1 00:00:04,240 --> 00:00:07,240 Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production of I Heart Radios 2 00:00:07,320 --> 00:00:13,960 Speaker 1: How Stuff Works. Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. 3 00:00:14,000 --> 00:00:17,200 Speaker 1: I am your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer 4 00:00:17,239 --> 00:00:19,480 Speaker 1: with I Heart Radio and How Stuff Works in all 5 00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:24,440 Speaker 1: of all things tech, and longtime listeners of this show 6 00:00:24,600 --> 00:00:27,840 Speaker 1: know that on my annual trips to c e s 7 00:00:27,920 --> 00:00:31,080 Speaker 1: for several years in a row, I would come back 8 00:00:31,320 --> 00:00:35,800 Speaker 1: talking about how TV manufacturers were really pushing three D 9 00:00:36,000 --> 00:00:40,239 Speaker 1: features over and over again in the face of well, 10 00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:44,920 Speaker 1: let's let's call it consumer resistance to the idea. So 11 00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:47,600 Speaker 1: in this episode, I'm going to talk a bit about 12 00:00:47,680 --> 00:00:51,520 Speaker 1: three D and how three D works, and then transition 13 00:00:51,600 --> 00:00:54,640 Speaker 1: over to why television manufacturers were so gung ho on 14 00:00:54,680 --> 00:00:58,520 Speaker 1: the idea in the first place and why ultimately it 15 00:00:58,720 --> 00:01:03,880 Speaker 1: failed because spoiler alert, no major television manufacturer is currently 16 00:01:04,000 --> 00:01:08,160 Speaker 1: including three D TV capabilities in their sets. All right, 17 00:01:08,240 --> 00:01:12,479 Speaker 1: So let's begin with the way three D actually works. Now, 18 00:01:12,480 --> 00:01:16,319 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 00:01:20,880 --> 00:01:24,600 Speaker 1: we can tell how far away stuff is in general, 21 00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:26,960 Speaker 1: or at least have a good idea about which things 22 00:01:27,000 --> 00:01:30,240 Speaker 1: are closer to us than other things. If something is 23 00:01:30,280 --> 00:01:33,000 Speaker 1: within twenty feet of us are closer, we can do 24 00:01:33,040 --> 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 --> 00:01:44,319 Speaker 1: stuff like parallax, so we can perceive objects actually have 27 00:01:44,560 --> 00:01:47,319 Speaker 1: depths as well. Right, it's not just that we can 28 00:01:47,319 --> 00:01:50,520 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 --> 00:01:55,720 Speaker 1: it's not like the world just looks like a bunch 31 00:01:55,720 --> 00:01:59,280 Speaker 1: of cardboard cutouts to us. Our brains use a lot 32 00:01:59,320 --> 00:02:01,760 Speaker 1: of different and form nation and cues to create this 33 00:02:01,920 --> 00:02:06,200 Speaker 1: three dimensional representation that we're taking in. But one of 34 00:02:06,280 --> 00:02:10,880 Speaker 1: those is stereoscopic vision. This applies to people who have 35 00:02:11,000 --> 00:02:13,800 Speaker 1: vision in both eyes. There are some people who do not, 36 00:02:14,120 --> 00:02:16,919 Speaker 1: and for those people the technology and three D films 37 00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:20,639 Speaker 1: and TV doesn't work. But for those of us who 38 00:02:20,680 --> 00:02:23,080 Speaker 1: do have vision in both eyes, we know that our 39 00:02:23,200 --> 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 00:02:30,480 --> 00:02:32,840 Speaker 1: either side of the nose, the left eye and the 42 00:02:32,960 --> 00:02:36,440 Speaker 1: right eye are peering out from different positions, so we 43 00:02:36,520 --> 00:02:40,720 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 --> 00:02:49,160 Speaker 1: single representation, and that's where we get our three dimensional images. 46 00:02:49,840 --> 00:02:53,640 Speaker 1: It's our brain taking that information and combining it to say, 47 00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:56,960 Speaker 1: here's how I'm making sense of the world around us. 48 00:02:57,000 --> 00:03:01,240 Speaker 1: But stuff like traditional photographs or drawings, or films and 49 00:03:01,280 --> 00:03:06,000 Speaker 1: television present two dimensional images to us. Their images on 50 00:03:06,080 --> 00:03:10,560 Speaker 1: flat surfaces, and thus they have no depth. Our brains 51 00:03:10,600 --> 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 00:03:17,760 --> 00:03:20,920 Speaker 1: this one thing is closer than this other thing. But 54 00:03:21,000 --> 00:03:23,480 Speaker 1: that also means our brains can be fooled if we 55 00:03:23,520 --> 00:03:27,560 Speaker 1: take advantage of that way that brains work. This is 56 00:03:27,560 --> 00:03:31,000 Speaker 1: the principle behind tricks like forced perspective, in which you 57 00:03:31,040 --> 00:03:33,919 Speaker 1: position subjects in an image in such a way as 58 00:03:33,960 --> 00:03:37,840 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 00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:45,320 Speaker 1: person is significantly larger or smaller than another. Rather, it 61 00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:47,400 Speaker 1: has to do with the distance to the camera and 62 00:03:47,480 --> 00:03:50,280 Speaker 1: the angle of the shot. So an example of this 63 00:03:50,320 --> 00:03:53,400 Speaker 1: trick in action is found throughout the Lord of the 64 00:03:53,520 --> 00:03:57,400 Speaker 1: Rings films, in which Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf, would 65 00:03:57,480 --> 00:04:00,160 Speaker 1: often be positioned so that he was closer to the 66 00:04:00,240 --> 00:04:03,400 Speaker 1: camera than the actors who were playing dwarves or hobbits, 67 00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:07,960 Speaker 1: you know, the smaller creatures. The crew created special tables 68 00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:11,040 Speaker 1: and benches and other pieces of furniture so that when 69 00:04:11,080 --> 00:04:14,200 Speaker 1: they were shot from the correct camera angle, it looked 70 00:04:14,240 --> 00:04:17,479 Speaker 1: like a normal table, and this supported the illusion that 71 00:04:17,560 --> 00:04:21,159 Speaker 1: you were looking in on, say a six foot tall 72 00:04:21,400 --> 00:04:25,839 Speaker 1: human like figure sitting down with three foot tall human 73 00:04:25,920 --> 00:04:29,920 Speaker 1: like figures, when in reality the differences in the actor's 74 00:04:30,000 --> 00:04:34,479 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 00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:40,440 Speaker 1: so the filmmakers can take advantage of that and create 77 00:04:40,480 --> 00:04:44,680 Speaker 1: this illusion. A three D version makes this trick harder 78 00:04:44,720 --> 00:04:47,479 Speaker 1: to pull off, since it requires shooting the scene from 79 00:04:47,560 --> 00:04:51,239 Speaker 1: two different angles to simulate the experience of a person 80 00:04:51,520 --> 00:04:54,960 Speaker 1: looking in on that scene with their own eyeballs and 81 00:04:55,040 --> 00:04:57,320 Speaker 1: so force perspective in three D films is a lot 82 00:04:57,360 --> 00:05:00,560 Speaker 1: harder to pull off, So that's the first part of 83 00:05:00,640 --> 00:05:03,880 Speaker 1: three D technology. You shoot a scene with two cameras 84 00:05:03,960 --> 00:05:07,400 Speaker 1: position such that they mimic how the viewer's eyes would 85 00:05:07,400 --> 00:05:11,000 Speaker 1: look in on that scene, or sometimes this is done 86 00:05:11,040 --> 00:05:14,480 Speaker 1: in a computer generated environment for example pre c g 87 00:05:14,640 --> 00:05:17,360 Speaker 1: I films or for converted films. Will talk more about 88 00:05:17,400 --> 00:05:20,440 Speaker 1: those in the second. But now you have two sets 89 00:05:20,440 --> 00:05:23,080 Speaker 1: of images to show an audience, right do you have 90 00:05:23,160 --> 00:05:25,520 Speaker 1: one set for the left camera and one set for 91 00:05:25,560 --> 00:05:30,000 Speaker 1: the right camera, and you will only want one set 92 00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:32,880 Speaker 1: of images to go to each eye? Right, the images 93 00:05:32,880 --> 00:05:34,799 Speaker 1: from the left camera have to go to the viewers 94 00:05:34,880 --> 00:05:37,560 Speaker 1: left eye. The images from the right camera have to 95 00:05:37,560 --> 00:05:40,360 Speaker 1: go to the viewer's right eye. But you're showing all 96 00:05:40,400 --> 00:05:43,520 Speaker 1: of them on the same surface. Otherwise this the three 97 00:05:43,600 --> 00:05:46,279 Speaker 1: D effect won't work. You would just have a mess 98 00:05:46,320 --> 00:05:48,880 Speaker 1: of images on the screen. It would be a big jumble. 