Recently in 3D in Digital Category

I will not have access to the Internet between November 4th and the 18th, because I will be traveling on a sail boat from Grenada to Antigua. Please excuse the blog interruption.

I leave you for the time being with my undigested thoughts on the broad and relevant topic “the evolving nature and aesthetics of creative content”.

First, it covers the evolving structures of storytelling via new media. Examples of new media structures are foureyedmonsters.com and lonelygirl15.com; and interactive television content that is created on the web to supplement traditional shows. Reality TV is obviously interactive but LOST is the best original dramatic example of this interactivity; and then of course, their is the growth of user generated content from channels like YouTube and CNN): What do these new storytelling structures look like? How are these structures similar and different to their predecessors?

Television, can have a relationship with the internet that film cannot. I imagine that the nature of going to the movies will still demand High Imaging that allows for suspension of disbelief...but there is a degrading of image quality and techniques that lower-end digital technologies have supplanted into the aesthetic psyche of many younger viewers – just look at the ads created and aimed at the under 30 demographic. Old tricks. Why is that? Perhaps because they are expert consumers of electronic stories and know it’s manufactured.... They are deconstructing the image.

Another thought, I think of Mark Chiolis’ (Grass Valley) remark to me in my interview with him:

"Today there are a number of thought provoking questions that are being asked. What happens when there is a true RGB 4k (there isn't one today) sensor that rivals, if not exceeds, that of today's film stock? One of the arguments for film is that people like the "look" which includes the grain and movement through the gate. What happens when the "game-boy" generation takes over? Having grown up with "video" is this the "look" they want to see? Will they have a different set of standards to compare to?"

Film (theatrical features) is (are) different. I think they will demand even more heighten realism and I suspect that Digital 3D will become increasingly popular in that format in the years to come (an outgrowth of the gamers demand for a heightened experience).

What are the fundamental relationships that the younger generation seem to be exploring via this new media content and traditional content? Some may say the subject matter is generally solipsistic, passive - an outgrowth perhaps of the individuals solitary communion with the anonymous web or with media itself...but look at the bleeding edge technology and science of virtual reality. Look at the studies of the psycho-physical effects of these media tools on users in medical and defense research. Passive is not the right word to describe this relationship. Interactive is better. But with what (media) and whom (other players)?

I say one cannot understand this generation unless they have a MySpace page and love it. Why? There is a freedom of movement in the field of archetype and symbol that enables both artist and audience to observe without disclosure, absorb without acquisition, and create without the demand for conclusion. The repetition of archetypical representation uncovers both artist's and audience's collective mythologies, thereby revealing: The anonymous is personal.

Renowned urban planer Richard Florida notes that the fundamental social and economic changes that underpin the Creative Economy, demonstrate that in “virtually every aspect of life, weak ties have replaced the stronger bonds that once gave structure to society. Rather than live in one town for decades, we now move about. Instead of communities defined by close associations and deep commitments to family, friends, and organizations, we seek places where we can make friends and acquaintances easily and live quasi-anonymous lives. The decline in the strength of our ties to people and institutions is a product of the increasing number of ties we have.”

How have television and new media influenced the sensibility and subject matter of creative content. I see the primary relationship that the younger generation is exploring, is with the media itself (I am not talking about the news media, I am talking about media itself). You may critiqued the passivity of video games...but, perhaps that passivity masks an exploration with identity that is not understood by non-participants and therefore disregarded as irrelevant. I say this exploration is powerful and emergent in movies like Adaptation and I Heart Huckabees. This relationship between identity and media is increasingly portrayed as mystical, interactive, and “high touch”. Their is a propensity for role playing, a desire for authenticity coupled with a disdain of truthiness and even traditional ideology. For dramatic content and docu-reality, they create satire and even sarcasm (the mass may also create cynicism, but I would never characterize this generation as cynical. They know the line of complicity runs through each of them).

In some respects, “reality shows” seem like an outgrowth of this propensity for role-playing, a study of the dramas of personality. In deconstructing the “sit com” and “documentary” and even the “commercial brand”, there appears to be an investigation of topics like truth and being.

Regarding lonelygirl15.com. As one writer I spoke with remarked, “Entertainment is always flirting with reality. It seems that things that don't aim to be thought of as real do a much better job. Verisimilitude, it's what it's all about."

