Studios take risk with 3D conversions

http://today3d.blogspot.com/2010/05/studios-take-risk-with-3d-conversions.html

 

The visual effects industry's ability to handle huge changes at the last minute has cultivated some dubious habits at the studios.

One exec sardonically calls it "postponing creative decisions." Basically, it means retooling and recutting pics until harrowingly close to release.

Since there's usually excess vfx capacity available worldwide, it all gets done. If one shop is overwhelmed, "911" calls go out to other shops, who step in to complete the show -- at a premium price.

Now studios are starting to apply the same thinking to 2D-to-3D conversions, but that's a much riskier bet.

3D conversion is "visual effects" in the sense that it's done by artists using computers and CG techniques. But visual effects are a well-established business with large, reliable companies that can take on 911s: Industrial Light & Magic, Weta Digital, Sony Imageworks, Double Negative and more.

3D conversion is a new business. The techniques and technologies are in their infancy. There are a few established conversion companies, but none have a lot of capacity.

Some conversion contracts are going to companies with little experience and only tests to show. I'm hearing that 911 calls are going out on 3D conversions already announced, but some of the more established companies are already booked.

Compounding those issues, studios continue to tinker with pics during the conversion, which makes the process tougher and costlier while hurting quality. That seems to have happened to "Clash of the Titans."

We recently saw a 3D test of one of this summer's tentpoles that ended up going out in 2D only. Through 3D glasses, it was unbearably dark -- predictably so, since the test footage hadn't been re-graded to compensate for the light lost in 3D viewing.

I have, however, seen one 3D release that looked as dark: "Clash."

Problems with a 3D conversion put the studio in a bind: Miss the release date, cancel the 3D release or put out an inferior product. The first has become unthinkable; no major release has missed its date due to post or vfx problems since "Titanic."

The second entails eating a very large expense and angering exhibitors who've made room for a 3D pic.

So there's a lot of pressure to go with option no. 3.

That may work until auds get more discerning, but at events I go to, "Clash" has technophiles -- the prime demo for 3D -- pretty angry.

The danger for the studios, though, is that until the 3D conversion business is more established, these new companies are signing up their clients for a piggy-back ride on a tightrope. There's a pretty good chance one of them will fall off -- and take a tentpole down with them.