99 00:05:48,960 --> 00:05:52,080 Speaker 1: So how do you tell the light which way to go? 100 00:05:52,200 --> 00:05:54,039 Speaker 1: How do you tell the light from the left side 101 00:05:54,080 --> 00:05:56,160 Speaker 1: just go to the left eye and the light from 102 00:05:56,200 --> 00:05:57,840 Speaker 1: the right side to just go to the right eye 103 00:05:58,160 --> 00:06:02,040 Speaker 1: for an audience full of people. Well back when three 104 00:06:02,120 --> 00:06:04,880 Speaker 1: D films were first really becoming a fad in the 105 00:06:04,960 --> 00:06:08,400 Speaker 1: nineteen fifties, it was typical to use filters on the 106 00:06:08,440 --> 00:06:12,000 Speaker 1: camera's color filters. The left camera would have say, a 107 00:06:12,080 --> 00:06:15,200 Speaker 1: red lens filter on it, and that meant only red 108 00:06:15,320 --> 00:06:18,720 Speaker 1: light could come through that filter. This is a matter 109 00:06:18,760 --> 00:06:21,600 Speaker 1: of physics. A red object is one that absorbs all 110 00:06:21,720 --> 00:06:25,080 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 --> 00:06:33,560 Speaker 1: allows red light to pass through and absorbs all other light. Similarly, 113 00:06:33,960 --> 00:06:36,640 Speaker 1: the right camera lens would have a blue filter on it, 114 00:06:36,680 --> 00:06:39,000 Speaker 1: which meant only the blue light from a scene could 115 00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:41,479 Speaker 1: pass through. So now you have two rolls of film 116 00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:46,040 Speaker 1: of the same movie. They are shot from almost identical angles, 117 00:06:46,040 --> 00:06:49,000 Speaker 1: but they are slightly offset, again to mimic the way 118 00:06:49,320 --> 00:06:53,240 Speaker 1: our eyes are offset. One set of those images is 119 00:06:53,279 --> 00:06:55,400 Speaker 1: from the camera with the red filter, and the other 120 00:06:55,480 --> 00:06:57,680 Speaker 1: is from the camera with the blue filter. You take 121 00:06:57,760 --> 00:07:00,560 Speaker 1: these developed pieces of film, you put them in a 122 00:07:00,600 --> 00:07:05,040 Speaker 1: pair of projectors, also spaced just so side by side, 123 00:07:05,279 --> 00:07:07,840 Speaker 1: and you play them in sync with each other so 124 00:07:07,920 --> 00:07:10,560 Speaker 1: that the sequence of images matches up. You have a 125 00:07:10,600 --> 00:07:14,480 Speaker 1: red set and a blue set, so these are identical 126 00:07:14,520 --> 00:07:16,920 Speaker 1: except for a slight difference in angle and of course 127 00:07:17,000 --> 00:07:21,520 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 00:07:25,320 --> 00:07:28,360 Speaker 1: images from the red filter camera pass through. The blue 130 00:07:28,560 --> 00:07:31,720 Speaker 1: lenses on the glasses will only allow the blue images 131 00:07:31,760 --> 00:07:34,840 Speaker 1: to pass through, and thus the brain gets two sets 132 00:07:34,880 --> 00:07:39,320 Speaker 1: of images. If the cameras and projectors are properly aligned, 133 00:07:39,520 --> 00:07:42,880 Speaker 1: this should create the illusion of a three dimensional image, 134 00:07:42,920 --> 00:07:46,360 Speaker 1: and the audience will perceive depth and what is otherwise 135 00:07:46,440 --> 00:07:50,400 Speaker 1: two sets of two dimensional pictures, which is pretty darn cool. 136 00:07:51,120 --> 00:07:54,000 Speaker 1: Of course, that's the old way to do it, and 137 00:07:54,080 --> 00:07:56,360 Speaker 1: it meant that you couldn't really get a full color 138 00:07:56,520 --> 00:07:59,640 Speaker 1: film in three D. But there are other ways to 139 00:07:59,680 --> 00:08:03,600 Speaker 1: get same effect. The two main ways fall into the 140 00:08:03,760 --> 00:08:09,600 Speaker 1: broad category of passive glasses and active glasses. Passive glasses 141 00:08:09,840 --> 00:08:13,480 Speaker 1: work in a similar way to the red blue lens glasses, 142 00:08:13,520 --> 00:08:17,200 Speaker 1: in fact, the same way, just through a different operating mechanism. 143 00:08:17,240 --> 00:08:21,720 Speaker 1: They typically use polarized lenses, which will only allow light 144 00:08:22,000 --> 00:08:25,400 Speaker 1: that is polarized in a certain way to come through 145 00:08:25,440 --> 00:08:29,800 Speaker 1: the lens. Polarized sunglasses work in this way. Most polarized 146 00:08:29,840 --> 00:08:33,960 Speaker 1: sunglasses will only allow light that is vertically oriented to 147 00:08:34,080 --> 00:08:38,760 Speaker 1: pass through the lens, because horizontally oriented light is typically 148 00:08:38,880 --> 00:08:42,960 Speaker 1: glare caused by light that's reflecting off of horizontal surfaces 149 00:08:43,080 --> 00:08:46,120 Speaker 1: like the hood of a car. So by blocking that 150 00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:49,640 Speaker 1: kind of light, the glasses eliminate glare. It also means 151 00:08:49,640 --> 00:08:51,880 Speaker 1: that less light is coming to your eyes more than 152 00:08:51,960 --> 00:08:54,920 Speaker 1: a second. So you can polarize light in lots of 153 00:08:54,920 --> 00:08:59,280 Speaker 1: different ways, not just horizontally and vertically, including in circular 154 00:08:59,320 --> 00:09:04,160 Speaker 1: patterns that are clockwise or counter clockwise or witter shens 155 00:09:04,160 --> 00:09:07,160 Speaker 1: as I like to say, a clockwise polarized lens won't 156 00:09:07,240 --> 00:09:11,400 Speaker 1: let light with a counter clockwise polarization through the same lens, 157 00:09:11,440 --> 00:09:15,640 Speaker 1: and vice versa. The clockwise approach is important, by the way, 158 00:09:15,679 --> 00:09:18,440 Speaker 1: because if you polarize lights so that, say, the left 159 00:09:18,520 --> 00:09:22,360 Speaker 1: lens only allows horizontal oriented light to come through and 160 00:09:22,400 --> 00:09:25,680 Speaker 1: the right lens only allows vertical oriented light to come through, 161 00:09:26,080 --> 00:09:28,559 Speaker 1: it would require the audience to sit upright to watch 162 00:09:28,600 --> 00:09:32,600 Speaker 1: the image to get the proper feeling, the proper effect. 163 00:09:33,559 --> 00:09:35,760 Speaker 1: That might work at a movie theater, but at home 164 00:09:35,840 --> 00:09:38,199 Speaker 1: it could be an issue for people who might say, 165 00:09:38,600 --> 00:09:42,600 Speaker 1: lounge a bit while watching television. So if your head 166 00:09:42,679 --> 00:09:45,600 Speaker 1: is at an odd angle to the screen, the lenses 167 00:09:45,679 --> 00:09:49,480 Speaker 1: might not align properly with the light coming from the image, 168 00:09:49,800 --> 00:09:55,880 Speaker 1: and thus the circular polarization helps bypass that particular problem. Otherwise, 169 00:09:55,920 --> 00:09:58,240 Speaker 1: the process is pretty much the same as the red 170 00:09:58,280 --> 00:10:02,240 Speaker 1: and blue version. Each camera has a special filter to 171 00:10:02,280 --> 00:10:04,520 Speaker 1: only allow light polarized in a particular way to pass 172 00:10:04,559 --> 00:10:09,040 Speaker 1: through the lens, or the projectors are fitted with special 173 00:10:09,080 --> 00:10:14,079 Speaker 1: filters to polarize the light that they're projecting. These match 174 00:10:14,160 --> 00:10:17,040 Speaker 1: the glasses, and we again get the two sets of 175 00:10:17,040 --> 00:10:20,199 Speaker 1: images that, when viewed through this pair of glasses with 176 00:10:20,240 --> 00:10:23,800 Speaker 1: the proper polarization, creates that illusion of a three dimensional image. 