Fall Stereographer Interview Series - THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES' SEAN KELLY

Our Fall Stereographer Series continues and has a great list of the world's best stereographers and technicians. Our goal is to enlighten you about the modern stereographer, his/her role in major tentpole productions, new technology and expert advice for the up and coming new generation of 3D creators. Be sure to check out all our interviews right here.

Next on tap for our series is stereographer Sean Kelly (THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES, THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY) who has also worked on some other movies in various capacities that you MAY have heard of, like AVATAR and THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN. How I would dearly love to be a fly on the wall during the production of these movies!! Well, we've got the next best thing in Sean right now...

Here's THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES' storyline:
From Academy Award®-winning filmmaker Peter Jackson comes THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES, the third in a trilogy of films adapting the enduringly popular masterpiece The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien.

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES brings to an epic conclusion the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, Thorin Oakenshield and the Company of Dwarves. Having reclaimed their homeland from the Dragon Smaug, the Company has unwittingly unleashed a deadly force into the world. Enraged, Smaug rains his fiery wrath down upon the defenseless men, women and children of Lake-town.

Obsessed above all else with his reclaimed treasure, Thorin sacrifices friendship and honor to hoard it as Bilbo’s frantic attempts to make him see reason drive the Hobbit towards a desperate and dangerous choice. But there are even greater dangers ahead. Unseen by any but the Wizard Gandalf, the great enemy Sauron has sent forth legions of Orcs in a stealth attack upon the Lonely Mountain. As darkness converges on their escalating conflict, the races of Dwarves, Elves and Men must decide – unite or be destroyed. Bilbo finds himself fighting for his life and the lives of his friends in the epic Battle of the Five Armies, as the future of Middle-earth hangs in the balance.

Thanks for making yourself available Sean - I know you are very busy! Let's start off with what is your favorite 3D movie and why?
Sean Kelly: I enjoyed the visuals and story of THE LIFE OF PI. The idea of being left in the middle of a large expanse has always appealed to me in 3D. To me, this is a movie that deserved 3D due to simplicity of the environment for much of the movie and how it played on the fact that we naturally understand the space of a vast ocean. 3D did its job of enhancing an already fantastic story and absorbing the viewer in the drama without asking for any "work" on the viewers behalf. The beautiful visual effects and lack of gratuitous 3D, for 3D sake, did it for me. GRAVITY was also a movie that worked extremely well. Again, the environment of space being a fantastic setting to showcase 3D, albeit, a conversion.

I loved LIFE OF PI! And GRAVITY was amazing with plenty of rendered 3D too. Explain your thoughts on the native 3D vs. 3D conversion debate as it stands with today's technology?
SK: I practice the native style of film making so I am prejudiced towards that. There is no doubt that conversions can be done at extremely high quality. Cost will of course always be a factor in the decision. If a movie is converted without enough money or time, then the final product will suffer. This is not necessarily true when shooting native. In conversions, if each shot is "signed off" by the director when they are 100% happy, and have the proper resources to ensure there is no compromise, there is no reason flawless 3D cannot be achieved. I suspect that often the reason a movie is converted is based on the fear of shooting speed on Set with 3D rigs. I believe this fear is unfounded with todays equipment and crews.

What do you make of the negative comments that Seamus McGarvey has made regarding 3D?
SK: Making a 3D movie was often filled with unknown technical dangers. These can be easily solved now. They can have a roll on effect when shooting starts. Preparation of the rigs to be used and the understanding of their limitations and expected uses is extremely important. On "the Hobbit" we had a very clear understanding of what was expected when shooting started and were lucky enough to have the backup and technical expertise on hand to ensure we were ready. 3Ality and RED were with us from the start so we could discuss, develop and solve issues in a very quick manner. We found that rather than prepping, we used the systems as though we were in a shooting scenario as early in preproduction as possible. This enabled us to encounter not only the time frames needed to put our systems into different configurations, (lens changes, cranes, hand-held, steadicam etc) but also to find 3Dcentric issues that a 2D crew would not normally anticipate. Our aim was to shoot at 2D speed and we were all very proud of the end result. Some of the developments, like wireless steadicam, helped operators continue their jobs without technology becoming a burden. Of course, the post production pipeline also benefited greatly from this pre production approach. To start a shoot, without solving these mainly time issues, understandably leads to problems. These "problems" are solvable and it is very possible to shoot movies, as we have always done in 2D, with the right people, equipment and preparation. It is a pity he had such an experience, it doesn't necessarily need to be that way.

Yes I've heard many, many great things about the technical expertise from 3ality. How to you position China now on the world cinema stage now that they have ~20,000 3D screens in place and growing?
SK: A major improvement! Its great to see how they have embraced the 3D technology and have decided it is the future. I believe they are shooting more 3D than 2D now? And TV content must also be delivered in 3D in many cases. For me it is a natural progression in visual media. We have had the technology to make this possible for many years now and the leaders, like 3Ality, are firmly setup there now. I hope other countries take note that, with good content, 3D is at least equal if not a better experience. They are also a huge market for the West which can always help the bottom line. Too much negative press for 3D worldwide was based on hearsay and faux 3D. Everything is in place for many countries to do the same as China and, also, the 4K TV can only help.

