1 00:00:04,400 --> 00:00:07,800 Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio. 2 00:00:12,160 --> 00:00:14,720 Speaker 1: Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host, 3 00:00:14,880 --> 00:00:18,040 Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with iHeart Radio, and 4 00:00:18,079 --> 00:00:21,439 Speaker 1: I love all things tech and I'm a little under 5 00:00:21,480 --> 00:00:23,599 Speaker 1: the weather today. But of course I don't want to 6 00:00:23,680 --> 00:00:27,600 Speaker 1: leave you without a tech Stuff episode. So rather than 7 00:00:28,080 --> 00:00:30,560 Speaker 1: skip a day, I thought we would have a nice 8 00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:36,200 Speaker 1: little rerun episode. Uh. This one comes from August twelve, 9 00:00:36,280 --> 00:00:39,360 Speaker 1: two nineteen, so not that long ago, and it is 10 00:00:39,400 --> 00:00:43,880 Speaker 1: called the Death of three D Television. I hope you enjoy. 11 00:00:44,720 --> 00:00:47,280 Speaker 1: So in this episode, I'm going to talk a bit 12 00:00:47,320 --> 00:00:50,879 Speaker 1: about three D and how three D works, and then 13 00:00:50,920 --> 00:00:54,400 Speaker 1: transition over to why television manufacturers were so gung ho 14 00:00:54,560 --> 00:00:57,880 Speaker 1: on the idea in the first place, and why ultimately 15 00:00:58,400 --> 00:01:03,320 Speaker 1: it failed because spoiler alert, no major television manufacturer is 16 00:01:03,360 --> 00:01:08,160 Speaker 1: currently including three D TV capabilities in their sets. All right, 17 00:01:08,200 --> 00:01:12,440 Speaker 1: So let's begin with the way three D actually works. Now, 18 00:01:12,440 --> 00:01:16,280 Speaker 1: in the real world, we can perceive depth, right, the 19 00:01:16,360 --> 00:01:20,800 Speaker 1: real world around us, we perceive in three dimensions, and 20 00:01:20,840 --> 00:01:24,600 Speaker 1: we can tell how far away stuff is in general, 21 00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:26,959 Speaker 1: or at least have a good idea about which things 22 00:01:27,000 --> 00:01:30,200 Speaker 1: are closer to us. Than other things. If something is 23 00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:32,960 Speaker 1: within twenty feet of us are closer, we can do 24 00:01:33,000 --> 00:01:36,160 Speaker 1: that pretty easily with our depth perception. Beyond that we 25 00:01:36,200 --> 00:01:40,320 Speaker 1: start to rely more heavily on visual cueues outside of 26 00:01:40,360 --> 00:01:44,280 Speaker 1: stuff like parallax, so we can perceive objects actually have 27 00:01:44,560 --> 00:01:47,280 Speaker 1: depth as well. Right, it's not just that we can 28 00:01:47,280 --> 00:01:50,480 Speaker 1: see that something is closer to us than something else. 29 00:01:50,760 --> 00:01:54,040 Speaker 1: We can see that that something has three dimensions, So 30 00:01:54,080 --> 00:01:55,680 Speaker 1: it's not like the world just looks like a bunch 31 00:01:55,680 --> 00:01:59,320 Speaker 1: of cardboard cutouts to us. Our brains use a lot 32 00:01:59,320 --> 00:02:01,720 Speaker 1: of different in form ation and cues to create this 33 00:02:01,880 --> 00:02:06,200 Speaker 1: three dimensional representation that we're taking in, but one of 34 00:02:06,240 --> 00:02:10,800 Speaker 1: those is stereoscopic vision. This applies to people who have 35 00:02:10,960 --> 00:02:13,760 Speaker 1: vision in both eyes. There are some people who do not, 36 00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:16,880 Speaker 1: and for those people the technology and three D films 37 00:02:16,919 --> 00:02:20,639 Speaker 1: and TV doesn't work. But for those of us who 38 00:02:20,639 --> 00:02:23,079 Speaker 1: do have vision in both eyes, we know that our 39 00:02:23,160 --> 00:02:27,000 Speaker 1: line of sight is slightly different for each eye. This 40 00:02:27,080 --> 00:02:30,400 Speaker 1: is just common sense, right. Because the eyes are on 41 00:02:30,440 --> 00:02:32,800 Speaker 1: either side of the nose, the left eye and the 42 00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:36,400 Speaker 1: right eye are peering out from different positions, so we 43 00:02:36,480 --> 00:02:40,680 Speaker 1: get slightly different angles of vision, and our brains take 44 00:02:40,840 --> 00:02:44,480 Speaker 1: these two streams of data and combine them into a 45 00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:49,119 Speaker 1: single representation, and that's where we get our three dimensional images. 46 00:02:49,800 --> 00:02:53,640 Speaker 1: It's our brain taking that information and combining it to say, 47 00:02:53,760 --> 00:02:56,959 Speaker 1: here's how I'm making sense of the world around us. 48 00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:01,200 Speaker 1: But stuff like traditional photographs or drawings, or films and 49 00:03:01,280 --> 00:03:05,960 Speaker 1: television present two dimensional images to us. Their images on 50 00:03:06,040 --> 00:03:10,560 Speaker 1: flat surfaces, and thus they have no depth. Our brains 51 00:03:10,560 --> 00:03:13,680 Speaker 1: can try to judge depth based upon the qualities within 52 00:03:13,800 --> 00:03:17,600 Speaker 1: the image, as in I can tell that in this image, 53 00:03:17,720 --> 00:03:20,920 Speaker 1: this one thing is closer than this other thing. But 54 00:03:21,000 --> 00:03:23,440 Speaker 1: that also means our brains can be fooled if we 55 00:03:23,480 --> 00:03:27,519 Speaker 1: take advantage of that way that brains work. This is 56 00:03:27,560 --> 00:03:30,959 Speaker 1: the principle behind tricks like forced perspective, in which you 57 00:03:31,040 --> 00:03:33,880 Speaker 1: position subjects in an image in such a way as 58 00:03:33,919 --> 00:03:37,800 Speaker 1: to create the illusion of a significant difference in size. 59 00:03:38,320 --> 00:03:41,040 Speaker 1: But it's not necessarily the case that one object or 60 00:03:41,080 --> 00:03:45,280 Speaker 1: person is significantly larger or smaller than another. Rather, it 61 00:03:45,280 --> 00:03:47,400 Speaker 1: has to do with the distance to the camera and 62 00:03:47,440 --> 00:03:50,240 Speaker 1: the angle of the shot. So an example of this 63 00:03:50,280 --> 00:03:53,400 Speaker 1: trick in action is found throughout the Lord of the 64 00:03:53,480 --> 00:03:57,400 Speaker 1: Rings films, in which Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf, would 65 00:03:57,440 --> 00:04:00,120 Speaker 1: often be positioned so that he was closer to the 66 00:04:00,200 --> 00:04:03,320 Speaker 1: camera than the actors who were playing dwarves or hobbits, 67 00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:08,040 Speaker 1: you know, the smaller creatures. The crew created special tables 68 00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:11,000 Speaker 1: and benches and other pieces of furniture so that when 69 00:04:11,040 --> 00:04:14,200 Speaker 1: they were shot from the correct camera angle, it looked 70 00:04:14,200 --> 00:04:17,479 Speaker 1: like a normal table, and this supported the illusion that 71 00:04:17,520 --> 00:04:21,119 Speaker 1: you were looking in on, say a six foot tall 72 00:04:21,360 --> 00:04:25,800 Speaker 1: human like figure sitting down with three foot tall human 73 00:04:25,880 --> 00:04:29,880 Speaker 1: like figures, when in reality the differences in the actor's 74 00:04:29,960 --> 00:04:34,480 Speaker 1: heights was really much less dramatic. This trick works because 75 00:04:34,520 --> 00:04:37,240 Speaker 1: there's no true depths in the image we're looking at, 76 00:04:37,520 --> 00:04:40,400 Speaker 1: so the filmmakers can take advantage of that and create 77 00:04:40,440 --> 00:04:44,640 Speaker 1: this illusion. A three D version makes this trick harder 78 00:04:44,680 --> 00:04:47,400 Speaker 1: to pull off, since it requires shooting the scene from 79 00:04:47,520 --> 00:04:51,200 Speaker 1: two different angles to simulate the experience of a person 80 00:04:51,480 --> 00:04:54,919 Speaker 1: looking in on that scene with their own eyeballs, and 81 00:04:55,000 --> 00:04:57,320 Speaker 1: so forced perspective in three D films is a lot 82 00:04:57,360 --> 00:05:00,520 Speaker 1: harder to pull off. So that's the first part of 83 00:05:00,640 --> 00:05:03,839 Speaker 1: three D technology. You shoot a scene with two cameras 84 00:05:03,960 --> 00:05:07,320 Speaker 1: position such that they mimic how the viewer's eyes would 85 00:05:07,400 --> 00:05:10,960 Speaker 1: look in on that scene, or sometimes this is done 86 00:05:11,000 --> 00:05:14,440 Speaker 1: in a computer generated environment for example pre c g 87 00:05:14,600 --> 00:05:17,359 Speaker 1: I films or for converted films. Will talk more about 88 00:05:17,360 --> 00:05:20,440 Speaker 1: those in the second. But now you have two sets 89 00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:23,320 Speaker 1: of images to show an audience right, You have one 90 00:05:23,360 --> 00:05:25,599 Speaker 1: set for the left camera and one set for the 91 00:05:25,680 --> 00:05:30,080 Speaker 1: right camera, and you will only want one set of 92 00:05:30,080 --> 00:05:33,040 Speaker 1: images to go to each