177 00:10:24,360 --> 00:10:28,120 Speaker 1: Then we have active glasses. These are glasses that have 178 00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:31,880 Speaker 1: liquid crystals in the lenses, and the liquid crystals can 179 00:10:31,960 --> 00:10:35,280 Speaker 1: change shape and a fraction of a second, so in 180 00:10:35,400 --> 00:10:38,960 Speaker 1: one orientation they block light from coming through the lens, 181 00:10:39,559 --> 00:10:42,720 Speaker 1: and the other orientation they allow light to pass through 182 00:10:42,920 --> 00:10:48,040 Speaker 1: the lens. They're kind of like very tiny window blinds 183 00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:51,920 Speaker 1: that open and shut at an incredible speed. And the 184 00:10:52,000 --> 00:10:55,720 Speaker 1: left lens and the right lens have crystals alternating these 185 00:10:55,760 --> 00:10:59,040 Speaker 1: two orientations, so that when the left lens is letting 186 00:10:59,080 --> 00:11:03,480 Speaker 1: light through and the right isn't, then you can get 187 00:11:03,480 --> 00:11:05,960 Speaker 1: the left side, and then vice versa. The right side 188 00:11:05,960 --> 00:11:08,360 Speaker 1: will let light through on the left, won't you get 189 00:11:08,360 --> 00:11:11,640 Speaker 1: the right side. The shuttering is in synchronization with the 190 00:11:11,679 --> 00:11:15,480 Speaker 1: film or the three D television, Otherwise that method wouldn't work, 191 00:11:15,840 --> 00:11:18,719 Speaker 1: so you're only getting the left images when those are 192 00:11:18,720 --> 00:11:21,840 Speaker 1: on display. You're only getting the right images when those 193 00:11:21,840 --> 00:11:25,760 Speaker 1: are on display, and otherwise the the opposite lens is 194 00:11:25,800 --> 00:11:29,840 Speaker 1: blocking light. So with these glasses, rather than having two 195 00:11:29,840 --> 00:11:32,800 Speaker 1: sets of the same image projected on a movie screen 196 00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:36,640 Speaker 1: simultaneously or on a television display, you only have one 197 00:11:36,960 --> 00:11:39,920 Speaker 1: set displayed at any given instant. So let's say it's 198 00:11:39,960 --> 00:11:42,520 Speaker 1: the first fraction of a second, only the image for 199 00:11:42,520 --> 00:11:44,960 Speaker 1: the left eye is on display. The glasses worn by 200 00:11:44,960 --> 00:11:47,400 Speaker 1: the audience open the shutters on the left lens and 201 00:11:47,440 --> 00:11:50,160 Speaker 1: close the shutters on the right lens, so that the 202 00:11:50,320 --> 00:11:52,640 Speaker 1: light only gets to the left eye of all the viewers. 203 00:11:52,880 --> 00:11:55,839 Speaker 1: In the next instant, the image for the right eye 204 00:11:55,920 --> 00:11:58,880 Speaker 1: is displayed and the glasses switch the shutters, so now 205 00:11:58,920 --> 00:12:00,760 Speaker 1: the light can pass through the right lens but not 206 00:12:00,840 --> 00:12:03,560 Speaker 1: the left. And this goes on, with the glasses shuttering 207 00:12:03,640 --> 00:12:06,280 Speaker 1: over and over in sequence with the images on the screen, 208 00:12:06,400 --> 00:12:09,680 Speaker 1: and it's all happening fast enough that our brains can't 209 00:12:09,720 --> 00:12:13,000 Speaker 1: detect the changes. To us, it just seems like a 210 00:12:13,000 --> 00:12:17,600 Speaker 1: continuous series of images coming right into our brains, like 211 00:12:17,640 --> 00:12:20,520 Speaker 1: we're looking at unbroken sequence with both eyes at the 212 00:12:20,559 --> 00:12:24,720 Speaker 1: same time, and our brains again construct this three dimensional representation. 213 00:12:25,440 --> 00:12:27,960 Speaker 1: This approach helps correct a problem that a lot of 214 00:12:28,000 --> 00:12:30,840 Speaker 1: other three D films have, which is that they tend 215 00:12:30,960 --> 00:12:35,080 Speaker 1: to be pretty dark. You've got two sets of images 216 00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:37,559 Speaker 1: on the same surface with the other methods of three 217 00:12:37,640 --> 00:12:40,800 Speaker 1: D presentation. So if you read a lot of tech 218 00:12:40,880 --> 00:12:43,079 Speaker 1: blogs or a lot of movie review sites that talk 219 00:12:43,120 --> 00:12:45,880 Speaker 1: about the differences between three D versions of a film 220 00:12:46,120 --> 00:12:49,040 Speaker 1: and the two D versions of the film, you'll often 221 00:12:49,160 --> 00:12:53,440 Speaker 1: see commentary about how dark the three D version is 222 00:12:53,520 --> 00:12:57,720 Speaker 1: in comparison, and that has a couple of things with it. 223 00:12:57,800 --> 00:13:01,160 Speaker 1: That's partly because you have projectors with these polarized filters 224 00:13:01,160 --> 00:13:03,880 Speaker 1: on them, so less light is coming from the projector 225 00:13:03,920 --> 00:13:07,080 Speaker 1: to hit the screen. You're wearing glasses that also have 226 00:13:07,160 --> 00:13:10,400 Speaker 1: polar rized lenses on them, so they're preventing some of 227 00:13:10,400 --> 00:13:12,679 Speaker 1: the light from the screen to getting to your eyes. 228 00:13:13,440 --> 00:13:16,720 Speaker 1: So that means the image is going to look darker 229 00:13:16,760 --> 00:13:20,360 Speaker 1: to you, and it can make it challenging or even 230 00:13:20,400 --> 00:13:23,640 Speaker 1: impossible to tell what's going on with a dimly lit scene. 231 00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:28,280 Speaker 1: There's some filmmakers who try to counteract this by using, 232 00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:31,920 Speaker 1: you know, actual effects in the making of a three 233 00:13:32,000 --> 00:13:34,880 Speaker 1: D film to make a very bright image in the 234 00:13:34,920 --> 00:13:39,000 Speaker 1: first place and avoid doing darker image stuff. But you 235 00:13:39,040 --> 00:13:42,080 Speaker 1: can also get around this by actually just boosting the 236 00:13:42,120 --> 00:13:45,440 Speaker 1: amount of light that the projector is is putting through 237 00:13:45,440 --> 00:13:48,440 Speaker 1: the lens. You can essentially turn up the brightness on 238 00:13:48,480 --> 00:13:52,920 Speaker 1: the projectors. That requires training a projectionist to be able 239 00:13:52,960 --> 00:13:55,439 Speaker 1: to do this sort of thing, to calibrate a projector 240 00:13:55,559 --> 00:14:00,480 Speaker 1: so that it is ideally working with the three D content, 241 00:14:01,559 --> 00:14:05,040 Speaker 1: and a lot of places just don't do that. So 242 00:14:05,080 --> 00:14:07,240 Speaker 1: there are a lot of projectionists who just they don't 243 00:14:07,240 --> 00:14:10,640 Speaker 1: have the training to tweak things and make it calibrated 244 00:14:10,679 --> 00:14:14,520 Speaker 1: so that you get a really good, uh, three D experience, 245 00:14:15,000 --> 00:14:19,160 Speaker 1: And so the result is you get this kind of dark, muddy, 246 00:14:20,200 --> 00:14:24,800 Speaker 1: out of focus almost experience. It's not ideal anyway. Uh. 247 00:14:25,120 --> 00:14:27,920 Speaker 1: You you realize that there's not really a one size 248 00:14:27,920 --> 00:14:31,000 Speaker 1: fits all approach to projecting films properly. You need to 249 00:14:31,440 --> 00:14:34,120 Speaker 1: have that kind of training to really get the most 250 00:14:34,200 --> 00:14:37,000 Speaker 1: out of it, and it's just just a fact that 251 00:14:37,080 --> 00:14:40,080 Speaker 1: not a lot of places do that. Active glasses, however, 252 00:14:40,960 --> 00:14:45,760 Speaker 1: which again don't have quite the same problems. They are 253 00:14:45,840 --> 00:14:50,080 Speaker 1: the most technically complicated version of three D televisions and 254 00:14:50,280 --> 00:14:52,840 Speaker 1: three D films, And it also means that the glasses 255 00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,920 Speaker 1: themselves have to draw a power from something which is 256 00:14:55,920 --> 00:14:58,640 Speaker 1: typically a chargeable battery, and that means if you want 257 00:14:58,680 --> 00:15:00,720 Speaker 1: to watch a three D film or TV show with 258 00:15:00,760 --> 00:15:03,320 Speaker 1: active three D glasses, you need to make sure that 259 00:15:03,360 --> 00:15:06,760 Speaker 1: those glasses are charged up first, or they may not work, 260 00:15:06,880 --> 00:15:09,320 Speaker 1: they might conk out before the movie is over. And 261 00:15:09,360 --> 00:15:11,520 Speaker 1: it also means they tend to be more expensive. So 262 00:15:11,560 --> 00:15:14,600 Speaker 1: if you lose a pair of polarized glasses, that's already 263 00:15:14,600 --> 00:15:16,880 Speaker 1: pretty expensive, but losing a pair of active three D 264 00:15:16,960 --> 00:15:19,680 Speaker 1: glasses can really set you back a bit. When we 265 00:15:19,760 --> 00:15:22,280 Speaker 1: come back, i'll talk about why the industry pushed hard 266 