Originally Posted by Drexler
What strikes me is that all the cameras except perhaps the last on the left have much
wider gaps between the lenses than any human has between the eyes. The 3D can't really look realistic that way no?
I'm guessing it must look something like what you can get from binoculars which have lenses set far apart (like the ones below). That is, objects look very 3D, but too much in an unnatural way and you get a somewhat cut-out cardboard effect.
The gap between the cameras are dictated by the distance to the object. For every shot the distance between the cameras/lenses have to be adjusted.
That's why they need those big beamsplitter rigs for anything closer than 8 feet because the cameras are too big to get close enough.
Just to show then how big a underwaterhous with beamsplitter with two RED One becomes compared to IMAX under water housing.
The only solution is for the cameras to get smaller so the beamsplitters can get smaller and easier to work with.
Here are a picture of a test that someone did with a RED one and two anamorphic lenses shooting into a mirror box capturing two sidebyside images on the sensor. They where then separated and unsqueezed, giving two 4 megapixel images.
Imagine that method on a 20 megapixel (6K) sensor (or larger) and you have two 4k images.
But smaller cameras will help a lot for Live 3D features, like the proof of concept RED render. Two of these small "boxes" can easily be mounted to a small beamsplitter for closeups.
The situation now is that nobody, including Avatar, have really shot real 3D digital yet. Because real 3D movies should have deep depth of field. Everything should be in focus except the most distant background.
That's when you get real 3D. To get that to work you also need superior image quality. 2K/2x24fps isn't good enough. 4K/2x48fps is a minimum with projector at the same resolution/framerate and a lot of lumen on the screen.
That is the only future for 3D to survive.
Originally Posted by Franin
Have any other film used this type of technique that you see on those pics? Or is Avatar the first?
All 3D movies shot on either film or digital have been using this kind of rig's for decades.
There are lot of reports of 3D shooting activity, but how much of that end up in features only the lists of future 3D features can tell.
The next "BIG" 3D feature is Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland
in march. All the live action there is shot with one camera and the 3D is done in post.
In addition comes all the 2D to 3D conversions of older movies that will in a big part be done by the Spielberg/Lucas/Dreamworks In-Three Inc.
company that are doing a investment collaboration
with India company Reliance MediaWorks Ltd.
It supposedly only cost $8-10 mill to convert a 2D feature into 3D.
How good the result is remain to be seen.