I agree. What brought you to 3D in the first place? (chance, study, interest, etc)
SK: I was a 1st AC based in Wellington. When James Cameron came to town to shoot Avatar I was asked if I would be interested in being a "convergence operator". I very quickly found I enjoyed the medium and learned many valuable lessons under James Cameron. After this I became involved in various projects with local cinematographer Richard Bluck and Peter Jackson. Peter was very innovative and experimented with 3D well before the Hobbit. During these times we used 3Ality rigs and RED cameras. I could safely say I was in the right place at the right time with the right people.

I'll say! James Cameron and Peter Jackson are two of the top driving forces of the 3D industry. What is your preferred set up on set? (camera, rig, lens, etc)
SK: Steadicam. The TS5 lightweight in full wireless mode. prime lens, a few picture receivers set up, our wireless IA/convergence set up, with many players in the scene. I imagine a nightmare for the operator to remember all the lines but the more IA/convergence moves the better. This, when done right, can be seamless and very rewarding as an end result. I think this may be the focus puller in me.

Are there any new stereoscopic technologies coming out in the field that has your interest?
SK: Laser projection for better brightness and bigger dynamic ranges. Colour is such an important part of depth perception so the whiter whites and blacker blacks with a greater controllable range in between will be a benefit to 3D.

When working with optics do you find there is disparity between how long it takes to make a 2D lens change verses a modern 3D set up?
SK: We will always blow our trumpets at this point. The 1st AC's I have worked with are extremely capable. We mainly shoot prime lenses. For them to unhook lens motors, slide two cameras back, remove and remount the new lens, re-hook motors and slide the two bodies back into position takes one to two minutes. The stereographer part of remotely loading the lens data to the rig and then visually aligning the lens in a zero or overlay position takes another couple of minutes. This sounds fast, and it can be. Obviously the physical position of where this needs to occur can add a little time. Many times it can be done quicker and there are tricks with the 3Ality system that means the remote stage done by the stereographer can be done during setup/rehearsal to shorten the time even more.


What would be your favorite shot for 3D and why?
SK: I have always liked a wide lens on a big technocrane move into a full drama shot. A slow move establishing the environment at the head. I like to ignore any so called edge violations in the move. Lots of atmosphere, heavy rain and a finishing point where the negative space can be used. A set with texture and natural depth cues. With luck, no CG elements that weren't expected will appear later!

Obviously 3D has matured since the late 2000's both in technology and expertise. What credentials / experience would you mention that helps separate you from the field and brings you to the top of the industry?
SK: I have been extremely lucky with the people and technologies that have crossed my path. From my first 3D experience with Avatar to the continuing work with experts like Director Peter Jackson, Cinematographer Richard Bluck, Post Production Stereograhper Meetal Gokul, physical and electronic technical expert Dion Hartley, and the farm of experts at 3Ality, I'm just very lucky.

What education would you recommend to up and coming stereographers / cinematographers in today's world?
SK: There are now many 3D courses available worldwide. I don't really have any knowledge of their quality so I can't comment. I am sure there would be excellent ones out there. Or the "hands on" method of contacting anyone who is in 3D. We are an industry of people passionate about what we do. Many of us (if not all) have been helped to get where we are by kind and sharing people and will naturally help others, when possible, into the industry. The problem can be the timing of when that help can be given so keep trying. Also, read about and watch 3D! Lots of it, you need to train your eyes to see it properly. Cinematographers shooting in 3D can be greatly helped by collaborating with a good stereographer. Stereo is only there to enhance what the Cinematographer and Director are out to achieve. It shouldn't be a compromise.

Do you have a post-production software preference for working with the stereo images to do any fine tuning you need to do?
SK: Meetal Gokul is the expert and he is using Mistika from SGO. Park Road Post Production have worked closely with SGO to develop pipelines and workflows with their DI platform Mistika. It has been a strategic partnership for a number of years, providing the solutions that have been needed.

How important is resolution? Would more pixels be more important for stereo 3D? Higher dynamic range? HFR, like what is used in THE HOBBIT trilogy?
SK: Acquisition at higher resolution is a benefit but it is necessary that they go through the entire process to realize their benefit. More pixels only if they are "good" pixels. They must include the best dynamic range, color space and color range. HFR is a given when you see and feel the smoother visual delivery of the movie.

Are there any specialty filters that you find enhance the stereo images? How about specialty filters that you have found should never be used?
SK: We have always shot without filtration. Polas can cause retinal disparities very easily and should therefore be used carefully.

Split focus diopters are a popular tool in 2D. Do you think a director looking for an effect like that can get that in stereo 3D?
SK: That would be something I would like to try. I haven't up until now and would be interested in the result.

Open mic: What is the biggest challenge that you'd like to openly discuss about today's 3D?
SK: Conversion vs Native. Can we find a way to shoot Native in the first place rather than convert later? I still believe that negative space looks better in native capture. Are the producers convinced that the native process is much more expensive? Is 48fps or 60fps the future? Does this slow down the uptake of native shooting due to the post production price and fit out? And subtitle placement??! These questions are part of what keeps the 3D world an exciting place to be involved in as it develops.