00:15:22,280 --> 00:15:24,840 Speaker 1: for three D televisions and three D content and three 267 00:15:24,920 --> 00:15:35,280 Speaker 1: D films, But first, let's take a quick break. Okay, 268 00:15:35,520 --> 00:15:38,240 Speaker 1: I gave you a quick rundown on how three D works, 269 00:15:38,640 --> 00:15:40,880 Speaker 1: and I could trace the history of three D back 270 00:15:40,920 --> 00:15:45,440 Speaker 1: to early stereoscopic photographs up through the gimmicky tricks of 271 00:15:45,480 --> 00:15:49,000 Speaker 1: the nineteen fifties designed to lure more crowds into movie 272 00:15:49,040 --> 00:15:51,600 Speaker 1: theaters because of a fear that television was going to 273 00:15:51,720 --> 00:15:55,240 Speaker 1: rob theaters of their audiences. But honestly, I've covered that 274 00:15:55,320 --> 00:15:58,160 Speaker 1: in other episodes, and it's not really that relevant to 275 00:15:58,280 --> 00:16:01,240 Speaker 1: this conversation about modern tell visions and the effort to 276 00:16:01,240 --> 00:16:04,160 Speaker 1: get three D adopted as a standard feature in TVs. 277 00:16:04,200 --> 00:16:06,760 Speaker 1: So what gives Well, First, it helps if we look 278 00:16:06,800 --> 00:16:10,200 Speaker 1: at the rebirth of three D at the cinema. Now, 279 00:16:10,240 --> 00:16:14,480 Speaker 1: apart from some fairly gimmicky films like Jaws three D, 280 00:16:15,040 --> 00:16:17,400 Speaker 1: the three D craze had proven to be just sort 281 00:16:17,440 --> 00:16:20,520 Speaker 1: of a fad from a bygone eram But that started 282 00:16:20,560 --> 00:16:23,640 Speaker 1: to change in the first decade of the two thousand's, 283 00:16:23,680 --> 00:16:27,160 Speaker 1: particularly with a film that came out in two thousand nine. 284 00:16:27,760 --> 00:16:31,440 Speaker 1: So you do have filmmakers who are interested in using 285 00:16:31,520 --> 00:16:35,160 Speaker 1: three D to enhance the experience they want their audiences 286 00:16:35,160 --> 00:16:39,640 Speaker 1: to have while they are watching one of these directors films, 287 00:16:39,920 --> 00:16:44,160 Speaker 1: and these filmmakers are exploring new ways to create movies 288 00:16:44,240 --> 00:16:48,280 Speaker 1: and to tell stories. A great example of such a 289 00:16:48,320 --> 00:16:53,760 Speaker 1: filmmaker is James Cameron, and in fact, his insanely successful 290 00:16:53,840 --> 00:16:57,800 Speaker 1: two thousand nine film Avatar is a large reason why 291 00:16:57,880 --> 00:17:03,480 Speaker 1: three D films took off. Shortly afterwards, Avatar smashed box 292 00:17:03,640 --> 00:17:07,840 Speaker 1: office records and the effects were rightly louded by critics. 293 00:17:08,040 --> 00:17:11,040 Speaker 1: People said the three D effects of this movie are 294 00:17:11,080 --> 00:17:14,040 Speaker 1: like nothing we've ever seen before. It's not really an 295 00:17:14,080 --> 00:17:17,160 Speaker 1: exaggeration to say that Avatar helped usher in the modern 296 00:17:17,280 --> 00:17:21,520 Speaker 1: three D cinema age. A three D film requires different 297 00:17:21,560 --> 00:17:26,480 Speaker 1: considerations than a standard two dimensional film, which can hide 298 00:17:26,560 --> 00:17:29,600 Speaker 1: a lot of stuff just through lighting and camera angles 299 00:17:29,600 --> 00:17:32,760 Speaker 1: and other simple tricks. A three D film requires a 300 00:17:32,840 --> 00:17:36,840 Speaker 1: slightly different approach, often using the same tricks but tweaked 301 00:17:36,880 --> 00:17:40,560 Speaker 1: for the three D filming process. It also requires twice 302 00:17:40,560 --> 00:17:43,359 Speaker 1: as many people. You've got two cameras to run, not 303 00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:46,800 Speaker 1: just one, so you have two camera crews. You've got 304 00:17:46,800 --> 00:17:50,760 Speaker 1: a much larger staff. It's more expensive, and because it's 305 00:17:50,760 --> 00:17:54,240 Speaker 1: more technically complicated, when things go wrong, it can take 306 00:17:54,280 --> 00:17:57,880 Speaker 1: a lot more time to fix stuff. So it's not 307 00:17:58,000 --> 00:18:02,800 Speaker 1: necessarily a better approach, but it is a different approach. 308 00:18:03,160 --> 00:18:05,440 Speaker 1: Stuff like force perspective is a lot harder to pull 309 00:18:05,480 --> 00:18:08,240 Speaker 1: off that way. It just means that you have to 310 00:18:08,280 --> 00:18:10,320 Speaker 1: go about things in a different way if you want 311 00:18:10,359 --> 00:18:12,399 Speaker 1: to get the most out of creating a three D 312 00:18:12,480 --> 00:18:16,800 Speaker 1: film versus a two D film. Other films get converted 313 00:18:16,960 --> 00:18:20,760 Speaker 1: into three D after they've already been shot in two D, 314 00:18:21,440 --> 00:18:24,000 Speaker 1: so these movies were not shot in three D natively. 315 00:18:24,480 --> 00:18:27,720 Speaker 1: So with this approach, you're taking a single two dimensional 316 00:18:27,800 --> 00:18:30,439 Speaker 1: set of images. You know, that's what a film is. 317 00:18:30,480 --> 00:18:34,160 Speaker 1: It's just a long sequence of two dimensional images. Then 318 00:18:34,240 --> 00:18:36,400 Speaker 1: you have to take that and turn it into two 319 00:18:36,600 --> 00:18:41,320 Speaker 1: offset series of images, one for each eye. Now, this 320 00:18:41,440 --> 00:18:44,760 Speaker 1: can be done, it can even be done well, but 321 00:18:44,800 --> 00:18:48,040 Speaker 1: it's also really easy to do it poorly, and in 322 00:18:48,040 --> 00:18:50,680 Speaker 1: any case, it can result in a movie that seems 323 00:18:50,720 --> 00:18:53,280 Speaker 1: 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 00:18:58,640 --> 00:19:03,320 Speaker 1: the three D noss. With movies, a big motivating factor 326 00:19:03,560 --> 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 00:19:10,680 --> 00:19:14,520 Speaker 1: It's a premium experience. So if it's done well, it 329 00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:17,239 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 00:19:20,200 --> 00:19:23,600 Speaker 1: it's done well or not, it drives up ticket prices. 332 00:19:23,640 --> 00:19:26,520 Speaker 1: You can charge more for those tickets, and driving a 333 00:19:26,680 --> 00:19:29,400 Speaker 1: ticket prices is a good way to generate a lot 334 00:19:29,480 --> 00:19:34,120 Speaker 1: more revenue, particularly in the early stages of a film's release, 335 00:19:34,520 --> 00:19:37,240 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 00:19:43,280 --> 00:19:46,160 Speaker 1: haven't yet seen the film in theaters to come check 339 00:19:46,200 --> 00:19:49,240 Speaker 1: it out. And you don't necessarily need to sell more 340 00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:52,520 Speaker 1: tickets than the previous record holder if the tickets you're 341 00:19:52,560 --> 00:19:56,680 Speaker 1: selling are more expensive. So, in other words, let's say 342 00:19:56,800 --> 00:20:01,040 Speaker 1: you are selling cookies at fifty cents each and I 343 00:20:01,080 --> 00:20:03,680 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 00:20:06,440 --> 00:20:10,000 Speaker 1: cookies have some feature about them that makes them superior. 346 00:20:10,119 --> 00:20:12,960 Speaker 1: Let's say I'm using the claim that the ingredients in 347 00:20:13,040 --> 00:20:16,600 Speaker 1: my cookie are all natural, for example, then I can 348 00:20:16,680 --> 00:20:19,400 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 nitted yourself thirty bucks, 351 00:20:25,680 --> 00:20:29,760 Speaker 1: which isn't bad. Now let's say I sold four dozen cookies, 352 00:20:30,040 --> 00:20:33,200 Speaker 1: so twelve cookies fewer than you did, but I charge 353 00:20:33,200 --> 00:20:35,960 Speaker 1: a dollar each, so I met myself forty eight bucks. 