The day I walked out on a 3D film set... to defend 3D

[Clyde DeSouza]

Yesterday, I put my money where my mouth is…I walked out of a film set (the first time ever). Admittedly I was consulting at only $1000 per day, so that helped me make up my mind. I’ve previously come down heavy on Stereographers for bending backward and compromising their craft.


So what should a stereographer do when faced with the nouveau 3D crowd? A Director or Cinematographer, or end client that does not like being told they aren’t thinking in 3D? The answer is not as simple as mine was, and I’ll be the first to recognize that every job exists to put food on the table... read the rest and some ideas to possibly avoid such situation, here: Fishy 3D -Should a Stereographer swim against the 3D tide?

I'd like to hear your thoughts.

(P,s I do know the Hierarchy; Everyone works for the Director, period. Here's a comment I replied to on Linkedin: "I hear you, and know the hierarchy. Only I had a teenage drama queen and diva rolled into one, who had some bad ideas on S3D to boot. So thanks, but no thanks."

 

[Mark Pavy]

I guess the issue is, do you stand by and watch people keep making lacklustre 3D movies, which in turn gives 3D a bad rep? Good on you Clyde. I'm still waiting for the first 3D Movie done right, only one close so far was Avatar.

 

[Mark Toia]

At a only (as you put it) a grand a day... tell them what they want to hear and walk away.

Simple math.

3d will be dead soon (IMHO) Sadly my kids refuse to watch 3d movies anymore, will stand at the front door confirming we dont see movies in 3 before we leave the house...
My 3d tv was used for 2 weeks.... now its become a standard tv again.
My thoughts of making a 3d film died the moment I got my first post quote, grip quote, over time quotes... etc etc etc etc...

Hey... its a good thing that your being paid a grand a day by people that reckon they already know what to do.

Easy money ))))
The term, never bite that hands that feed you comes to mind.

PS... I think 3d rigs look cool ! Works of art.

I'm still waiting for the first 3D Movie done right, only one close so far was Avatar.

And that was pretty much done in a box like Toy Story.. which is why it looked so great. I too have never seen a 3d movie as good or even close as AVATAR either except for those PIXAR CG3d kids films.

 

[Brett Harrison]

I've seen around 40 stereo shows and I would say Coraline was the best one and that was with shutter glasses. It's that slow, deliberate way of building a movie (animation) that enables people to think hard about the stereo aesthetic.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Thanks Mark, and Mark.

Well I say "only", because with 3d you never really only perform a task, you end up sharing information and knowledge as well. Knowledge that is at a premium versus say well established cinematic knowledge that has had the benefit of a few decades to mature.

But getting on to what Mark (Toia) said about price etc for 3D production. Couple or more "laws" have since come into play .. Moore's law, economies of scale etc.. So talent and hardware and software renders redundant, previously quoted figures.

You just need the right knowledgable crew to set you up for 3D. Yes Epics and matched lenses and lighter rigs help (and each play of off each other) example: Epic = lighter camera, therefore = lighter compact rig= maneuverability = No one over quoting for gear

Another equation: Epics = better light sensitivity = lesser need for boosting lights for 3D = less budget

Another: Abobe CS6 + HP dreamdisplay Laptop with Cuda = Stereo 5k grading and cutting on location ..screw the others who say it takes a truck load of gear to edit 5k stereo.

Same goes for talent.. more stereographers today, more post prod software and talent who composite in stereo.

You see where I'm going..

When it comes to 3DTV.. just because CES was all about 4K, don't forget: Each of those displays had 3D as a given.

For the record, I'll still watch 3D at home only on a home 3DTV projector sized display. I can't afford the 100 inch 3DTVs yet, and I won't if i keep walking out of sets to defend 3D

On the subject of taking the money and shutting up... that's what triggers the race to the bottom. I'm not fighting apartheid or human right.. mine is a way smaller undertaking: saving eyeballs.

Mark: After Avatar, my next fave was Hugo. Then Tron and looking forward to The Great Gatsby.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Brett true!
and I forgot.. I loved the Hobbit. after I got used to the ramp effect in the early minutes of watching 48fps stereo.

 

[Wil Wong]

Hugo was a pretty good 3D movie but agree, 3D is out. At least until it's without glasses. Then it'll still probably be a fad until hologram technology.

