After USC vs. OSU, what’s next for live 3D?

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

I was born and raised in Columbus, Ohio, and spent my formative years watching Ohio State’s Archie Griffin run circles around lesser athletes en route to two (count ‘em, 2) Heismans. So although I’m not looking forward to seeing the Buckeyes drubbed again by USC tomorrow, at least ESPN is giving us Angelenos and my friends back in Columbus the chance to watch it in 3D. The broadcast is the first of its kind for the network after a couple of years of internal tests, and one of only a handful of sports events telecast live in 3D. And like all of its predecessors, it will reach a very small number of theaters -- the only local outlet is the Galen Center at USC, with tickets given away by ESPN through its AM radio station here.

I’ve heard plenty of excited talk about 3D from networks, consumer-electronics manufacturers and tech companies, but thus far it’s largely been confined to animated movies and concert films. So I asked two close observers of the 3D market -- David Wertheimer, CEO of the Entertainment Technology Center at USC, and Vince Pace, CEO of PACE, the company providing much of the 3D technology for tomorrow’s broadcast -- why things aren’t moving as rapidly as, well, I’d like them to. There are hundreds of 3D-capable theaters across the country that could easily be set up to receive a live broadcast. Is there too little demand? Are the networks waiting for millions of consumers to buy the next generation of 3D-capable digital TVs (a process that will take years)? What?

Wertheimer said 3D technology is mature enough to deliver a high-quality experience for viewers. What’s in short supply today, though, is the art of shooting in 3D. The knowledge of how to create a 3D movie is ‘compartmentalized in the heads of a small number of people in Hollywood,’ he said, although that number is growing. Even fewer understand what’s involved in producing live 3D broadcasts.

‘We’ve had over 50 years to develop the art and the language of live sports production,’ Wertheimer continued. ‘We take for granted the technical prowess’ involved in now-routine things such as superimposed images and quick cuts from camera to camera. ‘Doing that in 3D is a new artform.’

Knowing that 3D has the potential to be big, various groups have been experimenting over the last few years to try to learn what’s involved. The interesting choice that some are making, Wertheimer said, is to conduct experiments in public.

Pace said there are many layers to the business that have to be developed on the financial side too. Events like tomorrow’s telecast are laying the foundation for 3D sports broadcasting to the home, he said, but there will also be a market for live broadcasts to groups -- including much larger venues than movie theaters. Championship games, contests involving heated college rivalries and Olympic events all might prove to be big draws, especially if displayed in places where beer is served. His comments made me think of how the Lakers often broadcast away playoff games in Staples, and how much more compelling those events would be if the video were in 3D.

But Pace also noted that 3D has a reputation it needs to debunk, a legacy of the nausea-inducing efforts of previous decades. So in his view, it’s a good thing that companies are taking their time with the technology and working out the kinks instead of rushing it to market. ‘Everybody’s expectation or hope would be that it went quicker, but it is a business,’ Pace said. ‘It’s a business that’s developing. I don’t want it to be a flash in the pan.’

-- Jon Healey

Healey writes editorials for The Times’ Opinion Manufacturing Division.