354 00:20:36,280 --> 00:20:38,800 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 00:20:42,160 --> 00:20:45,320 Speaker 1: same thing if we were just looking at the number 357 00:20:45,320 --> 00:20:49,400 Speaker 1: of tickets sold, the story would be different. So there's 358 00:20:49,400 --> 00:20:53,160 Speaker 1: a strong business case for three D content in movie theaters, 359 00:20:53,480 --> 00:20:56,840 Speaker 1: particularly in an age where the average person is going 360 00:20:56,880 --> 00:21:00,560 Speaker 1: to the cinema less frequently. Since two thousand, the per 361 00:21:00,680 --> 00:21:03,639 Speaker 1: capita ticket sales in the United States has been on 362 00:21:03,680 --> 00:21:06,720 Speaker 1: a fairly steady decline, with a couple of bumps every 363 00:21:06,760 --> 00:21:09,840 Speaker 1: other year or so. One way to combat this is 364 00:21:09,880 --> 00:21:12,720 Speaker 1: to offer up an experience that is hard to replicate 365 00:21:12,840 --> 00:21:17,920 Speaker 1: at home, a high fidelity experience with booming surround sound, 366 00:21:18,160 --> 00:21:22,080 Speaker 1: crisp images, and occasionally three D effects that can help 367 00:21:22,119 --> 00:21:25,160 Speaker 1: convert someone from I'll just watch it when it's available 368 00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:27,800 Speaker 1: for streaming to let's go to the theater and check 369 00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:31,399 Speaker 1: this out. Another motivation for three D films on the 370 00:21:31,440 --> 00:21:34,880 Speaker 1: studio side is that they seemed like a good solution 371 00:21:35,040 --> 00:21:39,160 Speaker 1: to a problem of debatable magnitude. That is the problem 372 00:21:39,320 --> 00:21:43,000 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 00:21:45,600 --> 00:21:50,240 Speaker 1: let's do a quick overview. First. Piracy isn't cool, guys, 375 00:21:51,040 --> 00:21:55,120 Speaker 1: that's just you know, true. My philosophy is that if 376 00:21:55,160 --> 00:21:58,639 Speaker 1: you think something is worth the price, then you should 377 00:21:58,640 --> 00:22:02,240 Speaker 1: pay that price in order to experience whatever that thing is. 378 00:22:02,760 --> 00:22:05,880 Speaker 1: If you think something is not worth the price, if 379 00:22:05,880 --> 00:22:08,640 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 00:22:12,040 --> 00:22:14,160 Speaker 1: That's how you can get the prices to come down. 382 00:22:14,200 --> 00:22:17,360 Speaker 1: You just say like, well, I just don't think it's 383 00:22:17,359 --> 00:22:19,679 Speaker 1: worth it, so I'm not gonna bother if it was. 384 00:22:19,960 --> 00:22:21,720 Speaker 1: If you feel like it wasn't worth it, why would 385 00:22:21,720 --> 00:22:24,359 Speaker 1: you worry about it? Now? If you think it's worth 386 00:22:24,520 --> 00:22:27,560 Speaker 1: the price, but you're not willing to pay that price. 387 00:22:27,600 --> 00:22:29,960 Speaker 1: So in other words, you're just saying, it's probably worth 388 00:22:30,040 --> 00:22:32,280 Speaker 1: the twenty bucks to see it, but I'm not gonna 389 00:22:32,280 --> 00:22:35,440 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 --> 00:22:42,879 Speaker 1: works out. So pirating isn't really cool. Now that being said, 392 00:22:43,520 --> 00:22:47,159 Speaker 1: the movie studios have a narrative around piracy that isn't 393 00:22:47,400 --> 00:22:51,600 Speaker 1: really supportable. So well, I agree that piracy is not good. 394 00:22:52,080 --> 00:22:56,359 Speaker 1: I also say that movie studios have blown it way 395 00:22:56,400 --> 00:23:01,440 Speaker 1: out of proportion. See, the narrative is that movie piracy 396 00:23:01,480 --> 00:23:07,600 Speaker 1: directly translates to lost revenue, and that's just not really supportable. 397 00:23:07,920 --> 00:23:10,960 Speaker 1: If someone bootlegs a copy of a movie and then 398 00:23:11,000 --> 00:23:14,000 Speaker 1: makes it available in people who otherwise would never go 399 00:23:14,240 --> 00:23:17,600 Speaker 1: see the movie download the film to watch it. You 400 00:23:17,760 --> 00:23:21,800 Speaker 1: can't really claim that the movie studio is out any revenue. 401 00:23:22,280 --> 00:23:24,879 Speaker 1: After all, those pirates were never going to pay to 402 00:23:24,920 --> 00:23:27,960 Speaker 1: see the movie at all, So, in other words, there's 403 00:23:28,040 --> 00:23:31,360 Speaker 1: no difference to the movie studios bottom line if those 404 00:23:31,359 --> 00:23:34,720 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 00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:41,159 Speaker 1: it for free, or they weren't going to pirate the 408 00:23:41,160 --> 00:23:44,480 Speaker 1: film and not watch it at all. Either way, you 409 00:23:44,560 --> 00:23:48,399 Speaker 1: don't get a ticket sale. Now, some of those people 410 00:23:48,880 --> 00:23:51,680 Speaker 1: might have been willing to buy a ticket before they 411 00:23:51,720 --> 00:23:55,680 Speaker 1: got hold of a pirated copy. Those people could potentially 412 00:23:55,720 --> 00:24:00,440 Speaker 1: represent cases of lost revenue, but it's impossible to determine 413 00:24:00,480 --> 00:24:04,120 Speaker 1: how many of those pirates would have otherwise bought a ticket, 414 00:24:04,440 --> 00:24:07,920 Speaker 1: which means it's impossible for movie studios to give an 415 00:24:07,920 --> 00:24:12,240 Speaker 1: actual amount as to the magnitude of lost revenue. And 416 00:24:12,280 --> 00:24:16,920 Speaker 1: since movie studios used these very large estimates to justify 417 00:24:17,040 --> 00:24:21,960 Speaker 1: lobbying for stiff penalties whenever they pursued cases against pirates. 418 00:24:22,560 --> 00:24:26,119 Speaker 1: They were able to win some pretty draconian victories against 419 00:24:26,160 --> 00:24:30,919 Speaker 1: people using pretty flimsy justification. This was all in an 420 00:24:30,960 --> 00:24:34,879 Speaker 1: effort to terrify would be pirates in order to discourage 421 00:24:34,920 --> 00:24:38,320 Speaker 1: the practice. At the same time, the goal was to 422 00:24:38,359 --> 00:24:41,879 Speaker 1: find ways to coax people into movie theaters, something that 423 00:24:41,920 --> 00:24:45,440 Speaker 1: the theater chains also wanted to have happened for obvious reasons. 424 00:24:45,800 --> 00:24:48,800 Speaker 1: And finding ways to create an experience that's not really 425 00:24:48,920 --> 00:24:52,320 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 00:24:55,359 --> 00:24:59,280 Speaker 1: big part of that strategy. It was hard to bootleg 428 00:24:59,400 --> 00:25:03,360 Speaker 1: a three D film, so the super jen Kie way 429 00:25:03,359 --> 00:25:05,879 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 00:25:09,240 --> 00:25:12,560 Speaker 1: worse than a typical bootleg made in that way. And 432 00:25:12,600 --> 00:25:14,800 Speaker 1: if you could get your hands on a digital copy, 433 00:25:15,240 --> 00:25:18,520 Speaker 1: something that has happened on numerous occasions with different films, 434 00:25:18,600 --> 00:25:20,400 Speaker 1: the image would be better, but you would still need 435 00:25:20,440 --> 00:25:23,280 Speaker 1: a compatible three D television and glasses set up, or 436 00:25:23,320 --> 00:25:25,520 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 00:25:29,160 --> 00:25:32,560 Speaker 1: of a two D version of the movie but then 439 00:25:32,640 --> 00:25:34,960 Speaker 1: one of the big selling points of the film wouldn't 440 00:25:34,960 --> 00:25:37,760 Speaker 1: be available to you. So three D was seen as 441 00:25:37,800 --> 00:25:39,840 Speaker 1: a way to convince people to go to a theater 442 00:25:39,960 --> 00:25:42,000 Speaker 1: to see a movie, rather than to pirate it or 443 00:25:42,040 --> 00:25:45,840 Speaker 1: wait around. And this trend found its way to television 444 00:25:45,880 --> 00:25:49,359 Speaker 1: manufacturers who saw the potential to advertise to home theater 445 00:25:49,560 --> 00:25:53,359 Speaker 1: enthusiasts who did want to get the closest approximation of 446 00:25:53,400 --> 00:25:58,240 Speaker 1: the cinematic experience in their own home setups. See One 447 00:25:58,280 --> 00:26:01,960 Speaker 1: of the reasons three D televisions became a thing is 448 00:26:02,000 --> 00:26:05,760 Speaker 1: that TV companies need to create a compelling reason for 449 00:26:05,840 --> 00:26:09,600 Speaker 1: people to go out and buy a television. This is 450 00:26:09,640 --> 00:26:13,560 Speaker 1: an arc we can follow whenever a new television technology 451 00:26:13,640 --> 00:26:17,240 Speaker 1: really takes off. Initially, only a small percentage of the 452 00:26:17,280 --> 00:26:20,800 Speaker 1: market adopts it, typically because the tech tends to be 453 00:26:20,880 --> 00:26:23,960 Speaker 1: pretty expensive when it first debuts and there may be 454 00:26:24,000 --> 00:26:27,280 Speaker 1: a shortage of content that you can watch on this 455 00:26:27,480 --> 00:26:33,080 Speaker 1: new tech of television. So, for example, we saw this 456 00:26:33,160 --> 00:26:36,600 Speaker 1: with the invention of color TV in the nineteen fifties. 