Open mic: What are you happiest about in the 3D field
SK: I enjoy the film making process and being part of the creative process. It is good to still be onset and still have the experience of film making. The physical side of shooting native 3D means I can still be up a mountain or beside a river. Knowing that advancements in technology mean that 3D will only become better and more accessible. I love walking onto a new set that will lend itself to good 3D and know that this is where we can make a difference from the traditions of 2D

If there was one thing you could change about the industry what would it be?
SK: The sometimes negative attitude towards 3D. I understand that it is very differcult to make everyone enjoy 3D, but we can help change this pre-conception by making more good 3D. There are very capable Stereographers, Cinemotographers, and Post Production houses who could help in projects that are damaging the 3D reputation. The people and physical technology is already here to be used and New Zealand is a great place to do it.


Thanks so much for your time for this Sean! Speaking for everyone, I wish the best of success for the finale of THE HOBBIT in THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES at the box office and for the award season. I'm sure I'll be in the theater multiple times to relive the experience over and over again just like I did with the first two! For more from Sean, check out Peter Jackson's production video blog #6 right here.

Stay tuned for our next interview in the our Stereographer Series coming soon!

Fall Stereographer Interview Series - STALINGRAD's Céline Tricart

Our Fall Stereographer Series continues and has a great list of the world's best stereographers and technicians. Our goal is to enlighten you about the modern stereographer, his/her role in major tentpole productions, new technology and expert advice for the up and coming new generation of 3D creators. Be sure to check out all our interviews right here.

Next up is a fast-rising, behind the camera star in the 3D world, Céline Tricart. She's multi-talented as she is also a writer, director and producer - but I want to focus on her 3D passion. She is an independent filmmaker and was stereographer on Gordon Chan's THE FOUR 2 (2013), DERRIERE LES MURS (French supernatural thriller) and the short film OUTSIPLOU. Further testifying to her talents is the trust that large budget productions place on her as well - she was 3D Rig Technician for both Fedor Bondarchuk's STALINGRAD and Michael Bay's TRANSFORMERS: AGE OF EXTINCTION.

She has already directed several shorts, three of which were shot in 3D, and received many awards around the world. Since 2008 when she graduated from the famous ENS Louis Lumiere film school in Paris, she was the stereographer of more than 20 live broadcast, commercials and documentaries, and of the first French 3D feature film BEHIND THE WALLS from directors J. Lacombe and P. Sid (Sombrero Productions- 2010). She has worked with the R and D department of the french company Binocle (3D rigs and softwares) during 4 years as lead stereographer. Further, Céline has published a book about 3D storytelling in early 2013 which is available worldwide. She works now closely with the award-winning company 3ALITY Technica on numerous projects.

Celine is now developing her first feature film with award winning producer, Roger Frappier (“Jesus of Montreal”, “The Decline of the American Empire”, “The Grand Seduction”) and his Canadian production company, MAX FILMS. This film will of course be shot in 3D! Celine is also looking into TV as a fascinating new medium to tell her compelling stories. Her new book “Directing 3D: Concepts and Techniques for Stereoscopic Filmmakers” will be published by Focal Press in 2015 worldwide.

I think Céline represents one of the best of the best for up and coming stereographers in the world. Let's get to know her opinion on the Stereographer Series questions!

Hi Céline, I really want to thank you for taking the time to chat with me today! Could you tell me what's your favorite 3D movie and why?
Céline Tricart: My pleasure Jim. Gravity of course! 3D is the perfect way to tell this particular story, the tension relies on distances, depths, space! It's also technically very well done but to me it's first and foremost a good story and a director who wanted to use stereoscopy to enhance his storytelling.

Explain your thoughts on the native 3D vs. 3D conversion debate as it stands with today's technology?
CT: The real debate is elsewhere. I don't care if it's native 3D or conversion, if the 3D is considered as a filmmaking tool and used properly in accordance to the story, then I'm in. I believe in the future of hybrid movies, part of it being shot natively, part of it converted depending on what's easier / has a better quality / is cheaper. I generally prefer native 3D because it means having 3D monitors on set and that gives the creative crew the opportunity to learn this new medium and use it in a better way.

Right. Real-time feedback to the creatives. What do you make of the negative comments that Seamus McGarvey has made regarding 3D?
CT: Clearly this interview is dated. He talks about lenses changes that takes 45min while today it's between 3 and 4 minutes with a good 3D rig and an efficient 3D crew. It's funny he doesn't even remember the exact name of the rig he used. I guess the DP who used the first HD cameras in the 90's probably had the same point of view... But it would have been unfair to use these reviews to judge the HD cameras of the years 2000. It's also funny he said they had a stereographer on set on Avengers who was a pain in the ass... Avengers is, still today, one of the best 3D-converted movies, to me it means it was definitely worth it! People don't like to change, that's why most DPs hate digital compared to film, and 3D compared to 2D. I don't mind! As far as I'm concerned, I'm always on the lookout for new ways of telling compelling stories. Intellectual curiosity and need for experimentation is the best human quality I think.

