or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Source Components › When small interaxials just don't cut it!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

When small interaxials just don't cut it! - Page 2

post #31 of 1087
Great! I'm excited to see if you can get results of enhanced 3D.
post #32 of 1087
Thread Starter 
I started experimenting with dual Canon 5D mark IIs at various interaxial distances today in preparation for the fireworks...



post #33 of 1087
Six cameras? How about an odd number- Add your JVC TD1 on the bench near the center as a control to record with the 2" IA too. Now you'll have a real science experiment worthy of entry into your local High School Science Fair.

Seriously, add the JVC too as a curiosity for comparison. If your results are just short of amazing, you will have to make a trek to Epcot and shoot their show on the World Showcase Lake. They have a show every night and the best time of the year to go is the late Winter like late February as attendance is low and the weather is perfect most of the time. Just avoid weeks before and after Holidays.
post #34 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Six cameras? How about an odd number- Add your JVC TD1 on the bench near the center as a control to record with the 2" IA too. Now you'll have a real science experiment worthy of entry into your local High School Science Fair.

Seriously, add the JVC too as a curiosity for comparison. If your results are just short of amazing, you will have to make a trek to Epcot and shoot their show on the World Showcase Lake. They have a show every night and the best time of the year to go is the late Winter like late February as attendance is low and the weather is perfect most of the time. Just avoid weeks before and after Holidays.

I'm not sure what I'm going to be able to setup for the fireworks show yet.
I want to have my two Canon HF21s with the 15X zoom and my two Canon 5D mark II DSLRs for sure and if I can get some assistance then a JVC GS-TD1 as well although I don't expect much from it.

Here is a picture showing what I was doing yesterday evening.
post #35 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Here is a 3D YouTube video from the setup shown above with the extremely large interaxial camera spacing.
3D sailboat races
post #36 of 1087
Wow! that was interesting. At first I thought this looks weird. The boats looked like they were floating above the water surface in zero gravity, then two boats passed right through each other and at that point I knew what the problem was, I swapped your left and right and it switched to a realistic looking stereo. You should add a tag for the swap.
post #37 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Wow! that was interesting. At first I thought this looks weird. The boats looked like they were floating above the water surface in zero gravity, then two boats passed right through each other and at that point I knew what the problem was, I swapped your left and right and it switched to a realistic looking stereo. You should add a tag for the swap.

Whoops!
I fixed it, I think.....
post #38 of 1087
That was a fascinating experiment. The thing that struck me most was how the 3D effect clashed with the telephoto effect. The wide interaxial gives a legitimate 3D separation of the boats, but the telephoto lens compresses them front to back. It's an odd juxtaposition of elements and, in the case of the boats, it makes it seem as though they're about to collide in the frame.

It's funny. I just watched a History Channel 3D film about the solar system yesterday. I learned (or relearned, since I knew this and forgot it ) that there are two satellites in orbit near earth that are trained on the sun. The purpose is to provide a distance great enough to see the sun in 3D. So, last night I saw a 3D picture created by cameras with the widest interaxial distance that exists (at least as far as I know). It all makes me wonder what the best applications are for wide interaxial rigs. It seems to me that some subjects are going to work a lot better than others. What other subjects do you have in mind for your rig, Frank?
post #39 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

That was a fascinating experiment. The thing that struck me most was how the 3D effect clashed with the telephoto effect. The wide interaxial gives a legitimate 3D separation of the boats, but the telephoto lens compresses them front to back. It's an odd juxtaposition of elements and, in the case of the boats, it makes it seem as though they're about to collide in the frame.

But they were about to collide.
Actually, I thought that the video is a pretty decent representation of what they would have looked like from 15 times closer then the camera actually was.
Quote:


It all makes me wonder what the best applications are for wide interaxial rigs. It seems to me that some subjects are going to work a lot better than others. What other subjects do you have in mind for your rig, Frank?