457 00:26:36,640 --> 00:26:39,359 Speaker 1: Color TV actually followed not long after black and white 458 00:26:39,359 --> 00:26:42,000 Speaker 1: television first started to get a real foothold after the 459 00:26:42,080 --> 00:26:44,639 Speaker 1: end of World War two, our c A and CBS 460 00:26:44,720 --> 00:26:48,720 Speaker 1: competed fiercely to create the standard for color television. Eventually, 461 00:26:48,920 --> 00:26:51,560 Speaker 1: our c A pretty much won that battle after some 462 00:26:51,640 --> 00:26:54,359 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 00:26:58,680 --> 00:27:01,919 Speaker 1: adoption did not fall immediately. In fact, it took quite 465 00:27:02,000 --> 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 00:27:07,800 --> 00:27:11,520 Speaker 1: time in BC was the only network broadcasting anything in color, 468 00:27:11,840 --> 00:27:14,720 Speaker 1: so a color television only had a slight advantage over 469 00:27:14,760 --> 00:27:17,639 Speaker 1: older black and white sets. Why would you buy a 470 00:27:17,680 --> 00:27:20,160 Speaker 1: color TV if there are only a couple of programs 471 00:27:20,200 --> 00:27:23,920 Speaker 1: that are in color. Studios pushed hard to expand the options, 472 00:27:24,080 --> 00:27:26,720 Speaker 1: with companies like Disney doing a lot to promote the 473 00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:32,480 Speaker 1: advancement of color television. But price was another barrier. Television's 474 00:27:32,480 --> 00:27:37,399 Speaker 1: were and are expensive. Many households don't have the extra 475 00:27:37,480 --> 00:27:40,600 Speaker 1: money laying around to upgrade to the latest update to 476 00:27:40,760 --> 00:27:44,560 Speaker 1: technologies like television's. The expectation was that you would buy 477 00:27:44,560 --> 00:27:47,639 Speaker 1: a television set and then you pretty much use it 478 00:27:47,720 --> 00:27:50,399 Speaker 1: until it stopped working, or maybe until the cost of 479 00:27:50,440 --> 00:27:53,200 Speaker 1: repairing a television is more or less the same as 480 00:27:53,359 --> 00:27:56,080 Speaker 1: buying a new one in the first place. For reasons 481 00:27:56,119 --> 00:27:59,639 Speaker 1: like these, color television actually took a really long time 482 00:27:59,720 --> 00:28:04,920 Speaker 1: to at a purchase in the US market, even by 483 00:28:05,280 --> 00:28:08,880 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 00:28:12,359 --> 00:28:16,600 Speaker 1: emerge with high definition television. The transition from standard definition 486 00:28:16,640 --> 00:28:19,640 Speaker 1: TV to h D t V was a fairly gradual one, 487 00:28:19,960 --> 00:28:22,680 Speaker 1: and largely for the same reasons as the color TV 488 00:28:22,760 --> 00:28:25,480 Speaker 1: transition we had seen in the sixties and seventies, though 489 00:28:25,480 --> 00:28:29,800 Speaker 1: it took less time with HDTV, and we're seeing similarities 490 00:28:29,800 --> 00:28:32,879 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 00:28:39,520 --> 00:28:42,760 Speaker 1: tech advancements. These are sales pitches to get people to 494 00:28:42,840 --> 00:28:48,800 Speaker 1: buy more televisions, because that's how businesses work. So for 495 00:28:48,840 --> 00:28:54,160 Speaker 1: several years, companies like Sony, LG, Samsung, and many others 496 00:28:54,600 --> 00:28:58,480 Speaker 1: really pushed three D capabilities. When we come back, i'll 497 00:28:58,480 --> 00:29:01,360 Speaker 1: talk about how that played out, but first let's take 498 00:29:01,640 --> 00:29:12,480 Speaker 1: another quick break. Companies were starting to experiment with three 499 00:29:12,560 --> 00:29:15,760 Speaker 1: D television tech before, but that's the year of the 500 00:29:15,800 --> 00:29:20,640 Speaker 1: industry really began to commit to the technology again, not coincidentally, 501 00:29:20,680 --> 00:29:25,000 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 00:29:28,280 --> 00:29:32,600 Speaker 1: glasses strategy, a few were gambling with active glasses instead. 504 00:29:33,200 --> 00:29:36,120 Speaker 1: A very few examples played with the idea of glasses 505 00:29:36,240 --> 00:29:41,040 Speaker 1: free three D television demand. That's a big gamble. So 506 00:29:41,120 --> 00:29:44,040 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 00:29:47,320 --> 00:29:50,000 Speaker 1: lights so that each of your eyeballs gets a different 509 00:29:50,080 --> 00:29:52,640 Speaker 1: feed of information, as it were. But it also means 510 00:29:52,680 --> 00:29:55,160 Speaker 1: to experience that three D effect, you need to be 511 00:29:55,280 --> 00:29:59,080 Speaker 1: viewing the television from the proper angle. So you can 512 00:29:59,120 --> 00:30:02,400 Speaker 1: imagine the TV surface and imagine that there's a wedge 513 00:30:02,440 --> 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 00:30:14,280 --> 00:30:16,840 Speaker 1: like in the middle, you get the three D effect. 517 00:30:17,240 --> 00:30:20,040 Speaker 1: But if you're outside the wedge by being a little 518 00:30:20,080 --> 00:30:22,920 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 --> 00:30:29,080 Speaker 1: slices like the slice goes down the middle where you're 521 00:30:29,160 --> 00:30:32,440 Speaker 1: sitting or standing, you don't get the proper three D effect, 522 00:30:32,440 --> 00:30:36,320 Speaker 1: and it becomes hard to look at the screen anyway. 523 00:30:36,520 --> 00:30:40,040 Speaker 1: The three D tech and television's worked more or less 524 00:30:40,240 --> 00:30:43,760 Speaker 1: depending upon the specific implementation, but that's just part of 525 00:30:43,760 --> 00:30:45,880 Speaker 1: the puzzle that needs to come together to make an 526 00:30:45,880 --> 00:30:50,160 Speaker 1: innovation in TV technology a success. Yes, it has to 527 00:30:50,200 --> 00:30:52,000 Speaker 1: work for it to be a success, but that's not 528 00:30:52,080 --> 00:30:56,880 Speaker 1: the only quality it has to have. Another is content, 529 00:30:57,360 --> 00:31:00,600 Speaker 1: just like with color television and high definition television and 530 00:31:00,640 --> 00:31:05,160 Speaker 1: now ultra high definition content. Without good three D content, 531 00:31:05,720 --> 00:31:09,960 Speaker 1: this feature was doomed. Early on a few different media 532 00:31:10,000 --> 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 00:31:21,080 --> 00:31:24,360 Speaker 1: broadcasting by two thousand thirteen. I'll get back to that 536 00:31:24,560 --> 00:31:27,920 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 00:31:32,560 --> 00:31:35,920 Speaker 1: Fans of video game consoles have seen this happen time 539 00:31:35,960 --> 00:31:40,120 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 00:31:45,240 --> 00:31:48,800 Speaker 1: Another source of content was the promise of three D 542 00:31:49,000 --> 00:31:51,560 Speaker 1: Blu ray discs, but to play one of these you 543 00:31:51,600 --> 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 Blue ray player that was not compatible with 545 00:31:57,800 --> 00:32:00,440 Speaker 1: three D technology, you would have to go buy a 546 00:32:00,440 --> 00:32:02,640 Speaker 1: new one. You wouldn't just be investing in a brand 547 00:32:02,680 --> 00:32:05,320 Speaker 1: new television, but also a brand new Blu ray player. 548 00:32:05,760 --> 00:32:09,080 Speaker 1: Some companies were able to patch existing equipment to support 549 00:32:09,160 --> 00:32:13,000 Speaker 1: three D content. Sony did this with the PlayStation three, 550 00:32:13,160 --> 00:32:16,280 Speaker 1: and firmware updates to players could help remove some of 551 00:32:16,320 --> 00:32:19,880 Speaker 1: the barriers to entry, but it wasn't a universal practice, 552 00:32:19,960 --> 00:32:22,760 Speaker 1: and it didn't always mean that the experience you got 553 00:32:22,880 --> 00:32:24,640 Speaker 1: was as good as if you went out and bought 554 00:32:24,680 --> 00:32:27,280 Speaker 1: a new Blu ray player that could support it. Natively, 555 00:32:28,080 --> 00:32:32,280 Speaker 1: so it was a fix for some platforms, but not 556 00:32:32,400 --> 00:32:35,400 Speaker 1: an ideal one. On top of all that, there was 557 00:32:35,440 --> 00:32:38,240 Speaker 1: the problem of three D quality in general. Now I'm 558 00:32:38,240 --> 00:32:41,480 Speaker 1: not talking about how the television is displayed three D, 559 00:32:41,760 --> 00:32:45,680 Speaker 1: although if you didn't tweak the settings just right you 560 00:32:45,680 --> 00:32:49,720 Speaker 1: would have a pretty shoddy experience in the home. I 561 00:32:50,120 --> 00:32:53,920 Speaker 1: am actually talking about the quality of the content itself. 