eye. Right, the images from 93 00:05:33,040 --> 00:05:35,360 Speaker 1: the left camera have to go to the viewers left eye. 94 00:05:35,960 --> 00:05:37,839 Speaker 1: The images from the right camera have to go to 95 00:05:37,880 --> 00:05:40,720 Speaker 1: the viewer's right eye. But you're showing all of them 96 00:05:40,760 --> 00:05:44,040 Speaker 1: on the same surface. Otherwise this the three D effect 97 00:05:44,080 --> 00:05:47,080 Speaker 1: won't work. You would just have a mess of images 98 00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:49,120 Speaker 1: on the screen. It would be a big jumble. So 99 00:05:49,560 --> 00:05:52,040 Speaker 1: how do you tell the light which way to go? 100 00:05:52,160 --> 00:05:54,000 Speaker 1: How do you tell the light from the left side 101 00:05:54,040 --> 00:05:56,160 Speaker 1: just go to the left eye and the light from 102 00:05:56,160 --> 00:05:57,800 Speaker 1: the right side to just go to the right eye 103 00:05:58,160 --> 00:06:02,000 Speaker 1: for an audience full of people. Well back when three 104 00:06:02,080 --> 00:06:04,840 Speaker 1: D films were first really becoming a fad in the 105 00:06:04,920 --> 00:06:08,360 Speaker 1: nineteen fifties, it was typical to use filters on the 106 00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:11,960 Speaker 1: camera's color filters. The left camera would have say a 107 00:06:12,040 --> 00:06:15,160 Speaker 1: red lens filter on it, and that meant only red 108 00:06:15,279 --> 00:06:18,680 Speaker 1: light could come through that filter. This is a matter 109 00:06:18,720 --> 00:06:21,599 Speaker 1: of physics. A red object is one that absorbs all 110 00:06:21,680 --> 00:06:25,040 Speaker 1: light except light that has wavelengths in the red spectrum. 111 00:06:25,120 --> 00:06:28,680 Speaker 1: That light would reflect off the object. A red lens 112 00:06:28,720 --> 00:06:33,520 Speaker 1: allows red light to pass through and absorbs all other light. Similarly, 113 00:06:33,920 --> 00:06:36,640 Speaker 1: the right camera lens would have a blue filter on it, 114 00:06:36,640 --> 00:06:38,920 Speaker 1: which meant only the blue light from a scene could 115 00:06:38,960 --> 00:06:41,440 Speaker 1: pass through. So now you have two rolls of film 116 00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:46,000 Speaker 1: of the same movie. They are shot from almost identical angles, 117 00:06:46,000 --> 00:06:49,280 Speaker 1: but they are slightly offset, again to mimic the way 118 00:06:49,279 --> 00:06:53,200 Speaker 1: our eyes are offset. One set of those images is 119 00:06:53,279 --> 00:06:55,360 Speaker 1: from the camera with the red filter, and the other 120 00:06:55,440 --> 00:06:57,680 Speaker 1: is from the camera with the blue filter. You take 121 00:06:57,720 --> 00:07:00,520 Speaker 1: these developed pieces of film, you put them in a 122 00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:05,040 Speaker 1: pair of projectors, also spaced just so, side by side, 123 00:07:05,240 --> 00:07:07,840 Speaker 1: and you play them in sync with each other so 124 00:07:07,880 --> 00:07:10,560 Speaker 1: that the sequence of images matches up. You have a 125 00:07:10,560 --> 00:07:14,480 Speaker 1: red set and a blue set. So these are identical 126 00:07:14,520 --> 00:07:16,880 Speaker 1: except for a slight difference in angle and of course 127 00:07:16,960 --> 00:07:21,480 Speaker 1: their color. The audience puts on glasses that have red 128 00:07:22,120 --> 00:07:25,280 Speaker 1: and blue lenses. The red lens will only let the 129 00:07:25,280 --> 00:07:28,440 Speaker 1: images from the red filter camera pass through. The blue 130 00:07:28,520 --> 00:07:31,680 Speaker 1: lenses on the glasses will only allow the blue images 131 00:07:31,760 --> 00:07:34,800 Speaker 1: to pass through, and thus the brain gets two sets 132 00:07:34,880 --> 00:07:39,280 Speaker 1: of images. If the cameras and projectors are properly aligned, 133 00:07:39,520 --> 00:07:42,840 Speaker 1: this should create the illusion of a three dimensional image, 134 00:07:42,920 --> 00:07:46,320 Speaker 1: and the audience will perceive depth and what is otherwise 135 00:07:46,440 --> 00:07:50,360 Speaker 1: two sets of two dimensional pictures, which is pretty darn cool. 136 00:07:51,120 --> 00:07:53,920 Speaker 1: Of course, that's the old way to do it, and 137 00:07:54,040 --> 00:07:56,280 Speaker 1: it meant that you couldn't really get a full color 138 00:07:56,520 --> 00:07:59,600 Speaker 1: film in three D. But there are other ways to 139 00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:03,360 Speaker 1: get the same effect. The two main ways fall into 140 00:08:03,520 --> 00:08:09,040 Speaker 1: the broad category of passive glasses and active glasses. Passive 141 00:08:09,080 --> 00:08:12,320 Speaker 1: glasses work in a similar way to the red blue 142 00:08:12,480 --> 00:08:15,480 Speaker 1: lens glasses, in fact, the same way, just through a 143 00:08:15,480 --> 00:08:20,600 Speaker 1: different operating mechanism. They typically use polarized lenses, which will 144 00:08:20,640 --> 00:08:24,440 Speaker 1: only allow light that is polarized in a certain way 145 00:08:24,600 --> 00:08:28,600 Speaker 1: to come through the lens. Polarized sunglasses work in this way. 146 00:08:28,840 --> 00:08:32,960 Speaker 1: Most polarized sunglasses will only allow light that is vertically 147 00:08:33,000 --> 00:08:37,920 Speaker 1: oriented to pass through the lens, because horizontally oriented light 148 00:08:38,080 --> 00:08:41,800 Speaker 1: is typically glare caused by light that's reflecting off of 149 00:08:41,840 --> 00:08:45,319 Speaker 1: horizontal surfaces like the hood of a car. So by 150 00:08:45,360 --> 00:08:49,120 Speaker 1: blocking that kind of light, the glasses eliminate glare. It 151 00:08:49,160 --> 00:08:51,160 Speaker 1: also means that less light is coming to your eyes 152 00:08:51,480 --> 00:08:54,360 Speaker 1: more than a second. So you can polarize light and 153 00:08:54,520 --> 00:08:58,199 Speaker 1: lots of different ways, not just horizontally and vertically, including 154 00:08:58,440 --> 00:09:03,760 Speaker 1: in circular patterns that are clockwise or counterclockwise or witter 155 00:09:03,840 --> 00:09:06,880 Speaker 1: shens as I like to say. A clockwise polarized lens 156 00:09:06,920 --> 00:09:10,640 Speaker 1: won't let light with a counter clockwise polarization through the 157 00:09:10,679 --> 00:09:14,880 Speaker 1: same lens, and vice versa. The clockwise approach is important, 158 00:09:14,880 --> 00:09:18,000 Speaker 1: by the way, because if you polarize lights so that's say, 159 00:09:18,040 --> 00:09:21,600 Speaker 1: the left lens only allows horizontal oriented light to come 160 00:09:21,640 --> 00:09:25,079 Speaker 1: through and the right lens only allows vertical oriented light 161 00:09:25,120 --> 00:09:27,600 Speaker 1: to come through, it would require the audience to sit 162 00:09:27,720 --> 00:09:31,319 Speaker 1: upright to watch the image to get the proper feeling, 163 00:09:31,440 --> 00:09:34,839 Speaker 1: the proper effect. That might work at a movie theater, 164 00:09:35,120 --> 00:09:36,960 Speaker 1: but at home it could be an issue for people 165 00:09:37,000 --> 00:09:42,040 Speaker 1: who might say, lounge a bit while watching television. So 166 00:09:42,080 --> 00:09:44,600 Speaker 1: if your head is at an odd angle to the screen, 167 00:09:45,000 --> 00:09:48,640 Speaker 1: the lenses might not align properly with the light coming 168 00:09:48,679 --> 00:09:53,120 Speaker 1: from the image, and thus the circular polarization helps bypass 169 00:09:53,240 --> 00:09:57,120 Speaker 1: that particular problem. Otherwise, the process is pretty much the 170 00:09:57,160 --> 00:10:01,199 Speaker 1: same as the red and blue version. Each camera has 171 00:10:01,240 --> 00:10:03,560 Speaker 1: a special filter to only allow light polarized in a 172 00:10:03,559 --> 00:10:07,280 Speaker 1: particular way to pass through the lens, or the projectors 173 00:10:07,320 --> 00:10:11,520 Speaker 1: are fitted with special filters to polarize the light that 174 00:10:11,559 --> 00:10:16,080 Speaker 1: they're projecting. These match the glasses, and we again get 175 00:10:16,160 --> 00:10:19,200 Speaker 1: the two sets of images that, when viewed through this 176 00:10:19,280 --> 00:10:22,240 Speaker 1: pair of glasses with the proper polarization, creates that illusion 177 00:10:22,280 --> 00:10:26,319 Speaker 1: of a three dimensional image. Then we have active glasses. 178 00:10:27,040 --> 00:10:30,240 Speaker 1: These are glasses that have liquid crystals in the lenses, 179 00:10:30,520 --> 00:10:33,800 Speaker 1: and the liquid crystals can change shape and a fraction 180 00:10:33,880 --> 00:10:37,720 Speaker 1: of a second, so in one orientation they block light 181 00:10:37,760 --> 00:10:41,360 Speaker 1: from coming through the lens, and the other orientation they 182 00:10:41,400 --> 00:10:45,040 Speaker 1: allow light to pass through the lens. They're kind of 183 00:10:45,080 --> 00:10:49,800 Speaker 1: like very tiny window blinds that open and shut at 184 00:10:49,840 --> 00:10:53,120 Speaker 1: an incredible speed. And the left lens and the right 185 00:10:53,240 --> 00:10:57,800 Speaker 1: lens have crystals alternating these two orientations, so that when 186 00:10:57,800 --> 00:11:01,280 Speaker 1: the left lens is letting light through and the right isn't, 187 00:11:02,000 --> 00:11:05,280 Speaker 1: then you can get the left side, and then vice versa. 