Monday night I'll be using it for fireworks. I think that's a great application. Any application where zoom is used and nothing is in the foreground is a good application for this I believe.
I was shooting some clouds and wishing for a much greater IA the other day.
With my Canon 5D Mark IIs with telephoto lenses it should be perfect for recording eagles in trees.
post #40 of 1087
Thread Starter 
I'm starting to think of my JVC GS-TD1s as not real 3D camcorders but more like 2.375D
I guess that would make the Sony about 2.25D and my old Panasonic with the "3D" adapter 2.0625D
post #41 of 1087
Frank- No, the JVC and Sony are great stereo camcorders for what most people want to shoot. If I needed to shoot stereo for one of my old clients, a PI firm that required me to shoot video with my 2X extended 19x lens ( 38x telephoto) then your system would work. But don't forget that the Hollywood movie makers use bench systems with under / thru setups to squeeze the big cameras closer together because the stuff they are shooting is also closer than 50 ft away.

Joe- did you look at Franks sailboat race before or after he fixed the swap? I saw the colision too but when I swapped the views, it looked as Frank said, 3D like if he was just close up.

Frank- I promise to upload my fireworks 3D failure for you to review later today. You can review it to see what you will do different. MY camcorder was hand held too. You will want to shoot as wide a sky as you can unless your fireworks do not fill the sky. You'll have to judge. I suggest you at least frame the zoom to fill the frame that you shoot. I hope your zoom lenses are calibrated and a match.

I have the 3D Blu-ray of the Hubble. This was an artificially created 3D from the Hubble images but it sure looked good. They were able to get away with it because the space scene doesn't change so the images could be taken by one camera and done at two different times and later matched in post. Anyway, Frank, as you are our resident expert on large IA distances, where would you place two Hubble cameras in space to shoot the Universe in stereo?
post #42 of 1087
I watched Frank's video after the fix, so I saw good stereo separation.

It's all about choosing the right tool for the job. You couldn't use Frank's newest rig to shoot 3D closeups of mosquito eyes. For that you'd need a tiny interaxial.

In the last few days, I've been looking through some of Frank's clips that I downloaded weeks and months ago. I was reminded of what I can't do with the JVC camera, and of the sense of depth I'll never be able to achieve with it. I knew that when I bought it, but watching the clips again brought it home. There's one of a mother fox and baby cub that must have been shot with the Canon rig, because behind them the sense of depth into the woods is remarkable.

In this price range, and for the convenience they provide, the Sony and JVC camcorders are great. One day, I may be motivated to put together a dual camera rig, but what I hope happens is that next year the manufacturers bring out camcorders with a human-eye-friendly interaxial and a zoom range that provides more shooting flexibility, especially at the wide angle setting. I think I'd be a lot happier with that, especially since I don't see myself doing a lot of nature/wildlife-type 3D videography. That should be doable, I would think - although it would be more expensive than the average 3D camcorder.
post #43 of 1087
Quote:


3D closeups of mosquito eyes

No, but I did see a YT video of that kind of closeup using your camcorder with a closeup lens. The focus was perfect and the wing of a fly almost filled the frame. The shooting was mostly the inside of flowers. I should have saved you the link.


Quote:


manufacturers bring out camcorders with a human-eye-friendly interaxial and a zoom range that provides more shooting flexibility,

Panasonic and Sony already have that class camcorder and yes they are more expensive. The Sony runs about $33K IIRC. It's design is for shooting 3D field sports. The optimum IA distance for most shooting to match human average eye visual is only 75mm. The 3D bloggie is only 3/4" But the Bloggie is optimized for arms length 3D video. I agree on the wide angle. I'd love a 21mm equivalent. Now that could get expensive.
I don't plan anymore building a bench system. I really need a faster computer first and then all my mad money is going for travel expenses to do some shooting.

But I have given Frank two highly specialized assignments for his great scene size bench system, The Fireworks display and if that passes the test, he needs to go to Epcot where they fill the sky with fireworks, laser light show, and walls of water with projected images.