562 00:32:53,960 --> 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 00:33:01,680 --> 00:33:04,960 Speaker 1: to begin with, which weren't guaranteed to be better, but 565 00:33:05,080 --> 00:33:08,320 Speaker 1: had advantages over the other type of three D content, 566 00:33:08,440 --> 00:33:12,360 Speaker 1: the aforementioned converted to D films that have been turned 567 00:33:12,440 --> 00:33:16,800 Speaker 1: into three D. Many movies included gimmicks of stuff seeming 568 00:33:16,840 --> 00:33:20,400 Speaker 1: to emerge out from the screen. That's a three D 569 00:33:20,480 --> 00:33:23,600 Speaker 1: trick that's been around since the nineteen fifties, and rather 570 00:33:23,680 --> 00:33:27,720 Speaker 1: than create an immersive experience, these tricks seemed to call 571 00:33:27,800 --> 00:33:30,760 Speaker 1: too much attention to themselves. It actually tends to pull 572 00:33:30,800 --> 00:33:34,360 Speaker 1: people out of the movie. You you're laughing at something 573 00:33:34,760 --> 00:33:38,320 Speaker 1: that's happening because it's so far outside the realm of 574 00:33:38,320 --> 00:33:40,520 Speaker 1: a typical movie experience that pulls you out of it. 575 00:33:41,120 --> 00:33:45,080 Speaker 1: There are several analysts and television manufacturing representatives who actually 576 00:33:45,080 --> 00:33:48,600 Speaker 1: blame the poorer performance of three D television sales on 577 00:33:48,640 --> 00:33:52,240 Speaker 1: the ratio of bad three D content to good stuff. 578 00:33:52,440 --> 00:33:55,200 Speaker 1: In other words, there was just too much crappy three 579 00:33:55,320 --> 00:33:58,400 Speaker 1: D out there, and there wasn't enough good to really 580 00:33:58,440 --> 00:34:02,920 Speaker 1: make it compelling. Then, of course you have to buy 581 00:34:03,160 --> 00:34:05,920 Speaker 1: or rent the Blu ray discs that you would play 582 00:34:06,000 --> 00:34:09,759 Speaker 1: on your compatible Blu Ray player, and that adds yet 583 00:34:09,760 --> 00:34:12,799 Speaker 1: another expense to this technology. And if the television comes 584 00:34:12,840 --> 00:34:15,200 Speaker 1: with fewer sets of three D glasses, then you have 585 00:34:15,320 --> 00:34:18,200 Speaker 1: people in your household, then you have to shell out 586 00:34:18,200 --> 00:34:22,840 Speaker 1: even more money to make sure everyone has a glasses set. 587 00:34:23,480 --> 00:34:26,840 Speaker 1: And complicating matters was that the Blu Ray format itself 588 00:34:26,960 --> 00:34:30,200 Speaker 1: was starting to struggle in the market at this same time. 589 00:34:30,719 --> 00:34:32,960 Speaker 1: While the quality of Blu ray films, both from a 590 00:34:33,040 --> 00:34:37,359 Speaker 1: picture and sound standpoint, was superior to most other home 591 00:34:37,480 --> 00:34:42,400 Speaker 1: entertainment options, it wasn't nearly as convenient as emerging cloud 592 00:34:42,440 --> 00:34:47,640 Speaker 1: based streaming services like Netflix, Amazon's prime video service Hulu, 593 00:34:47,719 --> 00:34:52,720 Speaker 1: and things like that. Consumers were favoring convenience over image 594 00:34:52,719 --> 00:34:56,240 Speaker 1: and sound quality, which has been a pretty steady trend 595 00:34:56,280 --> 00:35:00,520 Speaker 1: throughout media history see also the music industry. By two 596 00:35:00,520 --> 00:35:04,440 Speaker 1: thousand nineteen, there were really only two services to stream 597 00:35:04,560 --> 00:35:09,440 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 --> 00:35:16,520 Speaker 1: on the more popular mainstream services out there, and this 600 00:35:16,600 --> 00:35:21,440 Speaker 1: contributed to the lackluster usage data around three D televisions. 601 00:35:21,480 --> 00:35:23,920 Speaker 1: On top of that, people were watching less content on 602 00:35:23,960 --> 00:35:27,719 Speaker 1: their television's in general, and watching more stuff like that 603 00:35:27,880 --> 00:35:32,200 Speaker 1: on tablets and smartphones. The shift in consumer behavior had 604 00:35:32,280 --> 00:35:35,480 Speaker 1: no real place in it for three D television. The 605 00:35:35,560 --> 00:35:39,960 Speaker 1: glasses themselves also represented a challenge. Many customers didn't like 606 00:35:40,040 --> 00:35:41,719 Speaker 1: the idea of having to put on a pair of 607 00:35:41,760 --> 00:35:44,440 Speaker 1: glasses just to watch a movie in their own homes 608 00:35:44,840 --> 00:35:47,799 Speaker 1: and admit having to keep track of yet another peripheral 609 00:35:47,880 --> 00:35:51,719 Speaker 1: on top of mundane stuff like remote controls. Plus, if 610 00:35:51,760 --> 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 00:35:57,880 --> 00:36:00,840 Speaker 1: a hundred dollars per pair of glasses. So the general 613 00:36:00,880 --> 00:36:05,880 Speaker 1: consensus was that three D glasses are expensive and a hassle. Plus, 614 00:36:05,920 --> 00:36:09,360 Speaker 1: some people found that the glasses would be uncomfortable and 615 00:36:09,520 --> 00:36:12,960 Speaker 1: they could contribute to problems like eye strain or headaches 616 00:36:13,520 --> 00:36:18,440 Speaker 1: and generally create an unpleasant experience. Lots of folks have 617 00:36:18,520 --> 00:36:21,319 Speaker 1: issues like this with three D films as well, so 618 00:36:21,480 --> 00:36:24,560 Speaker 1: this isn't just something that happens to people watching three 619 00:36:24,640 --> 00:36:28,759 Speaker 1: D television. There are people who have generally unpleasant experiences 620 00:36:28,840 --> 00:36:32,400 Speaker 1: watching three D films. I tend to fall into that camp. Actually. 621 00:36:32,400 --> 00:36:35,600 Speaker 1: If a film is showing in three D and two D. 622 00:36:36,080 --> 00:36:39,640 Speaker 1: I almost always pick the two D version. I will 623 00:36:39,640 --> 00:36:41,680 Speaker 1: see a three D film if I feel like it 624 00:36:41,719 --> 00:36:45,160 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 00:36:48,320 --> 00:36:51,400 Speaker 1: rare exceptions because I do tend to find the experience 627 00:36:51,520 --> 00:36:56,840 Speaker 1: to be unpleasant. Three D TV sales never quite matched 628 00:36:57,040 --> 00:37:00,520 Speaker 1: the marketing efforts that these companies were putting forward. The 629 00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:04,560 Speaker 1: numbers did go up, though that may largely be because 630 00:37:04,960 --> 00:37:08,160 Speaker 1: many models sold in the first few years following two 631 00:37:08,840 --> 00:37:11,480 Speaker 1: had three D capability baked into them, so you could 632 00:37:11,560 --> 00:37:15,000 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, though, rather they were in the 634 00:37:17,320 --> 00:37:19,759 Speaker 1: market for a brand new television, and all the brand 635 00:37:19,800 --> 00:37:23,560 Speaker 1: new televisions also had three D support built into them. 636 00:37:23,680 --> 00:37:26,239 Speaker 1: Even if people were buying them because of the three 637 00:37:26,320 --> 00:37:29,600 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 --> 00:37:38,919 Speaker 1: perhaps because of the price or just in general sense 641 00:37:38,920 --> 00:37:41,040 Speaker 1: that they wouldn't get much out of it. And then 642 00:37:41,040 --> 00:37:43,640 Speaker 1: you had the people who would buy the three D TVs, 643 00:37:43,680 --> 00:37:47,480 Speaker 1: but they never or very rarely ever watched three D 644 00:37:47,600 --> 00:37:50,480 Speaker 1: content on them. The house of cards really came down, 645 00:37:50,520 --> 00:37:54,399 Speaker 1: tumbling down pretty quickly. It wasn't a complete shambles until 646 00:37:54,440 --> 00:37:57,319 Speaker 1: about two thousand and seventeen. Now I already mentioned that 647 00:37:57,400 --> 00:38:00,800 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 --> 00:38:11,680 Speaker 1: content were just too high. Companies were not seeing a 651 00:38:11,719 --> 00:38:15,479 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 00:38:19,239 --> 00:38:23,480 Speaker 1: wasn't there. The manufacturers began to abandon three D features 654 00:38:23,520 --> 00:38:27,880 Speaker 1: to video pulled the plug early, and which was a 655 00:38:27,880 --> 00:38:31,399 Speaker 1: pretty prescient move, as it turns out. Sam Sung would 656 00:38:31,440 --> 00:38:34,040 Speaker 1: hold on until two thousand and sixteen and then stopped 657 00:38:34,080 --> 00:38:37,640 Speaker 1: including three D support in their television's. LG and Sony 658 00:38:37,760 --> 00:38:41,080 Speaker 1: were the last two major television manufacturing companies to offer 659 00:38:41,120 --> 00:38:44,880 Speaker 1: three D support. They stopped in two thousand seventeen. On 660 00:38:44,920 --> 00:38:47,719 Speaker 1: the film front, three D screenings have not been doing 661 00:38:47,840 --> 00:38:49,880 Speaker 1: very well in the United States over the last few years. 