Is there a common thread in the subject and structures explored by newer creative content, a post-post modern sensibility? See the NYT’s article, “Brand Underground”:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/magazine/30brand.html?ex=1311912000&en=82edb890b1d6c977&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

There are several larger forces manifesting in the recent development of MTV's Virtual Laguna Beach for example. One of them is the evolution of brand: how the concept has extended itself into the realm of branded communities in the digital age. Gamers (the generation under age 35 and including generations X and Y) have grown up in a world saturated by brand so that the phenomenon is now a vehicle for personal expression and identity beyond the ostensible confines of a corporate mandate (well, except their own). Commentators like Rob Walker (The Brand Underground, NYT) have elucidated the social phenomena well, however, they tend to look at the expression as another failed modernist attempt to beat the system. Hand me the cyanide, the revolution is over and we lost!

Boomers are wired to view creativity as a choice between “selling out” or “sticking it to the man” and the quest for the great society as a dogmatic battle between the mediocrity of relativism and the virtue of absolutes. To use former bohemian terminology, today’s generation does not have that hang up. “They have relatively little generational consciousness,” writes David Brooks, “because this generation is for the most part not fighting to emancipate itself from the past.” The suggestion is provocative considering that while “the baby boom included the largest U.S. birth cohort to date, the game generation will ultimately outdo the baby boom in size, in scope, and presumably in influence,” notes John C. Beck and Mitchell Wade in their study of the game generation’s influence on organizational values in business. “The total size of the game generation is already greater than the baby boom ever was,” and the whole generation of gamers, “including X and Y and letters to be named later-simply approach the world differently than their predecessors.”

I am a broken record, but like dissident antipoliticians from the former Czechoslovakia, who used satire and absurdity to highlight the fact that in a postmodern consumer society the “line of complicity runs through each of us," this new American generation distrusts political grandstanding and even traditional forms of organized politics. Hence, the popularity of so-called no brow satires like South Park, The Colbert Report, and The Daily Show.

The playwright Heiner Mueller once remarked that the potency of theater in his native East Germany was based on the absence of other ways of getting messages across to people. "As a result," Mueller says, "Theater here has taken over the function of other media in the West," before now. While the never ending surface chatter of talking points and double speak on both the left and the right continue to erode the value of words, they also inflate the space between the lines.

None of this mentions how the game generation take globalization for granted and the growing crossover of cultural content from other traditions, “bollywood”, Japanese Anime et cetera.

"Look I think we have to pay attention to the extreme drop off in box office. It’s real," says Megan Wolpert, executive VP of Spyglass Television when I interviewed her in January this year: "People can say it's because of the content.  People can say it's because of the options.  People can say it’s because of piracy.  Regardless, it’s real."

Digital cinema according to most industry spokesmen just might save the theatrical box office.  3D is especially promising for the younger demographic who have been raised with the hyperrealism of entertainment software. “I believe we are back," National Association of Theatre Owners president and CEO John Fithian said as he proclaimed the long-awaited arrival of the digital-cinema age at ShoWest this year: "We stand now at the dawn of the biggest technological revolution since the advent of sound. Digital cinema starts right now, in the year 2006, and it couldn't come at a more important time."

Bob Gibbons, Director of Marketing and Communications at Kodak Digital Cinema remarked when I interviewed him in April. "The other thing is that you have got to use digital in a way that lets you enhance the entertainment experience, or changes the entertainment experience, or ad an incremental entertainment experience, or do something that you can't do with film; because some of us are convinced that if you simply put a sign on your door that says, 'I am going to show you this movie digitally, and by the way I want you to pay more for it.'  People in essence won't pay more for it.  If you are just reinventing the wheel and calling it fire, that is a little foolish." Gibbons sums it up: "So the point is that you have got to be able to do more with a digital system than you can do with an analogue system, and in fact you can.  You can do a lot more.  One of the ways you can do that is by having a network, so you can now not only get content, you can in fact manage you business." 

Gibbons continues, “It's being done though over in Europe on a per capita, per person basis.  When you walk into the door the exhibitor makes some money from you, and the money they make from you is partially from ticket price, it's partly from what you spend on concessions, it's a little bit if you play games, and stuff like that.  If you are an exhibitor and you have a slide show, and a lot of them still do, they are probably making seven cents from you when you walk through the door.  Over in Europe, when you walk through the door they are making up to ninety-four cents from you. Why?  Because the have targeted stuff, they have sold it differently, they are showing you stuff you absolutely can't see on television; it's just different and they can sell it for a lot more money.  It's the same thing."