Speaking of change, how to you position China now on the world cinema stage now that they have ~20,000 3D screens in place and growing?
CT: Definitely the biggest player out there for 3D box office. Most of the tentpoles now integrate Chinese locations and famous local stars. And the Chinese audience loves 3D! They're not stupid though, and if the studios keep sending them bad 3D conversions we'll get bored and upset. I hope they won't kill the golden goose...

What brought you to 3D in the first place? (chance, study, interest, etc)
CT: Chance! I feel really lucky to know a bit about 3D and have this amazing additional tool as a director! It was 2006, I was in film school in Paris and the french 3D club organized a screening in our projection room. It was basically a bunch of retired guys, building 3D rigs in their garage but they said something that changed my life: they said 3D was ready technically (well, almost!) and now what was desperately needed was writers, directors, artists to transform it into an art form. It blew my mind! I decided to write my end-of study essay about 3D storytelling and I directed a 6-minutes short film in 3D. It was very empowering to feel like a pioneer, to reinvent all the filmmaking rules and create a new language for this technology.

What is your preferred set up on set? (camera, rig, lens, etc)
CT: Technology is changing very fast... If I had to shoot a feature tomorrow I would probably choose Red Epics with 15-40 Optimo and a TS5 3ality Technica rig. With this configuration I know I can shoot as fast as in 2D and do steadycam, handheld...

Are there any new stereoscopic technologies coming out in the field that has your interest?
CT: I'm really interested in VR and shooting a fiction in 360 degrees 3D ! I can almost hear people complaining about it: "What's the point of not having a point of view decided by the director? What if the audience is not looking at the main character? Film was so much better..." VR is a new challenge, we'll have to figure out what storytelling in VR means... I'm very excited about it !

When working with optics do you find there is disparity between how long it takes to make a 2D lens change verses a modern 3D set up?
CT: Of course, you have to change 2 lenses instead of one and to redo the 3D alignment... With a decent crew and a modern 3D rig it shouldn't take more than 3 or 4 minutes though.

If you have worked with 3D conversions as a stereographer adviser on set, how are the general interactions with the cinematographer and director as opposed to a native 3D production?
CT: I've worked as an on-set stereographer for a Chinese movie that was shot in 2D and later converted. I had a blast! The Chinese / Hong Kong crew has eager to learn and "think in 3D" despite the fact they were shooting with a 2D Arri alexa like they usually do. I trained the DP and director as much as I could, and stayed on set for two weeks. The first few days I had to intervene a lot, mostly about the framing (get rid of blurry foregrounds, over the shoulder etc.) and the depth of field. After a week I didn't have to say anything anymore. They got it right away, embraced it and had a lot of fun with it!

What would be your favorite shot for 3D and why?
CT: Long steadycam POV shot I guess... Works really well and 3D makes sense as we see in 3D in real life.

Obviously 3D has matured since the late 2000's both in technology and expertise. What credentials / experience would you mention that helps separate you from the field and brings you to the top of the industry?
CT: I don't think I'm at the top of the industry! I'm still learning, and enjoying it a lot! My ultimate goal is to direct a 3D feature film, hopefully soon... Then I'll be able to use this credential and pretend I'm at the top in the industry !

Many would agree with me that you should be mentioned in the best of the best. Speaking of learning, what education would you recommend to up and coming stereographers / cinematographers in today's world?
CT: I'm not very familiar with US film schools, but I think the best education is to watch as many 3D movies as possible, take notes of what you liked / disliked, and then watch the movie again without the 3D glasses so you can identify the type of 3D settings or shots that works best. And do some tests, experiments! It's very easy to build a cheap 3D camera or to buy some of the prosumer ones out there.

Do you have a post-production software preference for working with the stereo images to do any fine tuning you need to do?
CT: Not really, the software changes and gets better every year.

How important is resolution? Would more pixels be more important for stereo 3D? Higher dynamic range? HFR?
CT: None of these are "necessary" for 3D. It's a matter of storytelling, again. Is the story demanding a higher resolution? HFR? HDR? Maybe no, maybe yes! I like the HFR technology but to be honest I didn't really like it in "The Hobbit". It's a fantasy film, taking place in an imaginary and magic world, I don't think the realistic effect of the HFR is suitable for this type of story.

Are there any specialty filters that you find enhance the stereo images? How about specialty filters that you have found should never be used?
CT: Whatever filter the DP wants to use, we can make it work. Sometimes it's tricky because it means ordering a filter big enough to cover the entire mirror box of a 3D rig. Some specialty filters can create different effects on each lenses and therefore retinal rivalry. That's why I believe in hybrid filmmaking: Is a particular scene requires a specialty filter and the director doesn't want to add it in post, then why not shooting this scene in 2D and convert it in 3D in post ?

Split focus diopters are a popular tool in 2D. Do you think a director looking for an effect like that can get that in stereo 3D?
CT: I've never try to do it in native 3D but it's probably worth trying, especially because we love wide depth of field in 3D! If it's technically too challenging, then again this shot can be converted in post. Anything is possible!

