Panasonic 3D CAMERA

the actual format they want to record to, will it hold up to the big screen?
I can see people having to hook up 2 nano flashes together in sync to capture a higher bitrate!
 
I am researching an article on all of this new 3D technology this week, I have spoken with the lot of the big players as recently as an hour ago. It is useless to resist this 3D wave, at least from a content producer POV. The networks and studios think this is the next big thing and are putting hundreds of millions of dollars into it. The electronics manufacturers are hedging their bets with it as well.

I personally think that most consumers could care less about having a 3D television in their home and are resentful that they have just laid out thousands of dollars to finally buy an HD LCD or Plasma, yet now the studios and manufacturers are telling them that their new toy is already outdated and to spend a lot more to get the latest and greatest 3D TVZ, 3D Blu Ray and eventually 3D small consumer camcorder.

I have heard an interesting cross section of opinions from the manufacturers, studios and third party service and accesory providers on if we all really need Oprah, Tyra, trash reality television and the news in 3D but I suppose at some point, it will all be in 3D even though it obviously doesn't need to be.

As content providers though, for all of us, whip out your credit cards and get ready to re-learn everything you thought you knew about production. Producing content in 3D is a big learning curve, much bigger than the transition from SD to HD was just a few years ago for us. If you produce non-broadcast, the demand won't be there for 5-10 years but if you produce entertainment, buckle up and start learning about parralex, convergence, anaglyph, polarization, shutter viewing systems and how to shoot effectively in 3D. Editors, get ready to enlarge your skill sets, editing 3D content is a whole new ball game as well, especially higher end deliverables.

Dan
 
Last edited:
It's definitely a bummer that a lot of people will have to buy a new TV but Sony did mention that all the PS3 needs is a firmware update although it's a gamble for other Blu-Ray players.
 
I think Sony and Panasonic both introduced their Blu Ray 3D players today as well. Nobody is buying Blu Ray so let's make it 3D!

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
As content providers though, for all of us, whip out your credit cards and get ready to re-learn everything you thought you knew about production.

Dan
Click to expand...

I don´t give a flying fart about 3D - heck, I actually hate it.

But I fear Dan is right.

Frank
 
puredrifting said:
I think Sony and Panasonic both introduced their Blu Ray 3D players today as well. Nobody is buying Blu Ray so let's make it 3D!

Dan
Click to expand...
Most Blu-Ray players are the PS3 anyway so that's about 31 million players that are 3D compatible.

It looks like HD TVs have gotten so cheep that they had to do something to keep the prices high on the new ones.


This reminds me that I have yet to see Avatar.
 
Looking at the median price for televisions over the past thirty years, you can see that there has been very little, if any, inflation in the cost of new sets. In 1972, there were 23" sets MSRP'd at $1000.

With the very best consumer models like Samsung's 8000 series selling for $2k (UN55B8000 55-Inch 1080p 240 Hz LED HDTV), the manufacturers will certainly continue to look to do something new.

Hey, if they can produce Avatar quality 3D on a large LCD display, I'm all for it. Remember though, that Cameron's picture represents the very best that can be done with bleeding-edge 3D. It looked pretty damn good. For features, maybe it makes sense to lens everything in 3D.

Unfortunately, when the networks decide they want How I Met Your Mother to be lensed in 3D, they might be forced to make a lot of compromises in classic production values as they chase the 3d dragon.

Industry-wide, the number of production days for scripted TV is shrinking as ad revenue continues to contract. With DVR and online content delivery, this trend will never reverse itself. As a direct result, ten-day schedules have been reduced to eight. How does 3D figure into this shift? Well, with 3D, production days aren't going to go down - that's for sure.

Consumers around the world completely ignored what was happening with HD in Japan as early as the late 1980s. It took until 1996 to get the ATSC standards published. It was 2009 before ATSC started to make its way into some of the more adventurous markets in the USA. Mexico won't transition in our lifetime (at the rate they're going) and Canada is set to go ATSC in 2011.

Narrative / scripted / single-camera TV, traditionally lensed in 35mm, has had plenty of trouble with the transition to HD acquisition. I know first-hand of several shows that went HD for a few episodes and then quietly went back to 35mm. Art directors have had a heck of a time dealing with HD. Now, a few years later, the market is forcing them all back into HD as they must drive every dollar to the screen.

For part of the entertainment business, this whole rediscovery / renaissance of 3D could be a great way to reenergize their audience. For others, it might just be a terrible instance of the tail wagging the dog.
 
I'm just not interested in 3D. And, for that matter, neither are most of the consumers I've talked to. Like I've said before, until we can actually project in 3D I highly doubt it will catch on. People might be OK with 3D as part of a theater experience, but few want it at home.
 
The push for 3D is coming from only two entities, the studios/networks and the electronics manufacturers. It is NOT coming from consumers. This is really the latest replay from the 1950s. Back then it was the novelty of average American homes having a TV so movie attendance plummeted. The plan was to give the audience something in theaters that they could not experience at home so 3D, Cinerama, VisaVision and the like came into being. It worked, somewhat, theater attendance went up.

Home theaters today with HD, 7.1, digital cable, are so good that people have once again stopped going to the movies except for event films like Avatar. So Hollywood, in their brilliance, has decided that 3D will get the viewers back into the theaters. It has, to a small point, but then you have the Sonys of the world who want people back in the theaters, but they want you to keep buying new 3D sets, glasses, 3D Blu Ray players and hunks of plastic with 3D movies on them.