The question is: would advertising ruin the movie experience?  According to John Horn in the Hollywood Reporter: “Los Angeles moviegoer Leonard Kolod recently spent $9.50 for a Beverly Center showing of new Line’s “A History of Violence,” only to be bombarded by nearly a dozen advertisements and previews preceding the film.  Kolod complained to Loews Cineplex, but rather than placate its customers, “Loews admonished Kolod in an email that ads 'have been part of the cinema experience for many years,' and are necessary to offset costs as 'screen actors are now receiving upwards [of] twenty million dollar salaries per movie and the films themselves are costing over one hundred million dollars to produce.'  To which the Leonard Kolod's of the world will say, 'next time, I’ll wait for the DVD'”  (Horn, The Los Angeles Times, “Hollywood should rewrite own script” December 26, 2005).

Then again maybe they won't. Maybe they will wait for the Blu-ray, but in actuality I think developments like the one elucidated below will offer theater owners more flexibility to deal with the challenges.

Kodak developing digital theater software | CNET News.com

Excerpts:

Kodak Digital Cinema and National CineMedia, a partnership of the three top U.S. movie theater chains, on Wednesday said they are developing theater management software to automate digital cinema systems now being installed at movie theaters worldwide.

News From broadcastbuyer.tv - GDC Technology Delivers Monster House In Digital 3D In Asia

Excerpts and Highlights from Dan Tennant's coverage of ACM's SIGGRAPH 2006 conference in Boston:

Realism is, hands down, the holy grail for game developers, and their journey towards photo-realistic gameplay is getting a very nice boost courtesy of ATI. ATI is showcasing a new technology called Parallax Occlusion Mapping at its booth on the show floor. For those of you somewhat familiar with graphical terms, think of POM as a variant of bump mapping or normal mapping, but with actual depth -- not the "simulated" depth other technologies create with fancy lighting effects. To show off the technology to me yesterday, ATI loaded a 3D representation of a cobblestone street in which each stone had a significant height raised well above its setting in the ground. The stones were not, however, shaped individually by a 3D artist; rather, the whole walkway was modeled as a perfectly flat, two-polygon surface (one polygon is a triangle, so just two are needed to make a rectangle). The POM technology gave the walkway actual depth, making it seem as though thousands of polygons were used to create a vision actually modeled with only a couple. To really show it off, an employee at the booth panned the camera down and swung it between two cobblestones -- something utterly impossible with normal mapping's "simulated" depth, which is revealed as truly flat at such ranges and angles. POM looks to be singularly awesome, and it's already hitting the streets on the XBOX 360. Gamers, cue your drooling.

Tomorrow's Treasures, Day 2 - SIGGRAPH 2006 - Computerworld Blogs

I watched as users opened multiple instances of the same map, resized and moved the windows to partially overlap each other, set each instance to display the single map differently (one topographically, another politically, etc.), and then effortlessly scroll, rotate, and zoom the map, watching as it dynamically shifted to their easy touch.

To put it short and sweet, this is exactly the kind of technology that would be positively awesome to see in a future kitchen. Forget posting pictures on the refrigerator -- just bring them up on the wall, scale them, crop them, cut them, rotate them, and organize them at your leisure. Stop buying post-its for use in to-do lists; just use the integrated wall-keyboard to tap out animated notes for your loved ones. Need to check a map before heading out? I couldn't imagine an easier-to-master interface.

Tomorrow's Treasures, Day 3 - SIGGRAPH 2006 - Computerworld Blogs

Though graphics and animation are obviously the overriding themes of SIGGRAPH 2006, there are several sub-themes that unite the various showcased technologies into mini-groups. For example, there are numerous innovative touch interfaces throughout the conference, both in the Emerging Technologies hall and on the main floor (the Multi-Touch Wall I mentioned yesterday being one of the stronger contenders in the area). One sub-theme of the conference is, unsurprisingly, game-related technology; considering the fact that computer and video games so often drive the development of video tech, many companies on the show floor are using games to show off their individual products, while others are simply showing off their games.