Open mic: What is the biggest challenge that you'd like to openly discuss about today's 3D?
CT: Same thing as 2, 3, 4 years ago: We have to get rid of the ticket upcharge for 3D! Do we pay an upcharge to see a movie in cinemascope? In color? In surround sound? If seeing a movie in 3D cost as much as a 2D movie, it will encourage independent filmmakers and smaller budget to shoot in 3D because they'll know their audience will go and see it.

Open mic: What are you happiest about in the 3D field?
CT: The technology and 3D rigs have never been better, and the best 3D movies I've ever seen has been released in the last 3 years. It's very encouraging to see talented directors getting interested in this new language! Hopefully the new generation will have the same open mind.

If there was one thing you could change about the industry what would it be?
CT: No upcharge for 3D movies!

Thanks so much for your time on this Céline! Congratulations on TRANSFORMERS: AGE OF EXTINCTION being the number one box office movie around the world thus far for 2014! Almost $1.1 billion. And... I loved the 3D. Looking forward to seeing more of your stereo work soon Céline!

Stay tuned for our next interview in the Fall Stereographer Series coming soon!

Fall Stereographer Interview Series - EXODUS: GODS AND KINGS's JAMES GOLDMAN

Our Fall Stereographer Series continues and has a great list of the world's best stereographers and technicians. Our goal is to enlighten you about the modern stereographer, his/her role in major tentpole productions, new technology and expert advice for the up and coming new generation of 3D creators. Be sure to check out all our interviews right here.

Next on tap for our series is stereographer James Goldman (OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL, PROMETHEUS, PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES) who is also responsible for the stereoscopic 3D in Ridley Scott's new epic EXODUS: GODS AND KINGS! This guy has his finger on the pulse of 3D and I am thrilled to have this chance to talk with him. EXODUS looks absolutely breathtaking. If you haven't seen the latest trailer - definitely check it out.

Here's EXODUS' storyline:
From acclaimed director Ridley Scott (Gladiator, Prometheus) comes the epic adventure "Exodus: Gods and Kings," the story of one man's daring courage to take on the might of an empire. Using state of the art visual effects and 3D immersion, Scott brings new life to the story of the defiant leader Moses (Christian Bale) as he rises up against the Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses (Joel Edgerton), setting 400,000 slaves on a monumental journey of escape from Egypt and its terrifying cycle of deadly plagues.

Thanks for taking time to talk with me James - I know you are extremely busy. How about and easy one to start: What is your favorite 3D movie and why?

James Goldman: Of course Jim, my pleasure. My favorite 3d film is Pina, the Wim Wenders film about Pina Bausch. I think that film really made a lot of people see what 3d was capable of. It took amazing spaces and filled them with objects and people to really utilize foreground, mid, and background. It played a lot with movement of foreground to background and vice versa. Not all narrative films can get away with that set up every time, but a dance film can.

Explain your thoughts on the native 3D vs. 3D conversion debate as it stands with today's technology?
JG: I think the debate really boils down to money and time with the studios. If a movie has a hard release date in the near future and 3d is desired, then they shoot native because conversion adds a whole other element to the post work time needed. If time is of no concern, then it seems to fall to conversion. I have heard conflicting reports as to which is cheaper; I’m sure that has a huge part to do with the direction it goes. Very few filmmakers are up to shoot 3d because they have heard all these horror stories about the delays and how long it takes to change lenses and so on. Conversion has come a long away- Guardians of the Galaxy looked amazing in 3d compared to earlier films.

What do you make of the negative comments that Seamus McGarvey has made regarding 3D?
JG: I respect Seamus McGarvey very much as a DP. His body of work speaks for itself. I know that his first experience with 3d was not a good one. He went out to test for Avengers with a camera crew that had never done 3d, a stereographer that was from the post side of things, and a package that was prepped in three days. I know this because I gave his camera crew some advice while I was prepping Prometheus in the next hallway at Panavision. I believe that, if prepped right, supported by a strong crew from camera, dit, and stereo, and given the proper tools, 3d can move almost as quickly and efficiently as a 2d film. I say almost because no matter how well prepared, you are always going to encounter issues. One rig has twice the issues as a 2d camera; that is simple math. We shot Prometheus and Exodus with five rigs in use almost constantly and in less than 90 days. I’ve worked on 2d films of the same scope that went much longer than 90 days.

How to you position China now on the world cinema stage now that they have ~20,000 3D screens in place and growing?

JG: China has a lot of people. Obviously those people want to see 3d, or the movie houses want them to see 3d. Only time will tell if that holds true. 3d made a big splash here a few years back and kind of slowed down. I know a lot of people hope it will take off over there for good. It can’t hurt 3d to have that much presence in the theatres.

What brought you to 3D in the first place? (chance, study, interest, etc)

JG: I ended up in 3d by chance first, and by study, second. I had done Alice in Wonderland as a camera assistant and was very interested in how it all worked. On Pirates of the Caribbean 4, we shot in 3d and I just paid attention to what was happening around me. Dave Drzewiecki was great to me and showed me how everything worked, along with Dave West from Pace, the best rig tech at Pace, hands down. I took over Pirates 4 in London and that was that. I did a lot of testing for Prometheus to get more comfortable with what I was doing and then it just all figured itself out. It helped to have good people around. Steve Evans on Prometheus was my right hand and very helpful in all areas.

