When I think about 3D the British expression "two swallows don’t make a summer" keeps coming to mind. In the last few months we’ve indeed seen two "swallows": "Avatar" and "Alice in Wonderland", both of which generated the vast majority of their significant revenue (they were respectively the 1st and 22nd highest grossing films ever) from the theaters showing the movies in 3D. "Call of the Wild" also in 3D was released six months before "Avatar" but only managed to produce box office revenues of around $30,000 in the US.
It’s not realistic to compare a low budget movie released with no advertising into only 14 theaters with two high budget movies, directed by world renown directors and supported by huge marketing budgets.. However it is realistic to wonder if summer has now arrived and future movies made in 3D will automatically attract audiences or will movie goers continue to be drawn by marketing, directors and plots and if those add up only then will 3D become significant?
At the end of 2009 approximately 15% of theater screens worldwide were digital and 55% of these were 3D. This represents an overall increase of 87% from 2008, but an increase of 255% for 3D; unsurprisingly the growth was largely due to Avatar. In the US there were 7,418 digital screens of which 44% were 3D. Thanks to a recent funding deal 14,000 screens in the three main chains in the US are due to be converted to digital in the next 3-5 years. Although it has not been stated how many of these will be 3D, it’s safe to assume that at least initially a significant proportion will be. However whilst it’s likely that more 3D screens would have meant more 3D revenues for Avatar and Alice, without the right content and marketing the existence of the screens is not likely to drive revenue.
From a satellite perspective the greater number of screens is very interesting as this is likely to change the economics of distribution in favor of satellite versus the physical delivery currently used. For live events such as the Metropolitan Opera satellite has always been the only method.
3D doesn’t end at the movie theater, 2010 marks the beginning of a major push by consumer electronics manufacturers with 3D TVs. Already this year The Masters Tournament and hockey from Madison Square Garden have been broadcast in 3D. In the UK Sky is delivering sports in 3D to more than 1,000 pubs. DIRECTV have announced that in June they will offer four 3D channels including ESPN 3D. Working with players at all parts of the value chain SES World Skies have recently started a series of tests of end to end delivery of 3D for television. Various methods can be employed to compress the signal resulting in anything from no additional bandwidth to an HD signal being required to an additional 50-60% being used.
Apart from limited content at present there are other issues facing 3D in the home, briefly these include:
Glasses – most TV manufacturers are opting for Active Shutter glasses, rather than the polarized ones being used in the vast majority of theaters. Active Shutter glasses are heavier, cost $100-$150 (£200 in the UK) and have a battery that needs replacing every 40 -80 hours. They are also proprietary to each manufacturer, so if you invite your friends round to watch the game unless they just happen to have the same brand of 3D TV as you, you’ll have to provide the glasses. TVs are currently being sold with only one or two pairs of glasses – not even enough for the average family.
The most likely early adopters for 3D TVs are the same people that have recently purchased HD TV – are they going to be willing to replace their TV yet again given the hefty price tag of 3D TVs? This may change in 5-10 years as the new HD TVs are reputed to have a much shorter lifespan than the old CRTs so shortening the replacement cycle.
Even with good 3D a significant minority of the population (~18%) get headaches or feel unwell after watching for any length of time. Is this person to be excluded from watching that movie or will the rest of the family elect to watch in 2D to include them?
TV is watched in many different situations in the home – whilst getting dressed, cooking, working on a computer etc. It’s not practical to keep taking glasses on and off and frequently changing from viewing 3D content to normal viewing may well exacerbate the side effects that make people feel ill. So practically, until we reach auto-stereoscopic 3D (i.e. no glasses required) in the home viewing of 3D content will be limited to those occasions when people choose to sit still in front of the TV. Auto-stereo for the home is currently predicted to be 15-20 years away.
Games on the other hand – which are played with avid concentration in front of a screen may well prove to be the key driver for 3D TV in the home.
So, is it summer yet? Certainly it’s been a warm spring and there are no imminent signs of a cold snap, however for 3D to become mainstream in addition to the commercial issues considered here there remain a number of technical and standards issues to be addressed. 3D is still very much in its infancy.
---------------------
Elisabeth Tweedie has over 20 years experience at the cutting edge of new communication and entertainment technologies. She is the founder and President of Definitive Direction a consultancy that focuses on researching and evaluating the long term potential for new ventures, initiating their development and identifying and developing appropriate alliances. During her 10 years at Hughes Electronics she worked on every acquisition and new business that the company considered during her time there. www.definitivedirection.com She can be reached at: etweedie@definitivedirection.com +1 310-292-0755 or +44 (0)7768 610574.