662 00:38:50,200 --> 00:38:52,640 Speaker 1: In the wake of Avatar, three D screenings began to 663 00:38:52,680 --> 00:38:55,280 Speaker 1: make up a pretty good part of the overall revenue 664 00:38:55,280 --> 00:38:58,080 Speaker 1: for ticket sales, but the glood of two D films 665 00:38:58,120 --> 00:39:02,759 Speaker 1: converted to three D, the horror viewing experiences, that kind 666 00:39:02,760 --> 00:39:05,319 Speaker 1: of stuff may have contributed to a general feeling of 667 00:39:05,360 --> 00:39:09,360 Speaker 1: disillusionment over the quality of three D movies. Or maybe 668 00:39:09,360 --> 00:39:13,000 Speaker 1: it's the premium prices that audiences object to. Whatever the reason, 669 00:39:13,200 --> 00:39:15,360 Speaker 1: three D ticket sales at the US have been on 670 00:39:15,400 --> 00:39:19,160 Speaker 1: the decline for several years. Then again, this is complicated 671 00:39:19,160 --> 00:39:22,399 Speaker 1: by the fact that ticket sales in general have been 672 00:39:22,440 --> 00:39:25,399 Speaker 1: on the decline, So it's possible the trend with three 673 00:39:25,480 --> 00:39:29,040 Speaker 1: D films is merely keeping pace with the overall trend 674 00:39:29,200 --> 00:39:32,280 Speaker 1: from movie ticket sales. But there's no shortage of articles 675 00:39:32,280 --> 00:39:35,600 Speaker 1: out there that suggests that audiences in North America see 676 00:39:35,800 --> 00:39:39,200 Speaker 1: very little added value with three D films in general 677 00:39:39,440 --> 00:39:42,280 Speaker 1: and have come to reject them when going to the theater. 678 00:39:43,160 --> 00:39:47,600 Speaker 1: In one place this isn't happening, however, is China. China 679 00:39:47,680 --> 00:39:51,320 Speaker 1: has the most theaters capable of screening three D films 680 00:39:51,560 --> 00:39:55,400 Speaker 1: in the entire world, and China represents a truly huge 681 00:39:55,600 --> 00:39:59,719 Speaker 1: market for entertainment. It's such a big market that its 682 00:39:59,719 --> 00:40:03,600 Speaker 1: shape it's the actual content of films, So for example, 683 00:40:03,840 --> 00:40:07,920 Speaker 1: in two thousand twelve, the remake of Red Dawn debuted. 684 00:40:08,320 --> 00:40:12,200 Speaker 1: The original film had come out in ninety four and 685 00:40:12,520 --> 00:40:14,640 Speaker 1: it had been shelved for a couple of years. That 686 00:40:14,680 --> 00:40:19,120 Speaker 1: had actually been finished by but MGM, the production company 687 00:40:19,160 --> 00:40:22,880 Speaker 1: that was behind it, got into some real financial difficulty, 688 00:40:23,160 --> 00:40:24,920 Speaker 1: so the movie kind of set on shells for a 689 00:40:24,920 --> 00:40:27,960 Speaker 1: couple of years. A different studio came in to become 690 00:40:28,000 --> 00:40:32,480 Speaker 1: the production company, and at that stage they were looking 691 00:40:32,560 --> 00:40:36,160 Speaker 1: at editing the movie and making a major change changing 692 00:40:36,239 --> 00:40:41,640 Speaker 1: the invading army from Chinese soldiers to North Korean soldiers. 693 00:40:41,840 --> 00:40:45,520 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 00:40:48,520 --> 00:40:52,000 Speaker 1: potential market in China. It was a political move. It 696 00:40:52,080 --> 00:40:55,960 Speaker 1: was done to avoid ticking off a potentially lucrative market. 697 00:40:56,080 --> 00:40:58,640 Speaker 1: They would never be able to sell the film in 698 00:40:58,760 --> 00:41:02,400 Speaker 1: China if China are seen as the enemy in the movie. 699 00:41:03,520 --> 00:41:05,880 Speaker 1: But then the movie never did release in China, so 700 00:41:05,880 --> 00:41:08,359 Speaker 1: it's kind of a moot point. What I'm getting at 701 00:41:08,520 --> 00:41:12,120 Speaker 1: is that the Chinese market is so huge, so significant 702 00:41:12,120 --> 00:41:16,960 Speaker 1: to the entertainment industry that when movie studios are considering 703 00:41:17,560 --> 00:41:22,520 Speaker 1: funding a film production that's part of the consideration. So 704 00:41:22,920 --> 00:41:26,600 Speaker 1: movies that are made for North America are often made 705 00:41:26,640 --> 00:41:29,279 Speaker 1: for North America. And then you have an asterisk next 706 00:41:29,320 --> 00:41:33,080 Speaker 1: to that that says and also China, but mostly China, 707 00:41:33,440 --> 00:41:37,720 Speaker 1: so you might end up having a very different film 708 00:41:37,760 --> 00:41:43,320 Speaker 1: than what perhaps the screenwriter or director originally intended. Anyway, 709 00:41:43,840 --> 00:41:46,680 Speaker 1: that Chinese market is likely to keep the three D 710 00:41:46,880 --> 00:41:50,319 Speaker 1: film industry alive because it is a fairly popular form 711 00:41:50,320 --> 00:41:53,719 Speaker 1: of entertainment over in China. It may mean that we'll 712 00:41:53,719 --> 00:41:57,040 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 00:42:01,520 --> 00:42:04,200 Speaker 1: it's a c g I film, it tends to require 715 00:42:04,239 --> 00:42:06,640 Speaker 1: twice as much of a crew to run a three 716 00:42:06,760 --> 00:42:09,799 Speaker 1: D shoot as a normal two D shoot, so it's 717 00:42:09,840 --> 00:42:14,040 Speaker 1: a very expensive and complicated endeavor. So is three D 718 00:42:14,120 --> 00:42:19,680 Speaker 1: dead in the United States? I would say it's mostly dead, 719 00:42:20,080 --> 00:42:22,399 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 --> 00:42:31,600 Speaker 1: brief franchise specific revival, and we'll probably see three D 722 00:42:31,680 --> 00:42:35,480 Speaker 1: come back and yet another incarnation in the future because 723 00:42:35,520 --> 00:42:39,000 Speaker 1: it has happened before. But I think in general we're 724 00:42:39,000 --> 00:42:42,120 Speaker 1: going to see fewer three D films, at least fewer 725 00:42:42,160 --> 00:42:46,120 Speaker 1: films made in three D from the get go, and 726 00:42:46,440 --> 00:42:49,080 Speaker 1: we probably will see a continuation of the trend of 727 00:42:49,200 --> 00:42:52,040 Speaker 1: fewer people buying tickets to go see the three D films, 728 00:42:53,000 --> 00:42:56,680 Speaker 1: But that's just my own opinion on that matter. This 729 00:42:56,840 --> 00:43:02,520 Speaker 1: was really to trace how the fad failed to become 730 00:43:02,560 --> 00:43:06,719 Speaker 1: a trend. If you guys have suggestions for future topics 731 00:43:06,920 --> 00:43:09,480 Speaker 1: of tech Stuff, send me an email. The address is 732 00:43:09,640 --> 00:43:13,839 Speaker 1: tech stuff at how stuff works dot com, or pop 733 00:43:13,880 --> 00:43:17,120 Speaker 1: on over to our website that's tech stuff podcast dot com. 734 00:43:17,200 --> 00:43:20,400 Speaker 1: You will find links to our presence on social media, 735 00:43:20,840 --> 00:43:24,520 Speaker 1: as well as a link to the archives of every 736 00:43:24,560 --> 00:43:28,560 Speaker 1: single episode that's ever been published of tech Stuff and 737 00:43:28,800 --> 00:43:31,279 Speaker 1: a link to our online store, where every purchase you 738 00:43:31,320 --> 00:43:34,000 Speaker 1: make goes to help the show and we greatly appreciate it, 739 00:43:34,400 --> 00:43:41,399 Speaker 1: and I'll talk to you again and really soon. Text 740 00:43:41,400 --> 00:43:44,080 Speaker 1: Stuff is a production of I Heart Radios How Stuff Works. 741 00:43:44,239 --> 00:43:47,040 Speaker 1: For more podcasts from I heeart Radio, visit the I 742 00:43:47,160 --> 00:43:50,400 Speaker 1: heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to 743 00:43:50,440 --> 00:43:51,360 Speaker 1: your favorite shows.