 

[Petri Teittinen]

3D is out? Tell that to Disney and all the other studios who pump money into 3D post-conversions in order to charge premium ticket prices. 3D helps break BO records so studios won't let it die. If something should die, it's post-conversion; they should shoot native 3D instead. I've stopped spending money on post-converted titles altogether; won't see them in theaters (except in 2D) and boycotting their 3D Blu-ray releases.

Clyde, kudos to you for standing behind your principles.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Clyde, kudos to you for standing behind your principles.

Thanks Petri. I do know however, and I'm under no illusion that I've started a revolution or anything. Because there are a ton of people who would jump in to fill the role of "stereographer".

Had this been a matter of pure difference of opinion on actual depth choice/framing etc, it would have made for an engaging debate and exchange of knowledge...not a walk-out.
It's the DIVA attitude and perhaps to a certain extent (here i'm only guessing) that there was a knowledgeable person sitting in Dubai (oh! the horror of it all! how can that be!) that created some kind of insecurity in said Director, which could be the reason for the attitude.

Ironic thing is...the client who of course won't know better, will be happy with the "pop-out" eyeball diverging 3D.
And so we begin the down ward spiral into the 3D wormhole.

On the subject of all blockbusters going in for conversion, I agree with you. That's one of the reasons there haven't been any more critique articles on my knowledgebase. Nothing substantial to write about.
I left GI joe somewhere in the middle, not entirely because of the convesion (it was pretty neat for the most part). The terrible acting, and non-immersiveness of the settings due to no proper thought being applied to re-creating a location in 3D was the reason.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

ha ha ha, "Fishy 3D" - I think I can relate on so many levels

If you haven't done so, go and watch "The Last Reef" 3D and you will most probably jump out of the theatre after about 3 minutes of nausea inducing eye tearing strain piercing through your brain like if someone was wiggling corkscrews in your eyeballs...otherwise, nice film with no story, rhyme or reason...

I think it is better to leave while still on the set...less painful

Greetings from sunny Tasmania and world's capitol of 3D innovation! LOL

 

[Paul Schneider]

Normally I wouldn't comment on something like this, but you asked for thoughts, so I feel justified giving them. Respectfully of course.

While I'm sure you were technically in the right regarding the 3d, in my opinion it's at best a fractional component of the shoot. A very important one at times, but certainly just a single component in a massive world of situations that need to be considered.

As a director I constantly depend on a bevy of skilled folks to give me their opinions. They inform as best they can and then step back and quietly let me make my decision. Many times I listen to these opinions, many times I do not...it's my rope to hang myself with. Usually, I've lived with both the project and the clients for weeks before the crew even sees me at breakfast and I'll ultimately have to deal with the repercussions of my on-set decisions for some time after. As much as I respect each and every voice on the day, there is simply not enough time to debate every issue and often less time for pleasantries. Below the line there are no egos allowed. Period. So is the way of the set.

I won't pretend to know your situation, but while personally fulfilling, walking off a set for any non-emergency, non-abusive, personal or ego reason is unacceptable and extraordinarily unprofessional. Again, I don't know the specifics, but I find it hard to believe the issue was that dire. In fact, in probably 100 shoots I think I've only seen it happen twice. Once was a union grievance, the second was someone who was so obviously unqualified that he left for fear of being held financially liable for his actions. Not insinuating, just saying its very, very rare.

I have to agree with Mark. Do your best to guide them, but once it becomes clear that lunacy is guiding the day and you've exhausted your diplomatic avenues, just tell them what they want to hear and leave with the fee you agreed upon. Moving forward, it is absolutely your prerogative never to work with a particular Director, the DP or the Prodco in the future, but it is not your place to undermine the stability or the client's confidence of a shoot, the by publicly walking away.

Again. My two cents. We make and live with our decisions.

 

[paulherrin]

clyde, i respect your work and vision and decision. i'm not going to make any judgement, it sounds like a very difficult situation involving your creative integrity - i've had similar situations (which is why you probably won't find me on imdb). i guess the other option is to air your grievance plainly (and privately, perhaps), ask not to be credited, and see if they have any further use for you when your position is being undermined, underutilized, or ignored. i totally understand not wanting to contribute to bad art and i admire your courage to stand up for what you believe to be right - i hope you (and we) will eventually be rewarded by your perseverance and commitment to the advancement of art that has depth worth looking into.