One of the booths I stopped by yesterday was run by Linden Lab, the creators of the massively multiplayer online community known as Second Life. Jeffrey Ventrella, one of the technical developers for the game, invited me to take a gander at a player-driven animation technology he was working on, and I must admit that I was impressed, despite the fact that I don't play the game. Apparently, players will soon be able to pose their online avatars by moving and manipulating body parts through a very intuitive, point-and-click interface. Not long afterwards, they'll be able to create personalized animations using the technology, saving them for hotkey-use in future sessions.

LucasArts, the gaming arm of George Lucas's development kingdom, is also sharing some new technology at the show. The company showed off a technology yesterday called euphoria (all lowercase, because apparently that makes it look modern) by Natural Motion Ltd. euphoria is being used in LucasArts' upcoming Indiana Jones title, driving much of the animation of the game using a set of predefined rules rather than scripted keyframes. When something smacks our good friend Indy in the back of the head, for instance, euphoria determines how he'll be jarred forward, will attempt to recover his balance, and then either stay up or fall over, creating all the animations on the fly. Thus, almost every time anything animates in the game, the movements are subtly different. It's a step in the right direction for realism.

Realism is, hands down, the holy grail for game developers, and their journey towards photo-realistic gameplay is getting a very nice boost courtesy of ATI. ATI is showcasing a new technology called Parallax Occlusion Mapping at its booth on the show floor. For those of you somewhat familiar with graphical terms, think of POM as a variant of bump mapping or normal mapping, but with actual depth -- not the "simulated" depth other technologies create with fancy lighting effects. To show off the technology to me yesterday, ATI loaded a 3D representation of a cobblestone street in which each stone had a significant height raised well above its setting in the ground. The stones were not, however, shaped individually by a 3D artist; rather, the whole walkway was modeled as a perfectly flat, two-polygon surface (one polygon is a triangle, so just two are needed to make a rectangle). The POM technology gave the walkway actual depth, making it seem as though thousands of polygons were used to create a vision actually modeled with only a couple. To really show it off, an employee at the booth panned the camera down and swung it between two cobblestones -- something utterly impossible with normal mapping's "simulated" depth, which is revealed as truly flat at such ranges and angles. POM looks to be singularly awesome, and it's already hitting the streets on the XBOX 360. Gamers, cue your drooling.

Tomorrow's Treasures, Day 4 - SIGGRAPH 2006 - Computerworld Blogs

One of the more frequently-used technologies in the realm of VR here at SIGGRAPH is a subsonic noise-based tracking system developed by a company called InterSense. Though several booths were showing off giant VR screens for various marketing purposes, they all used InterSense tracking systems to allow users to interact with their virtual wares. The tech works by implementing a set of three tracking bars on the top and sides of a given VR screen (itself little more than a rear-projection screen about 10 feet diagonally). Each bar both emits and receives sonic waves to and from a pair of wireless devices: a glasses-mounted sensor to track eye position (and thus modify a projected VR image on the fly to align it perfectly with the user's eyes) and a handheld sensor attached to an interacting pointer device. In order for the pointer to emit a virtual beam on the screen, giving it a presence in the virtual world, InterSense's sensors must track its location and orientation so that its virtual reflection can be displayed to match.

Thus, when a user pops on a pair of stereo glasses and grabs the pointer, a virtual beam of light is "emitted" from its tip, perfectly aligned no matter where the user is standing or the device is held. Given a virtual representation of a human heart, for instance, a user could hold the pointer horizontally, casting its beam in front of the heart, and then literally step forward, swing the beam around, and cast it through or behind the heart. The effect is startlingly convincing, as though you're moving a handheld pointer around and behind an actual three-dimensional object, pointing at (or modifying at will) different parts of it.

Different VR projectors are provided by different companies and paired with different kinds of eyewear, even though InterSense's technology is used for tracking purposes almost universally. There are two different kinds of stereo projection techniques: passive and active. Passive stereo is what you're probably used to: two projectors simultaneously emit images to the screen, but each projector emits polarized light at different angles. A user wears a pair of polarized glasses to view the image, so that each eye is fed a view from a different projector. Assuming that the distance and angle of the two projected images are calibrated correctly to each other and the viewer (helped along under optimal conditions by one of InterSense's glasses-mounted trackers), you end up with a very decent 3D image. IMAX uses such technology to full effect every day; here at SIGGRAPH, Purdue University is using passive projectors to drive a VR flythrough of its entire campus.