188 00:11:05,360 --> 00:11:07,480 Speaker 1: The right side will let light through on the left, 189 00:11:07,520 --> 00:11:10,400 Speaker 1: won't you get the right side. The shuttering is in 190 00:11:10,480 --> 00:11:14,400 Speaker 1: synchronization with the film or the three D television, Otherwise 191 00:11:14,440 --> 00:11:17,600 Speaker 1: that method wouldn't work, So you're only getting the left 192 00:11:17,640 --> 00:11:20,280 Speaker 1: images when those are on display, You're only getting the 193 00:11:20,360 --> 00:11:24,479 Speaker 1: right images when those are on display, and otherwise the 194 00:11:24,480 --> 00:11:28,400 Speaker 1: the opposite lens is blocking light. So with these glasses, 195 00:11:28,880 --> 00:11:31,800 Speaker 1: rather than having two sets of the same image projected 196 00:11:31,880 --> 00:11:35,520 Speaker 1: on a movie screen simultaneously or on a television display, 197 00:11:35,880 --> 00:11:39,040 Speaker 1: you only have one set displayed at any given instant. 198 00:11:39,160 --> 00:11:41,360 Speaker 1: So let's say it's the first fraction of a second, 199 00:11:41,760 --> 00:11:43,800 Speaker 1: only the image for the left eye is on display. 200 00:11:44,000 --> 00:11:46,400 Speaker 1: The glasses worn by the audience open the shutters on 201 00:11:46,440 --> 00:11:49,439 Speaker 1: the left lens and close the shutters on the right lens, 202 00:11:49,520 --> 00:11:51,760 Speaker 1: so that the light only gets to the left eye 203 00:11:51,800 --> 00:11:55,080 Speaker 1: of all the viewers. In the next instant, the image 204 00:11:55,080 --> 00:11:57,559 Speaker 1: for the right eye is displayed and the glasses switch 205 00:11:57,679 --> 00:11:59,800 Speaker 1: the shutters, so now the light can pass through the 206 00:11:59,840 --> 00:12:02,160 Speaker 1: right lens but not the left. And this goes on, 207 00:12:02,240 --> 00:12:05,040 Speaker 1: with the glasses shuttering over and over in sequence with 208 00:12:05,120 --> 00:12:07,760 Speaker 1: the images on the screen, and it's all happening fast 209 00:12:07,880 --> 00:12:12,120 Speaker 1: enough that our brains can't detect the changes. To us, 210 00:12:12,120 --> 00:12:16,040 Speaker 1: it just seems like a continuous series of images coming 211 00:12:16,120 --> 00:12:19,400 Speaker 1: right into our brains, like we're looking in unbroken sequence 212 00:12:19,520 --> 00:12:21,920 Speaker 1: with both eyes at the same time, and our brains 213 00:12:21,960 --> 00:12:26,560 Speaker 1: again construct this three dimensional representation. This approach helps correct 214 00:12:26,559 --> 00:12:29,080 Speaker 1: a problem that a lot of other three D films have, 215 00:12:29,800 --> 00:12:33,920 Speaker 1: which is that they tend to be pretty dark. You've 216 00:12:33,960 --> 00:12:36,520 Speaker 1: got two sets of images on the same surface with 217 00:12:36,559 --> 00:12:39,440 Speaker 1: the other methods of three D presentation. So if you 218 00:12:39,920 --> 00:12:41,880 Speaker 1: read a lot of tech blogs or a lot of 219 00:12:41,880 --> 00:12:44,520 Speaker 1: movie review sites that talk about the differences between three 220 00:12:44,600 --> 00:12:47,280 Speaker 1: D versions of a film and the two D versions 221 00:12:47,320 --> 00:12:51,800 Speaker 1: of the film, you'll often see commentary about how dark 222 00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:55,760 Speaker 1: the three D version is in comparison, and that has 223 00:12:55,800 --> 00:12:59,040 Speaker 1: a couple of things with it. That's partly because you 224 00:12:59,080 --> 00:13:01,920 Speaker 1: have projectors with these polarized filters on them, so less 225 00:13:02,000 --> 00:13:04,640 Speaker 1: light is coming from the projector to hit the screen. 226 00:13:05,280 --> 00:13:08,800 Speaker 1: You're wearing glasses that also have polar rized lenses on them, 227 00:13:09,200 --> 00:13:11,559 Speaker 1: so they're preventing some of the light from the screen 228 00:13:11,600 --> 00:13:15,520 Speaker 1: to getting to your eyes. So that means the image 229 00:13:15,520 --> 00:13:19,079 Speaker 1: is going to look darker to you, and it can 230 00:13:19,120 --> 00:13:21,800 Speaker 1: make it challenging or even impossible to tell what's going 231 00:13:21,840 --> 00:13:25,560 Speaker 1: on with a dimly lit scene. There's some filmmakers who 232 00:13:25,640 --> 00:13:30,640 Speaker 1: try to counteract this by using, you know, actual effects 233 00:13:30,640 --> 00:13:33,640 Speaker 1: in the making of a three D film to make 234 00:13:33,679 --> 00:13:35,920 Speaker 1: a very bright image in the first place and avoid 235 00:13:35,960 --> 00:13:40,040 Speaker 1: doing darker image stuff. But you can also get around 236 00:13:40,080 --> 00:13:42,880 Speaker 1: this by actually just boosting the amount of light that 237 00:13:42,920 --> 00:13:46,960 Speaker 1: the projectors is putting through the lens. You can essentially 238 00:13:47,000 --> 00:13:51,200 Speaker 1: turn up the brightness on the projectors. That requires training 239 00:13:51,400 --> 00:13:53,800 Speaker 1: a projectionist to be able to do this sort of thing, 240 00:13:53,880 --> 00:13:58,640 Speaker 1: to calibrate a projector so that it is ideally working 241 00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:02,520 Speaker 1: with the three D content, and a lot of places 242 00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:05,520 Speaker 1: just don't do that. So there are a lot of 243 00:14:05,520 --> 00:14:08,680 Speaker 1: projectionists who just they don't have the training to tweak 244 00:14:08,760 --> 00:14:11,280 Speaker 1: things and make it calibrated so that you get a 245 00:14:11,280 --> 00:14:15,680 Speaker 1: really good, uh, three D experience, And so the result 246 00:14:15,800 --> 00:14:20,480 Speaker 1: is you get this kind of dark, muddy, out of 247 00:14:20,600 --> 00:14:25,800 Speaker 1: focus almost experience. It's not ideal anyway. Uh. You you 248 00:14:25,840 --> 00:14:28,320 Speaker 1: realize that there's not really a one size fits all 249 00:14:28,360 --> 00:14:31,800 Speaker 1: approach to projecting films properly. You need to have that 250 00:14:31,920 --> 00:14:34,640 Speaker 1: kind of training to really get the most out of it, 251 00:14:35,080 --> 00:14:37,360 Speaker 1: and it's just just a fact that not a lot 252 00:14:37,400 --> 00:14:42,600 Speaker 1: of places do that. Active glasses, however, which again don't 253 00:14:42,680 --> 00:14:46,640 Speaker 1: have quite the same problems. They are the most technically 254 00:14:46,640 --> 00:14:51,080 Speaker 1: complicated version of three D televisions and three D films, 255 00:14:51,400 --> 00:14:53,520 Speaker 1: and it also means that the glasses themselves have to 256 00:14:53,600 --> 00:14:57,400 Speaker 1: draw power from something which is typically a chargeable battery, 257 00:14:57,640 --> 00:14:59,280 Speaker 1: and that means if you want to watch a three 258 00:14:59,360 --> 00:15:02,080 Speaker 1: D film or TV show with active three D glasses, 259 00:15:02,440 --> 00:15:04,520 Speaker 1: you need to make sure that those glasses are charged 260 00:15:04,600 --> 00:15:07,560 Speaker 1: up first, or they may not work, they might conk 261 00:15:07,600 --> 00:15:09,840 Speaker 1: out before the movie is over. And it also means 262 00:15:09,880 --> 00:15:12,040 Speaker 1: they tend to be more expensive. So if you lose 263 00:15:12,080 --> 00:15:15,400 Speaker 1: a pair of polarized glasses, that's already pretty expensive, but 264 00:15:15,440 --> 00:15:17,920 Speaker 1: losing a pair of active three D glasses can really 265 00:15:17,960 --> 00:15:20,320 Speaker 1: set you back a bit. When we come back, i'll 266 00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:22,720 Speaker 1: talk about why the industry pushed hard for three D 267 00:15:22,800 --> 00:15:25,800 Speaker 1: televisions and three D content and three D films, But first, 268 00:15:25,840 --> 00:15:36,000 Speaker 1: let's take a quick break. Okay, I gave you a 269 00:15:36,040 --> 00:15:39,160 Speaker 1: quick rundown on how three D works, and I could 270 00:15:39,200 --> 00:15:42,640 Speaker 1: trace the history of three D back to early stereoscopic 271 00:15:42,680 --> 00:15:46,440 Speaker 1: photographs up through the gimmicky tricks of the nineteen fifties 272 00:15:46,480 --> 00:15:49,920 Speaker 1: designed to lure more crowds into movie theaters because of 273 00:15:49,960 --> 00:15:52,680 Speaker 1: a fear that television was going to rob theaters of 274 00:15:52,720 --> 00:15:56,200 Speaker 1: their audiences. But honestly, I've covered that in other episodes. 