What is your preferred set up on set? (camera, rig, lens, etc)

JG: My preferred setup is the 3ality TS-5 with Red Epic or Dragon. We have used a lot of zooms on big rigs: Angenieux zooms from 15-40, 45-120, and everything in between. Super speed prime lenses for the steadicam rig. Fiber system is a must. A SIP (Stereo Image Processor) for each rig. Fairly standard. Every rig has its own cart, then all carts hub into my main A cart so myself, or someone else, can monitor all of them as a final check.

Are there any new stereoscopic technologies coming out in the field that has your interest?

JG: There is always something new, bigger and better. Until I have seen it used and worked in the field I don’t get very caught up in it. I’ve been most happy with the wireless setups that have become available for rig and video transmission in the last few years. Small, fast, and easy to use.

When working with optics do you find there is disparity between how long it takes to make a 2D lens change verses a modern 3D set up?

JG: It definitely takes longer to make a lens change in 3d. On Exodus, we had it down to less than five minutes including setup of the rig. But that was because the stereo department and camera department worked very closely with one another. I was a camera assistant first and always try to think like that when setting up a rig. It is the camera crew that has to deal with it on a minute-by-minute basis. The more friendly the rigs are to everyone, the easier it is for everyone to help one another out when finding problems or changing configurations.

If you have worked with 3D conversions as a stereographer adviser on set, how are the general interactions with the cinematographer and director as opposed to a native 3D production?
JG: Never have.

What would be your favorite shot for 3D and why?

JG: Not sure about that one. Every situation has a different approach and way to shoot it. I like to play with each shot and see what I can get out of it. I know this- my least favorite 3d shot is a tight over.

Obviously 3D has matured since the late 2000's both in technology and expertise. What credentials / experience would you mention that helps separate you from the field and brings you to the top of the industry?
JG: I think what sets me apart of a lot of stereographers is my approach to shooting. I like to be on set. I like to see what is going on when cameras are being set up. It’s easier to work hand in hand with the operators to get what you want then to deal with the director or the dp for little things like moving foreground or cheating things around the edges of frames. I find it easier to go to the director and dp with over all concerns, not every little thing. I have been very fortunate with Ridley and Dariusz because they both trust me to do what looks best and are very accepting of the 3d and willing to work with it, to a certain extent.

What education would you recommend to up and coming stereographers / cinematographers in today's world?

JG: Pay attention to what others are doing. The best schooling you can get is watching films and other media to see what people are doing. A good shot will always be a good shot, 3d or not. Everything else is just practice. I started working in film because I really enjoy watching movies and was interested in how things were done. I still am.

Do you have a post-production software preference for working with the stereo images to do any fine tuning you need to do?
JG: I haven’t spent much time in post; none, actually. My good friend, Gareth Daley, who worked with me on Exodus and followed the film through post, swears by RV software. Gareth swears it is the best for viewing shots in 3d and all stereo analysis. He is one of the smartest guys I know and probably has more 3d experience than any other working in film. He did all The Hobbit films as head rig tech and worked on many other 3d projects.

How important is resolution? Would more pixels be more important for stereo 3D? Higher dynamic range? HFR?
JG: More resolution could always be better in some ways. With more pixels you just begin to create larger files and, until the world is showing 4k in every theatre, it’s only truly beneficial for post and visual effects. It would allow you to crop in and reframe later, as well. I’m kind of old school and like my movies to look like film, crazy idea in this day and age, I know. I still feel like the crispier the image gets the more it looks like sports on TV.

Are there any specialty filters that you find enhance the stereo images? How about specialty filters that you have found should never be used?

JG: The only real filter we use often is the quarter wave retarder. It helps to eliminate glare or polarization in one eye or both depending on the situation. When something is wet or painted with a sheen, it sometimes looks different in the reflected eye. If that can be fixed in camra and save the VFX houses from doing it than we try.

Split focus diopters are a popular tool in 2D. Do you think a director looking for an effect like that can get that in stereo 3D?

JG: I’ve never seen anyone try the diopter thing in 3d, although it sounds interesting. Not sure if the eyes could take it. I’ve always wanted to the old Martin Scorsese trick where you dolly in and zoom out only instead of zoom replace it with IO and Convergence manipulation, make the world breathe and shift planes.

Open mic: What is the biggest challenge that you'd like to openly discuss about today's 3D?

JG: I think the biggest challenge in 3d today is making good 3d movies. Often, when I go and see a 3d movie, and I see them all, it lacks good overall 3d. It seems like the 3d is just an afterthought. Working with people and hearing stories, I know that sometimes it is just that. When people go to see 3d, that’s what they are paying to see. Thank god for Marvel because they have continued to put out big movies that a lot of people see and they have continued to try and keep the 3d as big as possible. Even though its post converted, they still work to get the depth in and I think it makes a big difference with the viewers.

Open mic: What are you happiest about in the 3D field?

JG: I’m happy it’s still around. I’m not happy with things like 4DX. I’ve sat through a couple movies in that thing and it seems so gag orientated so far, much like the movie houses in the 1950’s that didn’t last.