Active stereo, however, takes things a step further than their counterparts. A single projector emits a flip-flopping image to the VR screen, toggling back and forth between the view designed for one eye and the view designed for the other. The user wears special glasses that have tiny shutters in the lenses, opening and closing in time with the projector (which, as you can imagine, is far too fast for the eye to notice). The left shutter opens to view the left image exactly when the projector displays it, and then the process shifts to the right eye. Back and forth, dozens of times a second, and you end up with a 3D image that doesn't suffer from the slight hazing that passive stereo is so often plagued with. InterSense itself is using active stereo at its booth here at SIGGRAPH, as is Barco -- though the latter company has taken things a step further than anyone else by providing six-sided VR cubes for highly immersive experiences.

Tomorrow's Treasures, Day 5 - SIGGRAPH 2006 - Computerworld Blogs

As the final day of ACM's SIGGRAPH 2006 graphics and animation conference rolls around, I wanted to sit down and examine three different technologies showcased at the Boston convention that, given just a bit more development time, could theoretically be used together as the veritable Voltron of virtual reality experiences.

In order to create that experience, we would need technology that could fool the senses into suspending disbelief. Dismissing the olfactory and gustatory systems (smell and taste, respectively), we'd still need to replicate sound (which is easy), sight (which is pretty darned difficult to do convincingly), and touch (which is nigh impossible to accurately simulate). If we wanted to immerse someone -- let's call him Jimmy -- in an environment, we'd need to give him the ability to hear it, see it, feel it, and finally, traverse it.

Hearing, as I said, is a piece of cake; give Jimmy a pair of headphones and a decent sound card and we're set. Seeing is a little harder, though, which is where the good folks at Sensics Inc. come in. Sensics is demonstrating their piSight head-mounted display at SIGGRAPH, which boasts an incredible 150-degree viewing angle -- just an imperceptible smidgen beneath that of human eyesight. The piSight uses multiple OLED-powered displays focused into the eyes with twelve lenses per eye; combine it with InterSense's tracking technology, which I mentioned yesterday, and you get a pretty convincing, fully-3D visual. The level of detail and quality could certainly use a bit of work, but it's unquestionably the best head-mounted display I've ever heard of, much less used.

Immersion is the company responsible for force-feedback technology, so if you've ever felt the rumble of an XBOX controller in response to a game or felt a joystick buck in your hands, that's them talking to you. They produce a product line based on their CyberGlove, which can monitor hand and finger motion. Combined with an exoskeleton they develop (it's ugly as heck, but Jimmy will have his headset on, so he won't notice), the CyberGlove can deliver actual feedback and pressure to the hand, meaning Jimmy could be stopped by a wall in front of him, could pick up and feel a can of soda, could feel the weight of a brick or a suitcase, or could trace the outline of a sculpture with his finger. Let's slip those on Jimmy: not only can he see everything around him, but now he can interact with it all too.

Finally, we need to give Jimmy the ability to walk around in his environment. I'm talking about actual foot motion -- forget about using buttons on the hands to float through virtual space, the only way to be immersed in a VR experience is to be able to walk through it at your own speed and leisure. For that, we have to turn to Hiroo Iwata at the University of Tsukuba in Japan, and his dully-named Powered Shoes, which he presented at SIGGRAPH's Emerging Technology exhibition. The Powered Shoes are literally a form of roller skates whose wheels are actuated by motors. If we were to slip them on Jimmy and he were to walk, the wheels would counter his movements and roll just enough to keep him in one spot. A lot of work still needs to go into the shoes -- changing direction is a little awkward, and you can't run yet -- but the concept is sound, and it works well enough already; it just needs a bit more time to reach perfection.

Dolby pushes 3D cinema scheme, News at CNET.co.uk

Motion Captured: Disney Poaches Robert Zemeckis - TMZ.com

Excerpts:

Thanks to Cinematech I came across this audio file from a March panel presented by the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco entitled: "The Digital Revolution".

"The Digital Revolution"

The panel included "Richard Chuang [PDI/DreamWorks], Jeff Fino, [Wild Brain], John Knoll, visual effects [ILM], and Stu Maschwitz, [The Orphanage].

CanMag- Box Office- Monster House 3D Box Office Exceeds

"3D in digital is much better than 3D in film. The technology in digital doesn't create the headaches that you have in 35 mm, because your mind doesn't have to adjust for imperfections in the speed of the film between the two projectors," said Joe Berchtold, president of Technicolor Electronic Distribution Services, when I interviewed him in February this year. A heightened entertainment experience, which includes, 3D, may be the only way that theaters can compete in the new age of digital multideliverables, video games, home theaters, and waning theatrical admissions.