I agree with the posts that consumers generally could care less. What we are seeing are two industries, entertainment and electronics, that don't know how to do anything else but what they have always done, look for the "next big thing". This is a huge gamble with billions and billions of dollars on the line, it will be interesting to see if the collective sigh and shoulder shrug of consumers puts some of the CE giants and or studios out of business.

Dan
 
dopeyname101 said:
Sad thing is, though, Frank, it really doesn't matter whether we like 3D or not. What matters is what the audience wants and will pay for.
Click to expand...

I remember the first time I saw an HDTV (an analog system from Japan at a university research lab), I was blown away. It was obvious that everybody would want one if they could afford it. I've seen a handful of 3D movies, and though they were interesting, they weren't really something I wanted to see all the time.

Like Roger Ebert mentioned in his article, I think 3D is just a reason for theatre owners to upgrade their projection systems and charge more for tickets. Of course, if a studio only releases a movie in 3D, then you have to see it in 3D. But if there is a choice between 2D and 3D, I think most people will forgo paying the extra $3 and see it in 2D. It's probably a better experience anyway because you're not distracted by the 3D effects.

At home, I think most audiences don't really care if their TV is 3D or not, so they will not pay extra for it. I mean is it really any better if you see a football game or Mythbusters in 3D? I think the glasses will be more of a pain than any visual gain from the 3D.

Now hardcore gamers probably welcome the 3D TV's, but that's hardly the mainstream.
 
Yes on all points, but maybe one. Domestic and worldwide box office in 2009 was one of the best ever. 3D (and their associated premium ticket prices) helped make the year the best since 2002. December alone was pegged at over $1.065B - and eight months of 2009 took top receipts of all time.

So, it's easy to see why Hollywood feature business is optimistic about people continuing to go to theaters. I was pretty emphatic that people should see Avatar in nothing less than IMAX 3D. That said, I didn't see another 3D movie this year, and with three elementary school kids in the house, that's quite a feat.

Avatar wasn't a 3D movie by classic standards - it mostly ignored the spears-and-monsters-thrust-at-the-audience formula of the '50s in favor of a more subtle and immersive experience. I'd like to see more of it - the next Star Trek or POTC could be fantastic this way.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118013147.html?categoryid=3762&cs=1&query=2009+box+office

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/movies/awardsseason/10tech.html?ref=movies
 
I wrote Panasonic to get some technical details, like codec, focal lenth etc. and got a very fast reply with everything I asked for answered. I didn't ask that much though; but maybe that's a hint for the others :-)
There's a note in the e-mail, that it's confidential so better to enquire personally, I suppose.
 
Sumfun said:
But if there is a choice between 2D and 3D, I think most people will forgo paying the extra $3 and see it in 2D.
Click to expand...
I paid extra to see "Up" in 3D. While I think it's one of the best films of the year, I wouldn't pay a nickel extra to see it in 3D again. I watched it recently in 2D and it was every bit as good.

On the other hand, I insisted on experiencing Avatar in 3D because -- hey, if any film should be seen in 3D, I figured it'd be Avatar. And it was pretty good. My second screening was also in 3D, but that's because I took my daughters and wanted them to see it that way too. If I went a 3rd time, I'd probably go to the 2D and save the $3.

At home, I think most audiences don't really care if their TV is 3D or not, so they will not pay extra for it.
Click to expand...
That's been my argument with HD as well -- I don't think consumers were spending extra for HDTV at all, they were buying "flatscreen", and their TV just so happened to also be HD. I mean, heck, case in point -- I have a 3DTV. Did I intend to get one? No, I didn't even know it had 3D until I got it home and read the manual! I just wanted the biggest, flattest HD screen I could get (and yes, I am one who is a rabid HD nut). But just because I can't stand watching anything in standard-def anymore, doesn't mean that others care. I think they're coming around, but the transition to consumer awareness of HD has been way, way, way slower than anyone ever predicted.

Same for 3D, I bet. Even though ESPN and a couple others are launching 3D networks, I just can't see people at home putting on glasses to watch TV.

Give me a 3D screen without glasses, and yeah, why not -- it's awesome. But as long as it needs glasses, I think 3D at home is probably DOA for the television/movie watcher.
Now hardcore gamers probably welcome the 3D TV's, but that's hardly the mainstream.
Click to expand...
For gaming, yeah, maybe. But then again, gaming is HUGE business. I remember back when I was in the videogame business, we always wanted a license, to make a videogame based off a movie, because that's where all the money was -- attach yourself to a movie and you'd sell a lot of games.

Now, it's the other way around! Sometimes it seems like it's hard to find a movie that isn't based off of a videogame! So don't sell gaming short, they're an incredibly big swath of the market, and it's possible that gaming could drive an adoption of 3D, if the games warranted it.
 
My prediction is the first major users of 3D technology will the those who produce adult video. Panasonic is going to sell a bunch of these in the San Fernando Valley, just as Canon sold a bizillion XL1's to the adult video industry ten years ago. While someone may think twice about buying a 60" plasma to watch Monday Night Football, buying one to watch 3D porn is a no-brainer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top