3D Film and television numbers
The highest grossing 3-D movies Internationally, inflation corrected:
2. The Avengers $1,511.8 m B: $220 m (2012) ( 3.) Converted Live-Action & CGI
3. Pirates OTC 4 $1,051.5 m B: $250 m (2011) (10.) Live-Action & CGI
4. Alice IW $1,033.3 m B: $200 m (2010) (12.) Converted Live-Action & CGI
5. Up $ 786.1 m B: $175 m (2009) (47.) CGI
6. Kung Fu Panda 2 $ 681.9 m B: $150 m (2011) (57.) CGI
7. Tangled $ 592.0 m B: $260 m (2010) (74.) CGI
8. Cars 2 $ 573.5 m B: $200 m (2011) (82.) CGI
9. Puss in Boots $ 568.2 m B: $130 m (2011) (83.) CGI
10. Despicable me $ 547.9 m B: $ 69 m (2010) (89.) CGI
11. Brave $ 528.7 m B: $185 m (2012) (92.) CGI
- 4 live-action titles, 7 animated.
- 5 franchises (2nd,3rd or 4th parts), 6 new titles.
- 2 Sci-fi titles, 9 Fantasy. No other genres represented.
- 2 movies have budgets between $ 70 m - $ 130 m, the rest is $150 m - $ 280m, with $ 200 m being the average budget.
According to personal boxoffice research conducted by Dreamworks' stereoscopic supervisor Phil McNally, MegaMind was the last CGI feature from any studio to show parity between 3-D screen revenue and 2-D screen revenue. Brave was the first CGI feature where 3D screen revenue was half that of 2D screen revenue. For Brave this would still mean a 3-D profit of 139 m USD, considering a 3-D budget overhead of 20% - a guess but a reasonable one considering Pixar's production pipeline.
The real noticeable factors are the continued dominance of fantasy and sci-fi generes for 3-D releases, as per the 100 year historical trend of 3-D feature film releases and the dominance of 2-D to 3-D conversion for live-action 3-D releases. The last factor has, of course, a lot to do with budget and top quality conversion costs versus native 3-D shooting price points (15 m versus 60m on a 200 m budget). And when talking about CGI-content-rich movies, conversion costs are even more of a realistic practical and financial proposition than native 3-D shooting. The CGI-richness is of course driven by the genres of sci-fi and fantasy and this, in turn, has a lot to do with the family audience factor (U, PG and 12) and the higher ROI this yields at the boxoffice. The release of CGI features in 3-D speaks for itself, but the question of child-safety and suitability is not answered by high boxoffice numbers. This is a different subject altogether.
|Childrens programming on 3DTV Broadcasters: next to no choice|
The biggest issue with all 3-D channels is the lock-down of worldwide rights, both 2-D and 3-D. 3DTV broadcaster (pre-) sales would make sense if one was just talking about the 3-D rights. But that’s not the way these broadcasters roll and thus the independent 3-D producer is faced with a situation where either 2-D rights are sold to many international broadcasters and the 3-D rights are thrown in for free, or alternatively the 2-D and 3-D rights are sold or given away to one 3-D broadcaster with a very small audience share. We have to make a fist together as 3-D content producers and not accept this practice. Only when 3-D rights can be sold separately is there a realistic healthy, long term future possible for TV 3-D broadcasting.
3-D Post Conversion for television
|Yikes! That's gonna hurt!|
|3-D Conversion tests for various productions - by 3-D Revolution Productions|
|The issue with 3-D parallax (interaxial) values and children's eye distance (interocular)|
|Cloud Bread introduced parallax values uncomfortable and impossible to watch |
for its target audience of 3-5 year olds
|Shaun the Sheep 3DS test setup|