275 00:15:56,240 --> 00:15:59,360 Speaker 1: And it's not really that relevant to this conversation about 276 00:15:59,440 --> 00:16:01,640 Speaker 1: modern tell visions and the effort to get three D 277 00:16:01,720 --> 00:16:05,840 Speaker 1: adopted as a standard feature in TVs. So what gives Well, First, 278 00:16:05,880 --> 00:16:08,120 Speaker 1: it helps if we look at the rebirth of three 279 00:16:08,200 --> 00:16:12,119 Speaker 1: D at the cinema. Now, apart from some fairly gimmicky 280 00:16:12,160 --> 00:16:16,280 Speaker 1: films like Jaws three D, the three D craze had 281 00:16:16,320 --> 00:16:18,680 Speaker 1: proven to be just sort of a fad from a 282 00:16:18,680 --> 00:16:22,040 Speaker 1: bygone eram But that started to change in the first 283 00:16:22,120 --> 00:16:25,200 Speaker 1: decade of the two thousand's, particularly with a film that 284 00:16:25,320 --> 00:16:29,200 Speaker 1: came out in two thousand nine. So you do have 285 00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:32,920 Speaker 1: filmmakers who are interested in using three D to enhance 286 00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:36,680 Speaker 1: the experience they want their audiences to have while they 287 00:16:36,680 --> 00:16:40,920 Speaker 1: are watching one of these directors films, and these filmmakers 288 00:16:40,960 --> 00:16:45,360 Speaker 1: are exploring new ways to create movies and to tell stories. 289 00:16:45,920 --> 00:16:50,400 Speaker 1: A great example of such a filmmaker is James Cameron, 290 00:16:50,800 --> 00:16:55,120 Speaker 1: and in fact, his insanely successful two thousand nine film 291 00:16:55,200 --> 00:16:59,320 Speaker 1: Avatar is a large reason why three D films took off. 292 00:16:59,480 --> 00:17:05,600 Speaker 1: Shortly afterwards, Avatar smashed box office records and the effects 293 00:17:05,640 --> 00:17:09,520 Speaker 1: were rightly louded by critics. People said the three D 294 00:17:09,560 --> 00:17:12,600 Speaker 1: effects of this movie are like nothing we've ever seen before. 295 00:17:13,280 --> 00:17:16,000 Speaker 1: It's not really an exaggeration to say that Avatar helped 296 00:17:16,119 --> 00:17:19,680 Speaker 1: usher in the modern three D cinema age. A three 297 00:17:19,760 --> 00:17:25,399 Speaker 1: D film requires different considerations than a standard two dimensional film, 298 00:17:25,440 --> 00:17:28,480 Speaker 1: which can hide a lot of stuff just through lighting 299 00:17:28,560 --> 00:17:31,600 Speaker 1: and camera angles and other simple tricks. A three D 300 00:17:31,680 --> 00:17:35,640 Speaker 1: film requires a slightly different approach, often using the same 301 00:17:35,680 --> 00:17:39,280 Speaker 1: tricks but tweaked for the three D filming process. It 302 00:17:39,320 --> 00:17:42,760 Speaker 1: also requires twice as many people. You've got two cameras 303 00:17:42,800 --> 00:17:46,320 Speaker 1: to run, not just one, so you have two camera crews. 304 00:17:46,440 --> 00:17:49,840 Speaker 1: You've got a much larger staff. It's more expensive, and 305 00:17:50,160 --> 00:17:53,720 Speaker 1: because it's more technically complicated, when things go wrong, it 306 00:17:53,760 --> 00:17:57,240 Speaker 1: can take a lot more time to fix stuff. So 307 00:17:57,440 --> 00:18:01,520 Speaker 1: it's not necessarily a better approach, but it is a 308 00:18:01,640 --> 00:18:05,160 Speaker 1: different approach. Stuff like force perspective is a lot harder 309 00:18:05,160 --> 00:18:07,919 Speaker 1: to pull off that way. It just means that you 310 00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:10,040 Speaker 1: have to go about things in a different way if 311 00:18:10,080 --> 00:18:12,040 Speaker 1: you want to get the most out of creating a 312 00:18:12,040 --> 00:18:15,680 Speaker 1: three D film versus a two D film. Other films 313 00:18:16,080 --> 00:18:19,840 Speaker 1: get converted into three D after they've already been shot 314 00:18:20,000 --> 00:18:23,000 Speaker 1: in two D, so these movies were not shot in 315 00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:26,280 Speaker 1: three D natively. So with this approach, you're taking a 316 00:18:26,359 --> 00:18:29,720 Speaker 1: single two dimensional set of images. You know, that's what 317 00:18:29,840 --> 00:18:32,120 Speaker 1: a film is. It's just a long sequence of two 318 00:18:32,119 --> 00:18:35,440 Speaker 1: dimensional images. Then you have to take that and turn 319 00:18:35,480 --> 00:18:40,360 Speaker 1: it into two offset series of images, one for each eye. 320 00:18:40,920 --> 00:18:44,400 Speaker 1: Now this can be done, it could even be done well, 321 00:18:44,640 --> 00:18:47,879 Speaker 1: but it's also really easy to do it poorly, and 322 00:18:47,920 --> 00:18:50,280 Speaker 1: in any case, it can result in a movie that 323 00:18:50,359 --> 00:18:53,240 Speaker 1: seems to be shot in three D for no apparent reason, 324 00:18:53,800 --> 00:18:58,560 Speaker 1: like there's no thing in the film that benefits from 325 00:18:58,600 --> 00:19:03,320 Speaker 1: the three D ness. With movies, a big motivating factor 326 00:19:03,520 --> 00:19:07,120 Speaker 1: for studios and movie theater chains is that they can 327 00:19:07,200 --> 00:19:10,639 Speaker 1: charge more money for a three D screening of a film. 328 00:19:10,640 --> 00:19:14,520 Speaker 1: It's a premium experience. So if it's done well, it 329 00:19:14,520 --> 00:19:17,199 Speaker 1: can be a really great experience for the audience. They 330 00:19:17,240 --> 00:19:20,160 Speaker 1: can feel like it was worth the money. But whether 331 00:19:20,160 --> 00:19:23,560 Speaker 1: it's done well or not, it drives up ticket prices. 332 00:19:23,640 --> 00:19:26,480 Speaker 1: You can charge more for those tickets, and driving a 333 00:19:26,640 --> 00:19:29,360 Speaker 1: ticket prices is a good way to generate a lot 334 00:19:29,480 --> 00:19:34,080 Speaker 1: more revenue, particularly in the early stages of a film's release, 335 00:19:34,520 --> 00:19:37,200 Speaker 1: and that means you can turn up the hype machine, 336 00:19:37,480 --> 00:19:40,520 Speaker 1: because if your film breaks some box office records. You 337 00:19:40,560 --> 00:19:43,080 Speaker 1: can use that to try and get more folks who 338 00:19:43,240 --> 00:19:46,120 Speaker 1: haven't yet seen the film in theaters to come check 339 00:19:46,160 --> 00:19:49,240 Speaker 1: it out. And you don't necessarily need to sell more 340 00:19:49,240 --> 00:19:52,520 Speaker 1: tickets than the previous record holder if the tickets you're 341 00:19:52,520 --> 00:19:56,680 Speaker 1: selling are more expensive. So, in other words, let's say 342 00:19:56,760 --> 00:20:01,000 Speaker 1: you are selling cookies at fifty cents each and I 343 00:20:01,040 --> 00:20:03,640 Speaker 1: swoop in on your turf and I start selling cookies 344 00:20:03,720 --> 00:20:06,320 Speaker 1: for a dollar each. But I also say that my 345 00:20:06,400 --> 00:20:10,000 Speaker 1: cookies have some feature about them that makes them superior. 346 00:20:10,080 --> 00:20:12,960 Speaker 1: Let's say I'm using the claim that the ingredients in 347 00:20:13,000 --> 00:20:16,600 Speaker 1: my cookie are all natural, for example, then I can 348 00:20:16,640 --> 00:20:19,360 Speaker 1: make more money than you, even if you sell more 349 00:20:19,400 --> 00:20:22,399 Speaker 1: cookies than I do. If you sell five dozen cookies 350 00:20:22,440 --> 00:20:25,240 Speaker 1: at fifty cents each, well you netted yourself thirty bucks, 351 00:20:25,640 --> 00:20:29,720 Speaker 1: which isn't bad. Now, let's say I sold four dozen cookies, 352 00:20:30,040 --> 00:20:33,159 Speaker 1: so twelve cookies fewer than you did, but I charge 353 00:20:33,160 --> 00:20:35,959 Speaker 1: a dollar each, so I met myself forty eight bucks. 354 00:20:36,280 --> 00:20:38,760 Speaker 1: You sold more cookies, but I brought in more revenue. 355 00:20:39,160 --> 00:20:42,080 Speaker 1: Three D films can help studios and theaters achieved the 356 00:20:42,119 --> 00:20:45,280 Speaker 1: same thing. If we were just looking at the number 357 00:20:45,320 --> 00:20:49,359 Speaker 1: of tickets sold. The story would be different. So there's 358 00:20:49,400 --> 00:20:53,120 Speaker 1: a strong business case for three D content in movie theaters, 359 00:20:53,440 --> 00:20:56,800 Speaker 1: particularly in an age where the average person is going 360 00:20:56,840 --> 00:21:00,240 Speaker 1: to the cinema less frequently. Since two thousand one, the 361 00:21:00,359 --> 00:21:03,520 Speaker 1: per capita tickets sales in the United States has been 362 00:21:03,560 --> 00:21:06,439 Speaker 1: on a fairly steady decline, with a couple of bumps 363 00:21:06,480 --> 00:21:09,280 Speaker 1: every other year or so. One way to combat this 364 00:21:09,720 --> 00:21:12,000 Speaker 1: is to offer up an experience that is hard to 365 00:21:12,040 --> 00:21:17,880 Speaker 1: replicate at home, a high fidelity experience with booming surround sound, 366 00:21:18,119 --> 00:21:22,040 Speaker 1: crisp images, and occasionally three D effects that can help 367 00:21:22,080 --> 00:21:25,160 Speaker 1: convert someone from I'll just watch it when it's available 368 00:21:25,160 --> 00:21:27,800 Speaker 1: for streaming to let's go to the theater and check 369 00:21:27,800 --> 00:21:31,399 Speaker 1: this out. Another motivation for three D films on the 370 00:21:31,400 --> 00:21:34,880 Speaker 1: studio side is that they seemed like a good solution 371 00:21:35,000 --> 00:21:39,160 Speaker 1: to a problem of debatable magnitude. That is the problem 372 00:21:39,280 --> 00:21:42,960 Speaker 1: of movie piracy and bootlegging. Now, I've done episodes in 373 00:21:43,000 --> 00:21:45,399 Speaker 1: which I've talked about movie piracy in the past, but 374 00:21:45,560 --> 00:21:50,199 Speaker 1: let's do a quick overview. First. Piracy isn't cool, guys, 375 00:21:51,000 --> 00:21:55,080 Speaker 1: that's just you know, true. My philosophy is that if 376 00:21:55,160 --> 00:21:58,560 Speaker 1: you think something is worth the price, then you should 377 00:21:58,600 --> 00:22:02,199 Speaker 1: pay that price in order to experience whatever that thing is. 378 00:22:02,760 --> 00:22:05,840 Speaker 1: If you think something is not worth the price, if 379 00:22:05,880 --> 00:22:08,600 Speaker 1: you think they're charging way too much for that, then 380 00:22:08,760 --> 00:22:10,960 Speaker 1: you don't pay the price and you don't experience it. 381 00:22:12,000 --> 00:22:14,080 Speaker 1: That's how you can get the prices to come down. 382 00:22:14,160 --> 00:22:17,320 Speaker 1: You just say like, well, I just don't think it's 383 00:22:17,320 --> 00:22:19,639 Speaker 1: worth it, so I'm not gonna bother if it was. 384 00:22:19,920 --> 00:22:21,680 Speaker 1: If you feel like it wasn't worth it, why would 385 00:22:21,680 --> 00:22:24,359 Speaker 1: you worry about it? Now? If you think it's worth 386 00:22:24,480 --> 00:22:27,520 Speaker 1: the price, but you're not willing to pay that price. 387 00:22:27,560 --> 00:22:29,960 Speaker 1: So in other words, you're just saying, it's probably worth 388 00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:32,240 Speaker 1: the twenty bucks to see it, but I'm not gonna 389 00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:35,400 Speaker 1: pay twenty bucks to see it. I'm just gonna steal it. Well, 390 00:22:35,440 --> 00:22:38,560 Speaker 1: that that makes you a jerk. That's that's all that 391 00:22:38,600 --> 00:22:42,840 Speaker 1: works out. So pirating isn't really cool. Now that being said, 392 00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:47,159 Speaker 1: the movie studios have a narrative around piracy that isn't 393 00:22:47,359 --> 00:22:51,600 Speaker 1: really supportable. So well, I agree that piracy is not good. 394 00:22:52,040 --> 00:22:56,360 Speaker 1: I also say that movie studios have blown it way 395 00:22:56,359 --> 00:23:01,320 Speaker 1: out of proportion. See, the narrative is that movie piracy 396 00:23:01,480 --> 00:23:07,560 Speaker 1: directly translates to lost revenue, and that's just not really supportable. 397 00:23:07,920 --> 00:23:10,920 Speaker 1: If someone bootlegs a copy of a movie and then 398 00:23:10,960 --> 00:23:13,960 Speaker 1: makes it available in people who otherwise would never go 399 00:23:14,240 --> 00:23:17,640 Speaker 1: see the movie download the film to watch it. You 400 00:23:17,720 --> 00:23:21,760 Speaker 1: can't really claim that the movie studio is out any revenue. 401 00:23:22,280 --> 00:23:24,840 Speaker 1: After all, those pirates were never going to pay to 402 00:23:24,880 --> 00:23:27,920 Speaker 1: see the movie at all, So, in other words, there's 403 00:23:28,040 --> 00:23:31,320 Speaker 1: no difference to the movie studios bottom line if those 404 00:23:31,359 --> 00:23:34,679 Speaker 1: people pirated the film or they didn't, because they were 405 00:23:34,720 --> 00:23:36,520 Speaker 1: never going to buy a ticket in the first place. 406 00:23:37,040 --> 00:23:38,880 Speaker 1: Either they were going to pirate the film and watch 407 00:23:38,880 --> 00:23:41,119 Speaker 1: it for free, or they weren't going to pirate the 408 00:23:41,160 --> 00:23:44,439 Speaker 1: film and not watch it at all. Either way, you 409 00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:48,399 Speaker 1: don't get a ticket sale. Now, some of those people 410 00:23:48,840 --> 00:23:51,680 Speaker 1: might have been willing to buy a ticket before they 411 00:23:51,680 --> 00:23:55,639 Speaker 1: got hold of a pirated copy. Those people could potentially 412 00:23:55,680 --> 00:24:00,440 Speaker 1: represent cases of lost revenue, but it's impossible to determine 413 00:24:00,480 --> 00:24:04,080 Speaker 1: how many of those pirates would have otherwise bought a ticket, 414 00:24:04,440 --> 00:24:07,880 Speaker 1: which means it's impossible for movie studios to give an 415 00:24:07,920 --> 00:24:12,199 Speaker 1: actual amount as to the magnitude of lost revenue. And 416 00:24:12,240 --> 00:24:16,880 Speaker 1: since movies studios used these very large estimates to justify 417 00:24:17,000 --> 00:24:21,920 Speaker 1: lobbying for stiff penalties whenever they pursued cases, against pirates. 418 00:24:22,560 --> 00:24:26,120 Speaker 1: They were able to win some pretty draconian victories against 419 00:24:26,119 --> 00:24:30,920 Speaker 1: people using pretty flimsy justification. This was all in an 420 00:24:30,920 --> 00:24:34,840 Speaker 1: effort to terrify would be pirates in order to discourage 421 00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:38,320 Speaker 1: the practice. At the same time, the goal was to 422 00:24:38,320 --> 00:24:41,840 Speaker 1: find ways to coax people into movie theaters, something that 423 00:24:41,880 --> 00:24:45,400 Speaker 1: the theater chains also wanted to have happened for obvious reasons. 424 00:24:45,760 --> 00:24:48,760 Speaker 1: And finding ways to create an experience that's not really 425 00:24:48,880 --> 00:24:52,280 Speaker 1: easy to replicate at home was part of this strategy. 426 00:24:52,440 --> 00:24:55,320 Speaker 1: With the success of Avatar, three D films became a 427 00:24:55,320 --> 00:24:59,240 Speaker 1: big part of that strategy. It was hard to bootleg 428 00:24:59,359 --> 00:25:03,320 Speaker 1: a three D film, so the super jen Kie way 429 00:25:03,359 --> 00:25:05,840 Speaker 1: where you set up a camera inside a movie theater 430 00:25:06,240 --> 00:25:09,160 Speaker 1: just didn't work. You know, the image would be even 431 00:25:09,200 --> 00:25:12,520 Speaker 1: worse than a typical bootleg made in that way. And 432 00:25:12,560 --> 00:25:14,760 Speaker 1: if you could get your hands on a digital copy, 433 00:25:15,200 --> 00:25:18,480 Speaker 1: something that has happened on numerous occasions with different films, 434 00:25:18,560 --> 00:25:20,359 Speaker 1: the image would be better, but you would still need 435 00:25:20,400 --> 00:25:23,240 Speaker 1: a compatible three D television and glasses set up, or 436 00:25:23,280 --> 00:25:25,480 Speaker 1: you wouldn't actually be able to watch the content in 437 00:25:25,600 --> 00:25:29,040 Speaker 1: three D. And of course you could potentially get hold 438 00:25:29,119 --> 00:25:32,520 Speaker 1: of a two D version of the movie, but then 439 00:25:32,600 --> 00:25:34,920 Speaker 1: one of the big selling points of the film wouldn't 440 00:25:34,920 --> 00:25:37,760 Speaker 1: be available to you. So three D was seen as 441 00:25:37,760 --> 00:25:39,840 Speaker 1: a way to convince people to go to a theater 442 00:25:39,920 --> 00:25:41,960 Speaker 1: to see a movie, rather than to pirate it or 443 00:25:42,000 --> 00:25:45,840 Speaker 1: wait around. And this trend found its way to television 444 00:25:45,840 --> 00:25:49,320 Speaker 1: manufacturers who saw the potential to advertise to home theater 445 00:25:49,520 --> 00:25:53,320 Speaker 1: enthusiasts who did want to get the closest approximation of 446 00:25:53,359 --> 00:25:58,200 Speaker 1: the cinematic experience in their own home setups. See One 447 00:25:58,240 --> 00:26:01,920 Speaker 1: of the reasons three D televisions became a thing is 448 00:26:01,960 --> 00:26:05,760 Speaker 1: that TV companies need to create a compelling reason for 449 00:26:05,800 --> 00:26:09,560 Speaker 1: people to go out and buy a television. This is 450 00:26:09,600 --> 00:26:13,520 Speaker 1: an arc we can follow whenever a new television technology 451 00:26:13,600 --> 00:26:17,240 Speaker 1: really takes off. Initially, only a small percentage of the 452 00:26:17,240 --> 00:26:20,800 Speaker 1: market adopts it, typically because the tech tends to be 453 00:26:20,840 --> 00:26:23,919 Speaker 1: pretty expensive when it first debuts and there may be 454 00:26:23,960 --> 00:26:27,280 Speaker 1: a shortage of content that you can watch on this 455 00:26:27,440 --> 00:26:33,080 Speaker 1: new tech of television. So, for example, we saw this 456 00:26:33,119 --> 00:26:36,600 Speaker 1: with the invention of color TV in the nineteen fifties. 