 

[paulherrin]

it's post-conversion; they should shoot native 3D instead. I've stopped spending money on post-converted titles altogether; won't see them in theaters (except in 2D) and boycotting their 3D Blu-ray releases.

petri, while there's a bunch of muck to rake through, there's actually some really decent and creative post-conversion out there. i've done some my self (at least, i think it was decent) and while i'll say it's ideal to shoot stereo, that's not always possible and sometimes shots get messed up and sometimes it just makes sense to post-convert stuff. don't let studio marketing incentive/greed blind you petri. there's just as much bad stereo that's shot as there is post-converted.

 

[paulherrin]

toia... as a wise-ass monkey once said...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5pVVsVJkhc

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Firstly Clyde I am sorry to hear this, and no, it matters not that you tucked my place in this shoot to then walk out, as I understand completely what happened, sadly my Panama trip went even worst!!

As 3D specialist (not a working Stereographer) I stand in the middle of the Director the Steroagrapher, the Cinematographer, and the Director of Photography, insuring that the absolute best comes out of the intended finished product, working in complete and total harmony with what the Director wants, and what the Sterographer can give, and when all do work together in unison the results can be stunning.


However, while some of my suggestions, only some, as others are absolute primordial, but some can be overlooked and dealt with differently, what a Stereographer says, most of the times can't be overlooked, as when it comes to the calculations for a particular framing, and use of InterOcular distance, and both Convergence and Divergence if this are not respected to the Stereographer's specifications the results can be disastrous were some of it not even in post can this be fixed, and the end result is footage that will make the audience trow up.

When I do any work, I either have the given respect and control needed in order to achieve the Director's best interest or is a no go, I will not stand for been present on a job were I am in charge of a certain responsibility and that end product is not Stellar, and any one seeing it and knowing I was i charge of that a particular position was not able to insure that delivery, that could never fly with me, so for this I respect 100% your decision Clyde, and situations as this are the main reason why I only do so very limited work for others, were I either have full control of it, or I don't do it, I don't care how much it pays.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Paul(Schneider), your insights are helpful, and I really appreciate the considered way you've presented your thoughts.
let's see if I can answer with some examples. I'll try

While I'm sure you were technically in the right regarding the 3d, in my opinion it's at best a fractional component of the shoot...

This depends on how large a Fraction and the variables of the Equation. Let's say in a Soccer shoot, How much of a fractional component is important that the camera follow and frame the location of the ball in context to the field, versus the other components such as coverage of the audience, the split second live cutting of cameras etc...

My take is in a 3D film, all things being equal (as to a 2D film set).. the 3D is a large component that overshadows many other variables. and not paying attention to it... never mind how much attention, but not paying attention at all... well!

I won't pretend to know your situation, but while personally fulfilling, walking off a set for any non-emergency, non-abusive, personal or ego reason is unacceptable and extraordinarily unprofessional. Again, I don't know the specifics, but I find it hard to believe the issue was that dire.

You nailed it somewhere toward the end of the first sentence.
Let me re-state that no walk-out happened because of a difference of opinion on depth or 3D. It happened because the Director wanted the crew worship and did not want a Stereographer (but hired one nonetheless) that was the puzzling part I don't get.
Let me state it's no exxageration when I say that the Director was going out of his way to ignore your presence. You cant go much more direct than looking past a person. I put it down to insecurity...the DP picked up on it, the DIT did.. so all that was needed was a match to be lit.

It's unprofessional in my book to preach good 3D, sell books on the subject and then be two faced about it, and take someones money as well. That's a job for people with no self respect, sadly.

the second was someone who was so obviously unqualified that he left for fear of being held financially liable for his actions. Not insinuating, just saying its very, very rare.

I hear you! Rest assured, and in all im-modesty, I know a thing or two in 3d that could bail out a project caused by someone else's damage
Years of self funded experimenting, and sharing that knowledge for free (www.realvision.ae/blog) qualifies me on that count.

but it is not your place to undermine the stability or the client's confidence of a shoot, the by publicly walking away.

As I mentioned, I'm not going to cause a revolution, i'm under no mis-conceptions about that. I don't even actively pursue an on-location career as a stereographer. I consult in various capacities on a project. - Realtime GameEngines and stereoscopic compositing on location is a current one.