The results of Chicken Little and now Monster House confirm this likelihood.

Read Excerpts:

Every Oscar for Best Picture since the first Academy Awards in 1928 has honored a motion picture recorded on film from the Eastman Kodak Company. Since the dawn of the motion picture industry, Kodak has served as a driving force in filmmaking science and technology, providing negative, print, and sound film, digital intermediate post-production work, and digital cinema products and services. In a November 2005 Lehman Brothers Equity Research Report, analysts Sabbagha and Talbott, estimated that Eastman Kodak earnings from entertainment film revenues were $1 billon annually, forty percent from their origination stock and sixty percent from their print stock. I wanted to learn more about how Kodak intended to protect is legacy brand in the midst of the emerging digital motion picture marketplace. Last month, I spoke with Bob Gibbons, Director of Marketing and Communications at Kodak Digital Cinema.

Alexa O'Brien

How has Kodak been preparing for the digital marketplace in regards to motion picture film?

Bob Gibbons

Let me just give you my view of digital cinema, because I have been involved with it since the beginning at Kodak. Around 1980, probably around the time of Disney's TRON, postproduction started going digital. The problem with computers in 1980 was that you needed a lot of power. You needed silicone graphics. Even if you had big computers, the quality of the postproduction, the special effects and so forth, was far less than film quality. So we said, why don't we come out with some sophisticated scanners and recorders to help maintain the quality of the product? So, we came out with a brand called Cineon. We also opened up a laboratory so we could improve those products and that was Cinesite, an effects company. As it turns out, other people started to come out with products. Pretty soon, there was a lot of good quality capability out there. Prices came down and there were more competitors in the marketplace.

Then we said, maybe we don't need to be in the product side of things. Maybe we ought to be in the service side of things, and continue to do effects. So we have two digital service companies: one in Hollywood called, LaserPacific, and one in London called, Cinesite that has done effects for Harry Potter and Narnia.

Since its inception as catalyst for cinema’s transformation from black and white to color, Technicolor’s history now spans ninety years in the motion picture industry. Even as parent, Thomson, leverages the rainbow’s magic brand to advance its digital cinema venture, Technicolor still processes over five billion feet of motion picture film a year. DreamWorks, Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures, Warner Brothers, and Twentieth Century Fox have all signed agreements to use digital projection systems from Technicolor Digital Cinema on five thousand screens in the United States and Canada; and under the terms of a strategic understanding with Century Theatres, Technicolor will begin to install digital projection equipment with a beta-test deployment of ninety to hundred-and-twenty screens, in the first quarter of 2006. With an initial rollout plan for complete digital projection systems on up to five thousand DCI-compliant screens over the next three to four years, Thomson intends to deploy at least fifteen-thousand digitally-equipped screens in the United States and Canada over the next ten years.

As president of Technicolor Electronic Distribution Services, Joe Berchtold is responsible for the strategic development, growth, and operations of the Thomson Services division worldwide, including all aspects of Technicolor’s digital cinema initiatives, on-demand content, and IPTV distribution services. Since joining Thomson in 2003, Berchtold has been co-head of strategy and acquisitions, leading key initiatives that include the acquisition of DirecTV’s set-top box business; the company’s investment in Content Guard with Time Warner and Microsoft, where he now sits on the board of directors; and the forging of an agreement with VeriSign to jointly develop an online content authentication and authorization service bureau to support secure delivery of electronic entertainment content over digital networks.

Alexa O’Brien
Do you think digital cinema will reverse the declining box office trend?

Joe Berchtold

Well, I think that the hope of that is what has driven a lot of the energy behind digital cinema over the past year. I think people have come to realize that the savings from digital cinema on the cost side are some ways out, and the real opportunity here is the top line. It's getting customers back. If you think about a movie theater as a retail business, it’s among the most constrained retail businesses you can imagine from a merchandising standpoint; because as a physical reel of film is tied to a physical room, there’s just no flexibility. Digital inherently creates a lot more flexibility. People are talking about some of the things. You can add more screens. You can move screens. All of which will help on the margin. But, we also think, and I’m not creative enough, but we also think that five years from now, what are some of the most creative people in the world going to have figured out to be able to take advantage of this technology?