457 00:26:36,600 --> 00:26:39,320 Speaker 1: Color TV actually followed not long after black and white 458 00:26:39,320 --> 00:26:41,960 Speaker 1: television first started to get a real foothold. After the 459 00:26:42,040 --> 00:26:44,600 Speaker 1: end of World War two, our c A and CBS 460 00:26:44,680 --> 00:26:48,680 Speaker 1: competed fiercely to create the standard for color television. Eventually, 461 00:26:48,880 --> 00:26:51,560 Speaker 1: our c A pretty much won that battle after some 462 00:26:51,600 --> 00:26:54,320 Speaker 1: initial setbacks, but I covered that in my r c 463 00:26:54,520 --> 00:26:58,639 Speaker 1: A episodes. But even though the tech was there, widespread 464 00:26:58,640 --> 00:27:01,919 Speaker 1: adoption did not fall immediately. In fact, it took quite 465 00:27:01,960 --> 00:27:05,280 Speaker 1: some time. So for one thing, only a few programs 466 00:27:05,280 --> 00:27:07,720 Speaker 1: were being broadcast in color. In fact, for a long 467 00:27:07,760 --> 00:27:11,520 Speaker 1: time in BC was the only network broadcasting anything in color, 468 00:27:11,840 --> 00:27:14,680 Speaker 1: so a color television only had a slight advantage over 469 00:27:14,720 --> 00:27:17,639 Speaker 1: older black and white sets. Why would you buy a 470 00:27:17,640 --> 00:27:20,159 Speaker 1: color TV if there are only a couple of programs 471 00:27:20,160 --> 00:27:23,880 Speaker 1: that are in color. Studios pushed hard to expand the options, 472 00:27:24,040 --> 00:27:26,720 Speaker 1: with companies like Disney doing a lot to promote the 473 00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:32,440 Speaker 1: advancement of color television. But price was another barrier. Television's 474 00:27:32,440 --> 00:27:37,359 Speaker 1: were and are expensive. Many households don't have the extra 475 00:27:37,440 --> 00:27:40,560 Speaker 1: money laying around to upgrade to the latest update to 476 00:27:40,720 --> 00:27:44,520 Speaker 1: technologies like television's. The expectation was that you would buy 477 00:27:44,520 --> 00:27:47,639 Speaker 1: a television set and then you pretty much use it 478 00:27:47,680 --> 00:27:50,399 Speaker 1: until it stopped working, or maybe until the cost of 479 00:27:50,400 --> 00:27:53,200 Speaker 1: repairing a television is more or less the same as 480 00:27:53,320 --> 00:27:56,080 Speaker 1: buying a new one in the first place. For reasons 481 00:27:56,080 --> 00:27:59,600 Speaker 1: like these, color television actually took a really long time 482 00:27:59,680 --> 00:28:04,880 Speaker 1: to get a purchase in the US market, even by 483 00:28:05,280 --> 00:28:08,840 Speaker 1: fewer than fifty of all households with a television had 484 00:28:08,880 --> 00:28:12,280 Speaker 1: a color set. Similarly, we saw a trend like this 485 00:28:12,320 --> 00:28:16,560 Speaker 1: emerge with high definition television. The transition from standard definition 486 00:28:16,600 --> 00:28:19,640 Speaker 1: TV to h D t V was a fairly gradual one, 487 00:28:19,920 --> 00:28:22,640 Speaker 1: and largely for the same reasons as the color TV 488 00:28:22,760 --> 00:28:25,440 Speaker 1: transition we had seen in the sixties and seventies, though 489 00:28:25,480 --> 00:28:29,760 Speaker 1: it took less time with HDTV, and we're seeing similarities 490 00:28:29,800 --> 00:28:32,840 Speaker 1: with ultra high definition television sets to have two K 491 00:28:33,200 --> 00:28:36,160 Speaker 1: or greater resolution. On top of that, you have other 492 00:28:36,200 --> 00:28:39,320 Speaker 1: features like h D R and more. These aren't just 493 00:28:39,480 --> 00:28:42,760 Speaker 1: tech advancements. These are sales pitches to get people to 494 00:28:42,800 --> 00:28:48,800 Speaker 1: buy more televisions, because that's how businesses work. So for 495 00:28:48,840 --> 00:28:54,120 Speaker 1: several years, companies like Sony, LG, Samsung, and many others 496 00:28:54,560 --> 00:28:58,480 Speaker 1: really pushed three D capabilities. When we come back, i'll 497 00:28:58,480 --> 00:29:01,320 Speaker 1: talk about how that played out, but first let's take 498 00:29:01,600 --> 00:29:12,440 Speaker 1: another quick break. Companies were starting to experiment with three 499 00:29:12,560 --> 00:29:15,720 Speaker 1: D television tech before, but that's the year of the 500 00:29:15,760 --> 00:29:20,600 Speaker 1: industry really began to commit to the technology. Again, not coincidentally, 501 00:29:20,680 --> 00:29:24,959 Speaker 1: because of Avatar's success, all the major TV manufacturers were 502 00:29:25,000 --> 00:29:28,120 Speaker 1: pretty much on board. Most of them adopted the passive 503 00:29:28,240 --> 00:29:32,560 Speaker 1: glasses strategy, a few were gambling with active glasses instead. 504 00:29:33,160 --> 00:29:36,080 Speaker 1: A very few examples played with the idea of glasses 505 00:29:36,240 --> 00:29:41,000 Speaker 1: free three D television demand. That's a big gamble. So 506 00:29:41,080 --> 00:29:44,000 Speaker 1: with those sets, the screen itself acts in a way 507 00:29:44,160 --> 00:29:47,200 Speaker 1: that's similar to a pair of three D glasses directing 508 00:29:47,280 --> 00:29:50,000 Speaker 1: lights so that each of your eyeballs gets a different 509 00:29:50,040 --> 00:29:52,600 Speaker 1: feed of information, as it were, But it also means 510 00:29:52,640 --> 00:29:55,160 Speaker 1: to experience that three D effect, you need to be 511 00:29:55,240 --> 00:29:59,040 Speaker 1: viewing the television from the proper angle. So you can 512 00:29:59,080 --> 00:30:02,360 Speaker 1: imagine the TV surface and imagine that there's a wedge 513 00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:07,000 Speaker 1: shape expanding out from the TV surface, and then imagine 514 00:30:07,040 --> 00:30:10,160 Speaker 1: within that wedge you have slices kind of like a 515 00:30:10,200 --> 00:30:14,200 Speaker 1: pizza or a pie. If you're in one of those slices, 516 00:30:14,240 --> 00:30:16,840 Speaker 1: like in the middle, you get the three D effect. 517 00:30:17,200 --> 00:30:20,040 Speaker 1: But if you're outside the wedge by being a little 518 00:30:20,080 --> 00:30:22,880 Speaker 1: too far off to one side or the other, or 519 00:30:23,320 --> 00:30:26,080 Speaker 1: if you are in a position where you're astride two 520 00:30:26,080 --> 00:30:29,040 Speaker 1: slices like the slice goes down the middle where you're 521 00:30:29,160 --> 00:30:31,920 Speaker 1: sitting or standing, you don't get the proper three D 522 00:30:32,040 --> 00:30:36,280 Speaker 1: effect and it becomes hard to look at the screen anyway. 523 00:30:36,480 --> 00:30:40,040 Speaker 1: The three D tech and television's worked more or less 524 00:30:40,200 --> 00:30:43,720 Speaker 1: depending upon the specific implementation, but that's just part of 525 00:30:43,760 --> 00:30:45,840 Speaker 1: the puzzle that needs to come together to make an 526 00:30:45,880 --> 00:30:50,120 Speaker 1: innovation in TV technology a success. Yes, it has to 527 00:30:50,160 --> 00:30:51,959 Speaker 1: work for it to be a success, but that's not 528 00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:56,840 Speaker 1: the only quality. It has to have. Another is content, 529 00:30:57,320 --> 00:31:00,600 Speaker 1: just like with color television and high definition television and 530 00:31:00,640 --> 00:31:05,120 Speaker 1: now ultra high definition content. Without good three D content, 531 00:31:05,720 --> 00:31:09,920 Speaker 1: this feature was doomed. Early on a few different media 532 00:31:09,960 --> 00:31:14,160 Speaker 1: companies experimented with creating three D channels, and they included 533 00:31:14,200 --> 00:31:18,320 Speaker 1: big names like ESPN. The provider Direct TV also had 534 00:31:18,360 --> 00:31:21,000 Speaker 1: a three D channel, but both of them would stop 535 00:31:21,040 --> 00:31:24,360 Speaker 1: broadcasting by two thousand thirteen. I'll get back to that 536 00:31:24,520 --> 00:31:28,040 Speaker 1: in a second. The point is it's hard to sell 537 00:31:28,080 --> 00:31:32,200 Speaker 1: a public on a platform if there's nothing on that platform. 538 00:31:32,520 --> 00:31:35,880 Speaker 1: Fans of video game consoles have seen this happen time 539 00:31:35,920 --> 00:31:40,080 Speaker 1: and time again. Arguably it's what doomed the Nintendo. We 540 00:31:40,320 --> 00:31:44,400 Speaker 1: you there just wasn't enough compelling content available for the console. 541 00:31:45,200 --> 00:31:48,840 Speaker 1: Another source of content was the promise of three D 542 00:31:49,000 --> 00:31:51,520 Speaker 1: Blu ray discs, but to play one of these you 543 00:31:51,560 --> 00:31:55,080 Speaker 1: needed a compatible Blu ray player, So if you had 544 00:31:55,120 --> 00:31:57,720 Speaker 1: an old Blu ray player that was not compatible with 545 00:31:57,800 --> 00:32:00,080 Speaker 1: three D technology, you would have to go out and 546 00:32:00,160 --> 00:32:02,160 Speaker 1: buy a new one. You wouldn't just be investing in 547 00:32:02,200 --> 00:32:04,640 Speaker 1: a brand new television, but also a brand new Blu 548 00:32:04,760 --> 00:32:08,400 Speaker 1: ray player. Some companies were able to patch existing equipment 549 00:32:08,480 --> 00:32:11,680 Speaker 1: to support three D content. Sony did this with the 550 00:32:11,680 --> 00:32:15,960 Speaker 1: PlayStation three, and firmware updates to players could help remove 551 00:32:16,040 --> 00:32:18,720 Speaker 1: some of the barriers to entry, but it wasn't a 552 00:32:18,840 --> 00:32:22,280 Speaker 1: universal practice, and it didn't always mean that the experience 553 00:32:22,360 --> 00:32:24,160 Speaker 1: you got was as good as if you went out 554 00:32:24,200 --> 00:32:27,240 Speaker 1: and bought a new Blu ray player that could support it. Natively, 555 00:32:28,040 --> 00:32:32,239 Speaker 1: so it was a fix for some platforms, but not 556 00:32:32,400 --> 00:32:35,360 Speaker 1: an ideal one. On top of all that, there was 557 00:32:35,400 --> 00:32:38,200 Speaker 1: the problem of three D quality in general. Now I'm 558 00:32:38,200 --> 00:32:41,440 Speaker 1: not talking about how the television is displayed three D, 559 00:32:41,720 --> 00:32:45,640 Speaker 1: although if you didn't tweak the settings just right you 560 00:32:45,640 --> 00:32:49,720 Speaker 1: would have a pretty shoddy experience in the home. I 561 00:32:50,080 --> 00:32:53,880 Speaker 1: am actually talking about the quality of the content itself. 