Thanks so much again for your time for this James! I'm sure I speak for everyone in wishing the best for EXODUS at the box office and critical acclaim. I can't wait for it!

Stay tuned for our next interview in the Fall Stereographer Series coming soon!

Fall Stereographer Interview Series: GRAVITY's Chris Parks

Our Fall Stereographer Series this year continues from our Summer edition and has a great list of the world's best stereographers and technicians. Our goal is to enlighten you about the modern stereographer, his/her role in major tentpole productions, new technology and expert advice for the up and coming new generation of 3D creators. Be sure to check out all our interviews right here.

Next on tap for our series is stereographer and stereo supervisor Chris Parks (EDGE OF TOMORROW, JUPITER ASCENDING, JACK THE GIANT SLAYER, PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END) who of course absolutely nailed the stereo in Alfonso Cuaron's GRAVITY and helped push the movie over the top for audiences around the world. I'm very excited to have the chance to learn something from him! GRAVITY is one of my favorite 3D movies of all time.

I know you're extremely busy Chris - thanks for taking time to be with me today. Let's get right into it - What is your favorite 3D movie and why?
Chris Parks: Anytime Jim, thanks for the opportunity. There are elements of several 3D films that I like although I don’t think any of them get it all right. Avatar was amazing for its time and has to take a lot of credit for getting 3D to where it is now. Pina shows how 3D can be used to really add value to a film. T.S.Spivet was very bold with its 3D and should be applauded for that. I am too close to Gravity to be objective but it did show how a film can be shot and edited in a way that enables the viewer to perceive the 3D fully and so allows the 3D to affect the audience in the way that was intended

Explain your thoughts on the native 3D vs. 3D conversion debate as it stands with today's technology?
CP: They are both very useful tools that together allow you to achieve creatively what is impossible with just one or the other. Native 3D will give you the best results, but only if you shoot the film in a way that is designed to achieve what you want to in 3D as well as 2D. If, as a director, you just want to shoot your film as you would if it was just going to be in 2D, then most of the time you would achieve a better end result by converting some or all of it. If you have a lot of VFX, then the results from converting those fully CG shots can be as good as rendering them in stereo.

The other thing that conversion allows you to do, is to distort space. When I am doing a conversion project, I am not trying to recreate what the scene would look like if it had been shot with a native rig. I am trying to create a native aesthetic but I am changing the spacial relationships, the volumes of characters and objects to give a better result than if they had been shot natively. A hybrid solution where the decision to go native or conversion on each shot or sequence is made from a creative standpoint rather than for logistical reasons would allow the stereographer to craft the most rewarding experience for the audience.

What do you make of the negative comments that Seamus McGarvey has made regarding 3D? 
CP: A lot of what Seamus says I can relate to, or I think are absolutely right. When he talks about not wanting the reality of 3D and liking the flatness of 2D I really understand that. Cinematographers and directors aren’t creating flat films when they work in 2D. They are creating films with depth and using all the 2D depth cues at their disposal to give their films depth. Then someone like me comes along and adds in this depth and it is messing with what they are doing anyway, just in a different way. 2D film is an amazing art and is limitless in its ways of expression and I love it for that. Where I differ with Seamus though is that I believe that 3D does have a value in film making, and not just as a gimmick. I do think it is possible to use 3D to help tell stories and as part of the art, rather than just as a layer on top of what would otherwise be a perfectly good 2D film. I think we are only just starting to find ways to use it properly and even in Gravity where I think we pushed that side of it further than has been done before, I think we were only just touching the tip of the iceberg.

Seamus also talks about 3D rigs being too slow and breaking the flow of film making. He mentions 45 minute lens changes and endless alignment problems. All of that can be addressed with good crews and the right equipment. If we have the necessary prep prior to the first day of principal, then my crew can change lenses in 3 minutes and I expect to be able to use 95% of shots without any alignment in post. Nobody would last a day if they were taking 45 minutes to change a lens. There was a time when that was the norm, and I know there are still some rigs where that is the case, but it is not workable on a feature set. Without a doubt though, 3D rigs are bigger than 2D rigs of equivalent quality and steadicam operating becomes a game of survival rather than the art that it is in 2D. I have worked with Peter Robertson a couple of times and however much we try to strip things back, it is impossible for him to do in 3D what he can in 2D.

A lot though depends on the project that you are working on. I think Anna Karenina would have been stunning in 3D and the medium could have been used to support the story, the cinematography and the design. Joe Wright has a way of shooting that allows the 3D to be used in very creative ways. I personally think that it could be used more effectively in a film like Anna Karenina than in a film such as Avengers – but then I love what 3D can add to intimacy and those human moments.

What brought you to 3D in the first place? (chance, study, interest, etc)
CP: I got interested in 3D as a kid when my dad was filming for Life on Earth. He had a binocular (stereo) microscope, and the subjects that I had seen before down ordinary microscopes and which looked confusing and drab in 2D, suddenly looked incredible in 3D. Their design, transparency and subtle details all became visible. Later, I studied design at The Royal College of Art in London and my main research area was into 3D. Off the back of that I was involved in publishing a series of 3D books for which I designed the book itself and did the majority of the photography. That lead to being involved in IMAX 3D and special venue films for 15 years before the current resurgence of 3D allowed me to explore what was possible in narrative film making.

