Is it true that 3ality stopped developping new RIGs?

[Zhang Ming]

One of my friend who works on 3D equipments trade came back from NAB2013, he told me that 3ality has stopped most of their developping work, fired lots of stuff, and left only a few working on supports works and renting out their equipments. Helix no more. Is it true? Anymore informations? Anyway, in Beijing film festival, there are more than 10 companies came with 3ality's Rigs looking for opportunities, only one korean company with one P+S(my choice) and four 3Ality, no stereotec(which I think is the best but a bit out of my budget).

 

[Tom C. Hall]

3D television never real panned out which was 3ality's biggest drive. Give it a year or so for the industry to settle.

 

[Jason Comparetto]

I really have no idea what the facts may be, but I will say that 3ality took a chance that 3D would become really big. If that doesn't come true, then inevitably some adjustments will need to be made in how their organization works. I give them credit for really devoting themselves to a new direction. And like Tom Hall said, we may need to give it another year before we know who the winners really are.

 

[Andy Jarosz]

They told me the same thing. They said the market is saturated with 3D rigs.

 

[Zhang Ming]

They told me the same thing. They said the market is saturated with 3D rigs.

Honestly，I think 3D rigs will never become big market, TV will never turn 3D because people do not like watching TV with glasses for long time with just common contents, only high-class movies will use 3D. And developing 3D rigs needs patience and long time working, which is quite not suitable for big companies. Another interesting thing is why I rarely seen any company chose germany 3D rigs? There are lots of 3ality in Beijing, only a few P+S or StereoTEC.

 

[Jason Goodman]

I disagree with the statement that 3D will never become a big market, considering it has already done this. Avatar alone made USD$3B worldwide, that's pretty big. Not to mention four of the top ten highest grossing films of all time had releases in 3D (5 of the top 10 for 2012 were also 3D). I'm not sure if "TV will never turn 3D". Never is a long time, and as of right now, all major manufacturers offer 3D TVs and all 4k TVs I'm aware of support 3D. It is just a matter of compelling programming be accessible. I think most TVs have PiP feature, but I and most people I know rarely use it. Should a compelling application arrive, I know it is there and I could always access it if I feel the need. I do agree that many people do not like wearing the glasses, but I also think a large majority are willing to do it if what they are looking at is worth the perceived inconvenience. I wear eyeglasses all the time so I do not mind.

The positive point is, a massive infrastructure for the delivery of 3D content is here. Over 40,000 digital cinemas worldwide, millions of televisions, YouTube has a robust 3D player, none of this existed just four years ago. The audience is there, the access is there, we just need to deliver exciting 3D programming.

As far as why German rigs aren't used as much, I cannot honestly say, nor do I have empirical data to support or refute that statement. They are certainly VERY expensive, that may be why they are not used in the US or China as much. I think they are very widely used in Europe. 3ality was a very well financed company and they made a huge worldwide push in 2009 - 2011 to get their gear out there into the marketplace. Their alliance with Sony had a massive impact on this. It is my impression that they felt 3D would be a huge market ongoing into the future and they wanted their brand to be the scotch tape of production. Given the present climate, that may no longer be realistic.

3D has been with us since the invention of photography and it will not go away. I would agree that there are a large number of 3D rigs in the marketplace, possibly more than required right now. I would also say they are very highly refined at this point and until RED/Arri/Sony/Canon make 4K+ cameras of significantly smaller form factors than EPIC, Alexa M, C500 etc, there is little need for smaller or lighter 3D rigs. My company's BX4.5 rig weighs just 11.8lbs without cameras. It is currently the lightest rig in the marketplace to offer 11 axis motorization and accommodate full sized 4K+ cameras. It would be very hard to make it substantially lighter than that while maintain the rigidity and sturdiness required.

http://youtu.be/8n8gh_wFcsw

 

[Zhang Ming]

I disagree with the statement that 3D will never become a big market, considering it has already done this. Avatar alone made USD$3B worldwide, that's pretty big. Not to mention four of the top ten highest grossing films of all time had releases in 3D (5 of the top 10 for 2012 were also 3D). I'm not sure if "TV will never turn 3D". Never is a long time, and as of right now, all major manufacturers offer 3D TVs and all 4k TVs I'm aware of support 3D. It is just a matter of compelling programming be accessible. I think most TVs have PiP feature, but I and most people I know rarely use it. Should a compelling application arrive, I know it is there and I could always access it if I feel the need. I do agree that many people do not like wearing the glasses, but I also think a large majority are willing to do it if what they are looking at is worth the perceived inconvenience. I wear eyeglasses all the time so I do not mind.

The positive point is, a massive infrastructure for the delivery of 3D content is here. Over 40,000 digital cinemas worldwide, millions of televisions, YouTube has a robust 3D player, none of this existed just four years ago. The audience is there, the access is there, we just need to deliver exciting 3D programming.

As far as why German rigs aren't used as much, I cannot honestly say, nor do I have empirical data to support or refute that statement. They are certainly VERY expensive, that may be why they are not used in the US or China as much. I think they are very widely used in Europe. 3ality was a very well financed company and they made a huge worldwide push in 2009 - 2011 to get their gear out there into the marketplace. Their alliance with Sony had a massive impact on this. It is my impression that they felt 3D would be a huge market ongoing into the future and they wanted their brand to be the scotch tape of production. Given the present climate, that may no longer be realistic.