562 00:32:53,920 --> 00:32:58,680 Speaker 1: The floodgates opened after Avatar's crazy success, and so there 563 00:32:58,680 --> 00:33:01,400 Speaker 1: were the movies that had been shot in three D 564 00:33:01,640 --> 00:33:04,960 Speaker 1: to begin with, which weren't guaranteed to be better, but 565 00:33:05,040 --> 00:33:08,320 Speaker 1: had advantages over the other type of three D content, 566 00:33:08,400 --> 00:33:12,320 Speaker 1: the aforementioned converted to D films that have been turned 567 00:33:12,400 --> 00:33:16,800 Speaker 1: into three D. Many movies included gimmicks of stuff seeming 568 00:33:16,840 --> 00:33:20,360 Speaker 1: to emerge out from the screen. That's a three D 569 00:33:20,440 --> 00:33:23,600 Speaker 1: trick that's been around since the nineteen fifties, and rather 570 00:33:23,640 --> 00:33:27,720 Speaker 1: than create an immersive experience, these tricks seemed to call 571 00:33:27,800 --> 00:33:30,720 Speaker 1: too much attention to themselves. It actually tends to pull 572 00:33:30,760 --> 00:33:34,360 Speaker 1: people out of the movie. You you're laughing at something 573 00:33:34,720 --> 00:33:38,280 Speaker 1: that's happening, because it's so far outside the realm of 574 00:33:38,280 --> 00:33:40,520 Speaker 1: a typical movie experience that pulls you out of it. 575 00:33:41,120 --> 00:33:45,000 Speaker 1: There are several analysts and television manufacturing representatives who actually 576 00:33:45,040 --> 00:33:48,560 Speaker 1: blame the poorer performance of three D television sales on 577 00:33:48,600 --> 00:33:52,240 Speaker 1: the ratio of bad three D content to good stuff. 578 00:33:52,400 --> 00:33:55,200 Speaker 1: In other words, there was just too much crappy three 579 00:33:55,280 --> 00:33:58,360 Speaker 1: D out there, and there wasn't enough good to really 580 00:33:58,400 --> 00:34:02,880 Speaker 1: make it compelling. Then, of course you have to buy 581 00:34:03,120 --> 00:34:05,880 Speaker 1: or rent the blu ray discs that you would play 582 00:34:06,000 --> 00:34:09,719 Speaker 1: on your compatible Blu Ray player, and then adds yet 583 00:34:09,760 --> 00:34:12,799 Speaker 1: another expense to this technology. And if the television comes 584 00:34:12,800 --> 00:34:15,160 Speaker 1: with fewer sets of three D glasses, then you have 585 00:34:15,280 --> 00:34:18,160 Speaker 1: people in your household, then you have to shell out 586 00:34:18,200 --> 00:34:22,800 Speaker 1: even more money to make sure everyone has a glasses set. 587 00:34:23,440 --> 00:34:26,840 Speaker 1: And complicating matters was that the Blu Ray format itself 588 00:34:26,920 --> 00:34:30,160 Speaker 1: was starting to struggle in the market at this same time. 589 00:34:30,719 --> 00:34:32,920 Speaker 1: While the quality of Blu Ray films, both from a 590 00:34:33,040 --> 00:34:37,319 Speaker 1: picture and sound standpoint, was superior to most other home 591 00:34:37,440 --> 00:34:42,400 Speaker 1: entertainment options, it wasn't nearly as convenient as emerging cloud 592 00:34:42,400 --> 00:34:47,600 Speaker 1: based streaming services like Netflix, Amazon's prime video service, Hulu, 593 00:34:47,680 --> 00:34:52,680 Speaker 1: and things like that. Consumers were favoring convenience over image 594 00:34:52,680 --> 00:34:56,160 Speaker 1: and sound quality, which has been a pretty steady trend 595 00:34:56,239 --> 00:35:00,480 Speaker 1: throughout media history see also the music industry. By two 596 00:35:00,480 --> 00:35:04,400 Speaker 1: thousand nineteen, there were really only two services to stream 597 00:35:04,520 --> 00:35:09,400 Speaker 1: three D movies, at least legally. Those were Voodoo and 598 00:35:09,480 --> 00:35:13,280 Speaker 1: the PlayStation Video Service. You couldn't get three D streaming 599 00:35:13,280 --> 00:35:16,480 Speaker 1: on the more popular mainstream services out there, and this 600 00:35:16,560 --> 00:35:21,400 Speaker 1: contributed to the lackluster usage data around three D televisions. 601 00:35:21,480 --> 00:35:23,880 Speaker 1: On top of that, people were watching less content on 602 00:35:23,920 --> 00:35:27,680 Speaker 1: their television's in general, and watching more stuff like that 603 00:35:27,880 --> 00:35:32,160 Speaker 1: on tablets and smartphones. The shift in consumer behavior had 604 00:35:32,239 --> 00:35:35,440 Speaker 1: no real place in it for three D television. The 605 00:35:35,520 --> 00:35:39,960 Speaker 1: glasses themselves also represented a challenge. Many customers didn't like 606 00:35:40,000 --> 00:35:41,680 Speaker 1: the idea of having to put on a pair of 607 00:35:41,719 --> 00:35:44,440 Speaker 1: glasses just to watch a movie in their own homes 608 00:35:44,800 --> 00:35:47,799 Speaker 1: and admit having to keep track of yet another peripheral 609 00:35:47,840 --> 00:35:51,680 Speaker 1: on top of mundane stuff like remote controls. Plus, if 610 00:35:51,719 --> 00:35:55,080 Speaker 1: you damaged or lost a pair, it wasn't a pretty 611 00:35:55,200 --> 00:35:57,840 Speaker 1: big expense to replace them, usually in the range of 612 00:35:57,840 --> 00:36:00,800 Speaker 1: a hundred dollars per pair of glasses. So the general 613 00:36:00,840 --> 00:36:05,880 Speaker 1: consensus was that three D glasses are expensive and a hassle. Plus, 614 00:36:05,920 --> 00:36:09,319 Speaker 1: some people found that the glasses would be uncomfortable, and 615 00:36:09,480 --> 00:36:12,920 Speaker 1: they could contribute to problems like eye strain or headaches 616 00:36:13,480 --> 00:36:18,400 Speaker 1: and generally create an unpleasant experience. Lots of folks have 617 00:36:18,520 --> 00:36:21,279 Speaker 1: issues like this with three D films as well, so 618 00:36:21,440 --> 00:36:24,520 Speaker 1: this isn't just something that happens to people watching three 619 00:36:24,600 --> 00:36:28,719 Speaker 1: D television. There are people who have generally unpleasant experiences 620 00:36:28,840 --> 00:36:32,360 Speaker 1: watching three D films. I tend to fall into that camp. Actually, 621 00:36:32,400 --> 00:36:35,560 Speaker 1: if a film is showing in three D and two D, 622 00:36:36,080 --> 00:36:39,600 Speaker 1: I almost always pick the two D version. I will 623 00:36:39,640 --> 00:36:41,640 Speaker 1: see a three D film if I feel like it 624 00:36:41,680 --> 00:36:45,120 Speaker 1: was made specifically with the intent to be a three 625 00:36:45,239 --> 00:36:48,200 Speaker 1: D film, at least in some cases, but those are 626 00:36:48,280 --> 00:36:51,400 Speaker 1: rare exceptions because I do tend to find the experience 627 00:36:51,480 --> 00:36:56,840 Speaker 1: to be unpleasant. Three D TV sales never quite matched 628 00:36:57,000 --> 00:37:00,480 Speaker 1: the marketing efforts that these companies were putting forward. The 629 00:37:00,560 --> 00:37:04,560 Speaker 1: numbers did go up, though that may largely be because 630 00:37:04,920 --> 00:37:08,160 Speaker 1: many models sold in the first few years following two 631 00:37:08,800 --> 00:37:11,439 Speaker 1: had three D capability baked into them, so you could 632 00:37:11,520 --> 00:37:14,960 Speaker 1: argue that people were buying these sets not because they 633 00:37:15,000 --> 00:37:17,279 Speaker 1: were three D capable, but rather they were in the 634 00:37:17,280 --> 00:37:19,759 Speaker 1: market for a brand new television, and all the brand 635 00:37:19,760 --> 00:37:23,560 Speaker 1: new televisions also had three D support built into them. 636 00:37:23,680 --> 00:37:26,200 Speaker 1: Even if people were buying them because of the three 637 00:37:26,280 --> 00:37:29,560 Speaker 1: D capability, before long it became clear that most folks 638 00:37:29,640 --> 00:37:32,719 Speaker 1: just weren't using that feature. So you had a lot 639 00:37:32,760 --> 00:37:35,480 Speaker 1: of people holding back from buying a three D television, 640 00:37:35,920 --> 00:37:38,879 Speaker 1: perhaps because of the price or just in general sense 641 00:37:38,920 --> 00:37:41,000 Speaker 1: that they wouldn't get much out of it. And then 642 00:37:41,040 --> 00:37:43,600 Speaker 1: you had the people who would buy the three D TVs, 643 00:37:43,640 --> 00:37:47,440 Speaker 1: but they never or very rarely ever watched three D 644 00:37:47,600 --> 00:37:50,439 Speaker 1: content on them. The House of cards really came down, 645 00:37:50,480 --> 00:37:54,399 Speaker 1: tumbling down pretty quickly. It wasn't a complete shambles until 646 00:37:54,400 --> 00:37:57,279 Speaker 1: about two thousand and seventeen. Now I already mentioned that 647 00:37:57,360 --> 00:38:00,760 Speaker 1: three D channels like ESPN's special three D cable channel 648 00:38:00,880 --> 00:38:04,720 Speaker 1: went off the air. By that was an early warning sign. 649 00:38:05,160 --> 00:38:08,560 Speaker 1: The expense and technical challenges of producing good three D 650 00:38:08,680 --> 00:38:11,600 Speaker 1: content were just too high. Companies were not seeing a 651 00:38:11,680 --> 00:38:15,439 Speaker 1: good return on investment. If the money had been there, 652 00:38:16,040 --> 00:38:18,879 Speaker 1: then those channels would have stuck around, but it just 653 00:38:19,200 --> 00:38:23,440 Speaker 1: wasn't there. The manufacturers began to abandon three D features 654 00:38:23,480 --> 00:38:27,840 Speaker 1: to video pulled the plug early, and which was a 655 00:38:27,840 --> 00:38:31,399 Speaker 1: pretty prescient move, as it turns out. Sam Sung would 656 00:38:31,400 --> 00:38:34,000 Speaker 1: hold on until two thousand and sixteen and then stopped 657 00:38:34,080 --> 00:38:37,120 Speaker 1: including three D support in their television's. L G and 658 00:38:37,200 --> 00:38:40,759 Speaker 1: Sony were the last two major television manufacturing companies to 659 00:38:40,800 --> 00:38:43,960 Speaker 1: offer three D support. They stopped in two thousand seventeen. 