What is your preferred set up on set? (camera, rig, lens, etc)
CP: It depends on the nature of the shoot. My favoured setup for large feature film shoots would be a 3ality TS-5 rig. Red Epics and Arri Alexas are both good cameras for 3D and then whatever lens is dictated by the cinematographer and the look that the director wants for the film. I love the look of anamorphics but they aren’t feasible for native stereo work. Well matched Cookes probably hit the sweet spot for me in terms of a look that is attractive but precise enough to match between the eyes in stereo. Matched Angenieux zooms are great for speed if the shoot lends itself to that way of shooting. For other uses the P&S Freestyle rig is wonderful for its simplicity and I still have a lot of affection for the Hines Rigs – a wonder to behold with two 15/70 IMAX cameras on board!

Are there any new stereoscopic technologies coming out in the field that has your interest?
CP: Good Autostereo TV’s will rejuvenate 3D TV and create a market for film makers to push 3D forwards. So far I haven’t seen any that are good enough though and we risk alienating audiences by releasing TV’s which give a poor 3D experience.

When working with optics do you find there is disparity between how long it takes to make a 2D lens change verses a modern 3D set up?
CP: If you are comparing primes, then yes. A 3D lens change will take approximately 3 minutes on average with a good rig setup and experienced crew. With a bit of thinking ahead though the time taken for lens changes can nearly always be lost in the time taken for lighting changes or camera moves. If you are happy to shoot with zooms however, there is no difference.

If you have worked with 3D conversions as a stereographer adviser on set, how are the general interactions with the cinematographer and director as opposed to a native 3D production?
CP: The big difference is that on set you are talking in very abstract terms when working in 2D. There is no way to show how doing something will affect the 3D. You can suggest that changing the camera position, or lens or lighting etc will give better 3D – but better for whom? Maybe what I as stereographer think will be better actually takes it further away from what the director wants, but with no way to view it the discussion becomes much less precise. I try to counter that with conversations and screenings prior to shooting – looking at a selection of 3D material and gauging what the director lights. From that I can get a feel for what would work to support the film that they are doing. I will then suggest an approach for the 3D and we will refine it as much or as little as they want to. From that point, if we are on set, I can say relate comments to what we have discussed and what I know they want - ‘If you want the feel that we talked about then you need to stay wider’ for example. They can then decide whether in this case they do want that feel, or whether going tighter actually gives them what they are looking for.

What would be your favorite shot for 3D and why?
CP: High speed always works – it gives the audience time to explore the subject.

Obviously 3D has matured since the late 2000's both in technology and expertise. What credentials / experience would you mention that helps separate you from the field and brings you to the top of the industry?
CP: I think that it is really important that anyone working on a production is working to help tell the story, rather than working to a preconceived agenda. It is easy as a stereographer to go into a project with an idea of what will make for good 3D but it is really important to remember that films are collaborative efforts and it doesn’t matter whether a certain decision will help the 3D, if it hinders the telling of the story then it is not good. There are 100 things a day that have to make you change what you were planning, but the important thing is to be flexible and come up with a different (and ideally better) way to achieve good 3D. I think that having respect for all the other disciplines on a production is a very good starting point!

What education would you recommend to up and coming stereographers / cinematographers in today's world?
CP: Stereographers need to have an understanding of how a camera department works. Start out as a runner or trainee. Get experience as a camera assistant. Understand the language of film. Understand the 2D grammar and language of film. Once you have that, you can then use that to strengthen what you do in 3D

Do you have a post-production software preference for working with the stereo images to do any fine tuning you need to do?
CP: They are all just tools. Having a good operator is the most important thing. I have worked via T-vips (a remote teleconferencing system that allows me to be in a cinema in the UK while the operator is in the US and we are both seeing the same things on our screens) with an operator who I have never met. I only know him as Chris. We have done depth grading sessions that have worked seamlessly despite us being 3000 miles apart. It doesn’t matter what software he is on (it happens to be base light), the important thing is the result. Having said that, if I was operating then I would choose the Mistika as I know it can do everything that I need of it.

How important is resolution? Would more pixels be more important for stereo 3D? Higher dynamic range? HFR?
CP: More resolution is good for bigger screens, and particularly IMAX where 2K and even 4K images don’t compare to the resolution we get from 15/70 prints. 3D anyway gives a greater perceived resolution which helps. Higher dynamic range is great for 3D – being able to see further into the shadows or highlights in 3D helps stop them flattening out. Anywhere in the image that we can hold details, however subtle, is valuable. HFR – I think the jury is still out. It definitely helps with the strobing which kills the image in 3D films. It can make action sequences much more watchable. However, having drama sequences looking like TV isn’t going to win it any friends. Maybe the answer is to have a variable framerate that can jump between 24 and 48 as James Cameron is rumoured to be doing on the next Avatar. Maybe it is more about how it is used or lit? Maybe we just need to learn how to use it better!

Thanks so much for your time on this Chris! I appreciate it tremendously.

Stay tuned for our next interview in the Fall Stereographer Series coming soon!