3D has been with us since the invention of photography and it will not go away. I would agree that there are a large number of 3D rigs in the marketplace, possibly more than required right now. I would also say they are very highly refined at this point and until RED/Arri/Sony/Canon make 4K+ cameras of significantly smaller form factors than EPIC, Alexa M, C500 etc, there is little need for smaller or lighter 3D rigs. My company's BX4.5 rig weighs just 11.8lbs without cameras. It is currently the lightest rig in the marketplace to offer 11 axis motorization and accommodate full sized 4K+ cameras. It would be very hard to make it substantially lighter than that while maintain the rigidity and sturdiness required.

http://youtu.be/8n8gh_wFcsw

My opinion is 3D rigs will never become a big market. Only S3D groups need rigs, and rigs has very long life, while TV companies won't has many 3d groups, and only high-class movies or commercials need S3d, so there won't be many 3D rig demands. I myself invested most money and my personal time on S3D equipments and post works recently, certainly I see a promising future for S3D market on movies, but not on TV or rigs.

About the rigidity, it's kind of interesting, my tests showed it highly depends on operator and experience, my P+S rig has 5 pixel Y-vibration in 5K when turning up and down at the time I bought it(still acceptable according to common S3D film standards which require less than 2-pixel Y-shift in 2K) , but after I insert a small paper into the camera locker as the Agent told me, it reduced to less than 1 pixel in 5K. Who can predict that depend on such small tricks?

 

[Jason Goodman]

I agree with the statement that 3D rigs will not be a big market. Not too many people need them as compared to iPads or something like that and this is likely to remain the case regardless of the future of 3D TV. How many people own RED EPICs or Arri Alexas compared to the number of people who own TVs and watch stuff made with those tools?

That is sad that a $50,000 item requires a paper shim to work properly. Whoever told you that 5 pixels of vertical vibration was acceptable was either trying to sell you a sub par rig or did not have a very discriminating eye for s3D.

 

[Alec Morris]

i watched the bcs title game in 3D at a party. every single person there loved it, including wives and girlfriends that don't give a crap about football. when the content is readily available (ESPN 3D costs extra right now) and people realize their new UHDTV's already support stereoscopic content, there won't be a question of demand anymore. as jason said, 3D is a huge success in film. why would it be any different in television? if HBO shoots the next season of game of thrones in 3D, or amc does the same with the walking dead, we aren't having this conversation anymore. if ice cream were really difficult to find and only came in one or two flavors, not many people would say they like ice cream. similarly, if ice cream is a huge success in ice cream parlors (cinema), it doesn't make any sense to say that it won't succeed in grocery stores (tv). method of delivery doesn't usually have an effect on desire. i seem to remember people saying watching shows on a computer screen would never catch on. yet now most people i know spend more time watching netfilx on their iPad's than they do on their TV's (side note: if the iPad 3D comes out, which seems likely at some point, this conversation is also over)

people don't have a problem wearing glasses... they have a problem wearing the crappy, uncomfortable glasses that you get at the theater or that come with the tv. once the content is there, the range of 3d glasses will rapidly expand. oakley has some. gucci is making some. clip-ons are already available. people are clamoring to get google glass and wear those all day long. the oculus rift is massive but every gamer wants one. why? because the content is exciting, just as box office numbers have proved 3D content is exciting to large groups of people. once comfy, stylish, affordable polarized glasses are widely available, i don't think anyone will have a problem.

and yeah, to bring the thread back on topic, the bs rigs can only evolve as far as the camera's they support. it would take something out of left field, like much smaller lenses, a sensor that can separate somehow from the electronics, or an epic closer to the size of a go pro to warrant new rigs. it's like a fluid head; there's only so many ways you can change the design until it does everything you could ask of it. this is very important to understand, as some could twist this to suggest that it means the demand for 3D is dying, which is simply not the case.

 

[Zhang Ming]

i watched the bcs title game in 3D at a party. every single person there loved it, including wives and girlfriends that don't give a crap about football. when the content is readily available (ESPN 3D costs extra right now) and people realize their new UHDTV's already support stereoscopic content, there won't be a question of demand anymore. as jason said, 3D is a huge success in film. why would it be any different in television? if HBO shoots the next season of game of thrones in 3D, or amc does the same with the walking dead, we aren't having this conversation anymore. if ice cream were really difficult to find and only came in one or two flavors, not many people would say they like ice cream. similarly, if ice cream is a huge success in ice cream parlors (cinema), it doesn't make any sense to say that it won't succeed in grocery stores (tv). method of delivery doesn't usually have an effect on desire. i seem to remember people saying watching shows on a computer screen would never catch on. yet now most people i know spend more time watching netfilx on their iPad's than they do on their TV's (side note: if the iPad 3D comes out, which seems likely at some point, this conversation is also over)

people don't have a problem wearing glasses... they have a problem wearing the crappy, uncomfortable glasses that you get at the theater or that come with the tv. once the content is there, the range of 3d glasses will rapidly expand. oakley has some. gucci is making some. clip-ons are already available. people are clamoring to get google glass and wear those all day long. the oculus rift is massive but every gamer wants one. why? because the content is exciting, just as box office numbers have proved 3D content is exciting to large groups of people. once comfy, stylish, affordable polarized glasses are widely available, i don't think anyone will have a problem.

and yeah, to bring the thread back on topic, the bs rigs can only evolve as far as the camera's they support. it would take something out of left field, like much smaller lenses, a sensor that can separate somehow from the electronics, or an epic closer to the size of a go pro to warrant new rigs. it's like a fluid head; there's only so many ways you can change the design until it does everything you could ask of it. this is very important to understand, as some could twist this to suggest that it means the demand for 3D is dying, which is simply not the case.

I do hope you are right. The problem is, I saw a completely other-direction trend in TV production in China. Films are going slowly forward here, but TV are fast going back. I am not talking about the dream, I am talking about the sad facts... Please, American S3D stuffs, be the leader again, make TV at least half S3D, make some S3D series! So many people here bought 3D TVs without contents. Our 3D channels just repeat some old contents again and again....