But getting back on point... Altruism won't save 3D, it will only feed the ego's of delusional people and in the worst case scenario could very really lead to the end of a livelihood for many hard working stereographers out there.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Thanks Paul(Herrin), Ketch.

Just wanted to re-emphasize, it was not a case of creative differences on 3D. It was simply the Director wanting to be worshipped/and or threatened by knowledge. (this is my belief)

If you want a few examples of "accomodation":
A week prior I mentioned the need for even a consumer grade 32 - 42 inch 3DTV on location.
Not to judge 3D (im capable of doing that with anaglyph glasses) but for a more important reason: to check for image integrity. (specks of dust on the mirror, Keystone, etc) Even at the end of the first day and after I left, the only 3D monitor was a 7 inch camera mounted autostereoscopic display, and naturally the sweet-spot for it allows only one person to view- guess who?

So it seems, being told what goes into a 3D shoot and offering suggestions for best 3D didn't fly well with said Epic owner.
Sadly.


So what's the take-away- for Stereographers? after all who wants a thread of endless ranting?

I came up with these:

• Define the Stereographers role prior to signing on with the production.
• Settle for no less than direct communication with the Director and Cinematographer – Stereography after all, can be thought of as Volume Sculpting as much as Photography is light sculpting.
• Establish a stringent workflow per shot – so that the Director and/or DP is not tempted to skim over the all important point of “motivation” for a particular 3D camera move… or worse, skim over the entire 3D depth setting itself.

• Persuade via suggestion – and via having an IPAD or tablet full of good 3D vignettes from blockbuster 3D films that were good and cover a particular move – I recommend Hugo, Tron Legacy, Pina, Pirates of the Carribean (the mermaid sequence) as must have.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Lol Pavel. I stand guilty of that cheesy title! ;-)

I think it is better to leave while still on the set...less painful
Greetings from sunny Tasmania and world's capitol of 3D innovation! LOL

Greets from even sunnier Dubai where 3D comes to die. Grrr.
"winters" over

 

[paulherrin]

• Define the Stereographers role prior to signing on with the production.
• Settle for no less than direct communication with the Director and Cinematographer – Stereography after all, can be thought of as Volume Sculpting as much as Photography is light sculpting.
• Establish a stringent workflow per shot – so that the Director and/or DP is not tempted to skim over the all important point of “motivation” for a particular 3D camera move… or worse, skim over the entire 3D depth setting itself.

• Persuade via suggestion – and via having an IPAD or tablet full of good 3D vignettes from blockbuster 3D films that were good and cover a particular move – I recommend Hugo, Tron Legacy, Pina, Pirates of the Carribean (the mermaid sequence) as must have.

great stuff. i really think it's absolutely necessary to involve stereo & post artists (along with others) as early as possible in the creative process. i totally get the singular vision methodology, but regardless of alternative collaborative modes the storytelling process in cinema is always an orchestrated team effort and unless you're experimenting with form everyone literally (as in, literally literally) needs to be on the same page. this is why i think it's helpful when a director (and producers, please) be well-versed or experienced in the language and jargon of each department with a willingness to learn and an awareness of the necessity of yielding to the expertise of each specialist. that's the mix of creative storytelling vision, interpersonal relationships, and balancing/leveraging art and technology (and economics and politics and and...) that makes for great leadership.

tl/dr: humility = + (the last thing you want to work with is an insecure control freak... bad process, bad art)

 

[Pedro Guimaraes]

Well....I havn't been here in awhile so I just saw this...

I don't think this is the place for me to voice any opinions on your story. I cannot I agree with you posting your rate (regardless of what it is, that is just common work etiquette) and bringing this up in "public" like you have.

Like a previous poster said...none of us have any idea of all the factors involved to have the proper information side one way or the other on your stance. I know all too well the pressures stereographers face on ANY level of production (low budget to high). It is a difficult job and you have to ready to deal with egos and politics.

All I can say is that it would take a very major incident for me to "walk off" a set. I will not judge your actions because once again I do not have enough information to make a judgement in my mind.....and it's not my style. To each his own.

Maybe one day we can chat about this over a beer at a pub which to me is a more appropriate place for a discussion of this nature.

In the end you were there and you did what you thought was right at the time. Sounds like you standing by it. That's commendable.
I just can't say I would of done the same thing.