660 00:38:44,760 --> 00:38:47,439 Speaker 1: On the film front, three D screenings have not been 661 00:38:47,480 --> 00:38:49,319 Speaker 1: doing very well in the United States over the last 662 00:38:49,360 --> 00:38:52,240 Speaker 1: few years. In the wake of Avatar, three D screenings 663 00:38:52,280 --> 00:38:54,360 Speaker 1: began to make up a pretty good part of the 664 00:38:54,400 --> 00:38:57,440 Speaker 1: overall revenue for ticket sales, but the glood of two 665 00:38:57,520 --> 00:39:01,920 Speaker 1: D films converted to three D, the horror viewing experiences, 666 00:39:02,400 --> 00:39:04,520 Speaker 1: that kind of stuff may have contributed to a general 667 00:39:04,560 --> 00:39:08,240 Speaker 1: feeling of disillusionment over the quality of three D movies. 668 00:39:08,840 --> 00:39:11,920 Speaker 1: Or maybe it's the premium prices that audiences object to. 669 00:39:12,160 --> 00:39:14,880 Speaker 1: Whatever the reason, three D ticket sales at the US 670 00:39:14,920 --> 00:39:17,920 Speaker 1: have been on the decline for several years. Then again, 671 00:39:18,120 --> 00:39:21,239 Speaker 1: this is complicated by the fact that ticket sales in 672 00:39:21,360 --> 00:39:24,640 Speaker 1: general have been on the decline, So it's possible the 673 00:39:24,680 --> 00:39:27,840 Speaker 1: trend with three D films is merely keeping pace with 674 00:39:27,920 --> 00:39:31,279 Speaker 1: the overall trend for movie ticket sales. But there's no 675 00:39:31,320 --> 00:39:34,279 Speaker 1: shortage of articles out there that suggests that audiences in 676 00:39:34,280 --> 00:39:38,239 Speaker 1: North America see very little added value with three D 677 00:39:38,320 --> 00:39:41,319 Speaker 1: films in general and have come to reject them when 678 00:39:41,360 --> 00:39:45,520 Speaker 1: going to the theater. In one place this isn't happening, however, 679 00:39:46,120 --> 00:39:50,440 Speaker 1: is China. China has the most theaters capable of screening 680 00:39:50,440 --> 00:39:54,160 Speaker 1: three D films in the entire world, and China represents 681 00:39:54,320 --> 00:39:58,640 Speaker 1: a truly huge market for entertainment. It's such a big 682 00:39:58,680 --> 00:40:02,759 Speaker 1: market that its shape. It's the actual content of films. So, 683 00:40:02,840 --> 00:40:06,520 Speaker 1: for example, in two thousand twelve, the remake of Red 684 00:40:06,600 --> 00:40:11,120 Speaker 1: Dawn debuted. The original film had come out in nine four, 685 00:40:11,880 --> 00:40:14,600 Speaker 1: and it had been shelved for a couple of years 686 00:40:14,600 --> 00:40:18,640 Speaker 1: that had actually been finished by but MGM, the production 687 00:40:18,680 --> 00:40:22,880 Speaker 1: company that was behind it, got into some real financial difficulty, 688 00:40:23,120 --> 00:40:24,880 Speaker 1: so the movie kind of set on shells for a 689 00:40:24,920 --> 00:40:27,920 Speaker 1: couple of years. A different studio came in to become 690 00:40:27,960 --> 00:40:32,440 Speaker 1: the production company, and at that stage they were looking 691 00:40:32,520 --> 00:40:36,160 Speaker 1: at editing the movie and making a major change changing 692 00:40:36,200 --> 00:40:41,600 Speaker 1: the invading army from Chinese soldiers to North Korean soldiers. 693 00:40:41,800 --> 00:40:45,480 Speaker 1: The film it's China in two twelve, it's North Korea. 694 00:40:45,600 --> 00:40:48,440 Speaker 1: So why is that, Well, it's because of the huge 695 00:40:48,480 --> 00:40:51,960 Speaker 1: potential market in China. It was a political move. It 696 00:40:52,040 --> 00:40:55,960 Speaker 1: was done to avoid ticking off a potentially lucrative market. 697 00:40:56,040 --> 00:40:58,600 Speaker 1: They would never be able to sell the film in 698 00:40:58,760 --> 00:41:02,360 Speaker 1: China if China are seen as the enemy in the movie. 699 00:41:03,480 --> 00:41:05,840 Speaker 1: But then the movie never did release in China, so 700 00:41:05,880 --> 00:41:08,319 Speaker 1: it's kind of a moot point. What I'm getting at 701 00:41:08,480 --> 00:41:12,080 Speaker 1: is that the Chinese market is so huge, so significant 702 00:41:12,080 --> 00:41:16,960 Speaker 1: to the entertainment industry that when movie studios are considering 703 00:41:17,560 --> 00:41:22,480 Speaker 1: funding a film production. That's part of the consideration. So 704 00:41:22,880 --> 00:41:26,600 Speaker 1: movies that are made for North America are often made 705 00:41:26,600 --> 00:41:29,280 Speaker 1: for North America. And then you have an asterisk next 706 00:41:29,280 --> 00:41:33,040 Speaker 1: to that that says and also China, but mostly China, 707 00:41:33,400 --> 00:41:37,680 Speaker 1: so you might end up having a very different film 708 00:41:37,719 --> 00:41:43,280 Speaker 1: than what perhaps the screenwriter or director originally intended. Anyway, 709 00:41:43,800 --> 00:41:46,640 Speaker 1: that Chinese market is likely to keep the three D 710 00:41:46,880 --> 00:41:50,279 Speaker 1: film industry alive because it is a fairly popular form 711 00:41:50,320 --> 00:41:53,680 Speaker 1: of entertainment over in China. It may mean that we'll 712 00:41:53,719 --> 00:41:57,000 Speaker 1: see more conversions, more two D to three D film 713 00:41:57,080 --> 00:42:01,480 Speaker 1: conversions rather than native three D films, because again, unless 714 00:42:01,480 --> 00:42:04,160 Speaker 1: it's a c g I film, it tends to require 715 00:42:04,200 --> 00:42:06,640 Speaker 1: twice as much of a crew to run a three 716 00:42:06,719 --> 00:42:09,799 Speaker 1: D shoot as a normal two D shoot, so it's 717 00:42:09,840 --> 00:42:14,000 Speaker 1: a very expensive and complicated endeavor. So is three D 718 00:42:14,120 --> 00:42:19,640 Speaker 1: dead in the United States? I would say it's mostly dead, 719 00:42:20,040 --> 00:42:22,359 Speaker 1: But we do have the sequels to Avatar coming out 720 00:42:22,800 --> 00:42:25,680 Speaker 1: that might have a bit of a at least a 721 00:42:25,719 --> 00:42:31,560 Speaker 1: brief franchise specific revival, and we'll probably see three D 722 00:42:31,680 --> 00:42:35,440 Speaker 1: come back and yet another incarnation in the future because 723 00:42:35,480 --> 00:42:39,000 Speaker 1: it has happened before. But I think in general we're 724 00:42:39,000 --> 00:42:42,080 Speaker 1: going to see fewer three D films, at least fewer 725 00:42:42,120 --> 00:42:46,120 Speaker 1: films made in three D from the get go, and 726 00:42:46,400 --> 00:42:49,040 Speaker 1: we probably will see a continuation of the trend of 727 00:42:49,160 --> 00:42:52,000 Speaker 1: fewer people buying tickets to go see the three D films. 728 00:42:53,000 --> 00:42:56,640 Speaker 1: But that's just my own opinion on that matter. This 729 00:42:56,800 --> 00:43:02,520 Speaker 1: was really to trace how the fad failed to become 730 00:43:02,520 --> 00:43:06,080 Speaker 1: a trend. Thank you so much for listening to text Stuff. 731 00:43:06,120 --> 00:43:09,759 Speaker 1: I promise we'll have new episodes up very soon. Uh, 732 00:43:10,080 --> 00:43:15,320 Speaker 1: just having an off day, really, it's nothing serious, but yeah, 733 00:43:15,680 --> 00:43:18,840 Speaker 1: totally side checked me. So we will have some news 734 00:43:18,840 --> 00:43:22,120 Speaker 1: shows up very soon. If you have suggestions for topics 735 00:43:22,120 --> 00:43:24,200 Speaker 1: we should cover in episodes of tech Stuff, please reach 736 00:43:24,200 --> 00:43:26,600 Speaker 1: out to me on Twitter. The handle for the show 737 00:43:26,680 --> 00:43:29,239 Speaker 1: is tech Stuff hs W and I'll talk to you 738 00:43:29,280 --> 00:43:38,840 Speaker 1: again really soon. Text Stuff is an I Heart Radio production. 739 00:43:39,040 --> 00:43:41,880 Speaker 1: For more podcasts from my Heart Radio, visit the i 740 00:43:42,000 --> 00:43:45,239 Speaker 1: Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to 741 00:43:45,280 --> 00:43:46,200 Speaker 1: your favorite shows.