2011 Product Placement Awards

rss

brandcameo

3D Technology: The End Of Product Placement As We Know It?

Posted by Abe Sauer on January 14, 2010 06:51 PM

Avatar's 3D technology is being credited for revolutionizing the way we watch movies. Its success has been followed by a flurry of announcements about blockbusters-to-be in 3D. While Avatar certainly revolutionized the way we watch movies, might it also revolutionize the way we place products?

For years now the product placement practice has been booming. Once generally considered a loose agreement between brands and prop managers, it is now an established business. A-list director Brett Ratner shamelessly boasts about his ambitions to help brands get scene-stealing placements. Even audiences have come to expect them and the term "product placement" is a household word. However, 3D technology poses incredible threats and opportunities for the advertising practice.

One of the key characteristics of 3D, as used in Avatar, is "limited depth of field." Essentially, this means that the figure onscreen in 3D pops out at the audience while the background appears out of focus. An attempt to focus on the background causes what some call "Avatar h3dache."

For product placements though, the loss of a clear background means the elimination of countless placement opportunities for a wide range of brands. Cars logos, soda names, box graphics and any number of other brand identifiers will appear to be just a swirl of blurry color. Any attempt to distinguish them will be pointless. What good is a product placement that cannot be seen?

Obviously, the flip side is that 3D focus might allow product placements to really jump out at viewers. Think about E.T.'s legendary Reese's Pieces not just lined up flatly on the ground but each popping out at every rapt child in the audience. Mmm, delicious exposure.

Below are a just a few examples approximating the potential impact of 3D on recent product placements:

Brands certainly will balk at paying for placements that will never be seen, but will brands even be willing to supply prop masters with products knowing the small chances of getting a decent placement?

Product placement was already a field of branding with few established norms or ground rules. A move to 3D only promises to shake it up further, with the future as promising as it is foreboding.

For a deeper look at product placement, check out brandchannel's decade-long database and product placement analysis feature, brandcameo.

Comments

david sloly United Kingdom says:

the main objective of a movie should be to tell a compelling story. the director will use depth of field to help the audience focus on a particular actor or prop that is helping to tell that story at any time. product placement is part of the prop, and when the prop is helping the audience understand the story then the director will bring it into clear view and all is good. Would you rather have your prop/product on screen for a shorter time as an integral part of the story telling or drifting in the background?

January 15, 2010 04:03 AM #

Abe S United States says:

Well, obviously, all brands would like to be an integral part of the story. But as those opportunities are few and far between (except maybe for Apple), I think they might take the background shot as a better-than-nothing choice.

January 15, 2010 09:19 AM #

MIke Brooks United States says:

Depth of field, whether related to photography or to 3D will place certain elements in focus and others out of focus. 3D enhances this as images are extended beyond the image plane. If you equalize the foreground and background you lose or compromise the 3D effect usually at it's best with a forced perspective. To integrate background placements at an acceptable focal point would affect how a scene is entered into and progresses to ensure the brand gets its shot at being in focus.

January 15, 2010 10:48 AM #

reactorr online branding Canada says:

It still works with big name brands that we recognize in a nano second and creates top of mind.
Although it wouldn't seem as enticing for less established ones.

January 15, 2010 07:05 PM #

Z United States says:

Am I missing something here?  From what I understand, when a camera focuses on something in the foreground, the background can become blurry.  Why is this any different in 3D?

January 25, 2010 06:27 PM #

metatim United Kingdom says:

Z: You're quite right. 3D simply delivers one camera view to the left eye and another camera view to the right eye. If two parts of the shot can be sufficiently focused with one camera, they can certainly be made so with the other. In this situation, the viewer can choose to focus their eyes on any of those elements and it works just fine.

The problem occurs on more subtle levels. When you focus on the intended part of the shot, the actual angle of your eyes will probably match the actual angle of the two cameras used. If you focus somewhere else, something may feel very slightly wrong - although I'm not sure.

More importantly, we're used to scanning for whatever element we're supposed to be paying attention to on the screen and probably use focus as a subtle clue without even realising it. In 3D, we have to relearn that skill a little, as the point of focus may be at a different depth. I think this is why Cameron included a shot right at the start of Avatar in which you are forced to adjust your focus forward to see a floating water droplet - this gets you used to the idea of searching the shot in a third dimension.

As a result of this added difficulty, directors may end up using a more shallow depth-of-field (so only the 'correct' depth is in focus) to make it easier for the audience to locate the point they are supposed to be focusing on. Or directors may not realise this, and audiences will just have to adapt. We shall see.

January 31, 2010 10:33 AM #

replica bags People's Republic of China says:

2222   Shoescommunications, but we Air Jordans Shoes and Nike Kicks and wholesale nike shoes did not want this issue to be held back over a battle over preferred technologies.So I introduce to you the shoes are,nike air kicks wholesale nike shoes wholesale cheap nike kicks nike kicks .Thank you for your attention.

April 12, 2010 10:54 PM #

Beads United Kingdom says:

The film was totally enjoyable!

April 22, 2010 08:58 AM #

Comments are closed

What Branders are Saying on Twitter

elsewhere on brandchannel

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
brandcameoThe Grey
A tourism commercial for Alaska
Keeping KosherBaby Boomers
The New Disability Market
debateJoin the Debate
Nominate your #1 brand in 2011
BPBP
Back in Business
Michael StoneMichael Stone
Pan Am Lives
Digital Watch: WahlWahl Climbing
Assessing Wahl’s Digital Branding
paper2012 Social Marketing & New Media Predictions
A new white paper by Awareness, Inc.
Jeff Weedman
P&G's Jeff Weedman

Connect + Develop Your Career
Marketing to the New MajorityBranding 123
By Barry Silverstein