The second project is to make a travel video of Bryce Canyon, Utah. He could also do Grand Canyon but that is a bit too big even for his rig. Bryce is about right for his 3 ft. bench according to my math.
post #44 of 1087
Frank-

I'm having trouble with you tube tonight uploading the Fireworks video. It's aborted for the 4th time so I uploaded it to my web server and you can down load it from there. It is a WMV file in SBS. I verified it and it plays fine here. Don't know why YouTube keeps aborting. I'm trying again but if it fails at least you can get it here.

http://www.tv-shopper.com/3DTEST/fireworks.wmv

You will see I tested everything from full wide angle to full telephoto of the projected Earth light. The far side of the lake is about a mile. (guessing)


I'm also trying to decide to go to the Jacksonville fireworks Monday. If I go it will have to be early to get a good spot and then I'll need to sit there for a couple hours twiddling my thumbs. The last time I went and set up, ( its a location near the beginning of my Jacksonville River walk video) I almost got pushed into the river by a bunch of drunks who got into a fight. That Riverwalk will have thousands of people pushing and shoving but it is the best location to see it. Hope you've scouted your location for your project as that contraption will definitely look like a science project from the local University. At least I can blend in with other amateurs.
post #45 of 1087
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

... Panasonic and Sony already have that class camcorder and yes they are more expensive. The Sony runs about $33K IIRC. It's design is for shooting 3D field sports. The optimum IA distance for most shooting to match human average eye visual is only 75mm. The 3D bloggie is only 3/4" But the Bloggie is optimized for arms length 3D video. I agree on the wide angle. I'd love a 21mm equivalent. Now that could get expensive.
I don't plan anymore building a bench system. I really need a faster computer first and then all my mad money is going for travel expenses to do some shooting. ...

I've seen the Panasonic demoed, and it looks ideal, but there's no way I'm spending $22,000 for any camcorder. I'll build my own rig first. I'm hoping for something in the price range of this year's models, but with more advanced features. Sounds reasonable to me. It might look odd, but I still think a camcorder that is wider than it is long would work well. Nothing wrong with shifting the paradigm a little.

I may be on a bit of a hiatus from all this 3D stuff soon. My other project is heating up, so 3D will have to return to the back burner until it's finished. Hopefully, that won't be too long.
post #46 of 1087
What's the other project?

I don't see any technical problem with a slightly larger format camcorder either but I don't think it would have mass market appeal. Would I spend $22 to $33K for an industrial strength 3D camcorder? Yes, but only if the market was there for a ROI. I spent $75K for my first broadcast camcorder. I had to borrow big time but it was paid for in the work I got in a little over 9 months. I made good money with that camcorder for the next 12 years! In fact I eventually owned 4 of that level camcorder but the work load and market was plentiful even for jobs that called for 3 and 4 cameras. Of course as time passed the cameras sold for less and the last one I paid $18K for. I've been selling them now that I'm retired and have two left.
The trouble with 3D is there is no market yet. Not sure there ever will be. I'm talking enough to support a collection of crews working every day shooting 3D. Even HD spec jobs are not that plentiful today but it is growing and the rates are now there to support the equipment costs.

What we do with 3D is hobby and as such, requires a support budget with no expected ROI. Consequently, I will do projects that are on par with consumer level output. I won't expect to do video that requires a bigger support budget. I'm more interested in putting effort into the story and program that meets my goals and love the freedom not to worry about turning a profit on every job, nor, meeting a client deadline.
post #47 of 1087
My other project is a 100th anniversary video. I'm doing it gratis for my church. It's been off and on for well over a year, with various delays. There's no specific deadline, but I want to wrap it up.

For me, 3D is just a hobby. I don't expect any ROI, and I have no desire to take on a lot of projects that will mean deadlines and client demands. If someone (or some organization) becomes interested, I'd prefer it be on my terms.

Whenever I take on learning a new skill set (like 3D editing) I find a subject I really like and challenge myself to learn what I need to know to produce something I can be happy with. It need not be commercially marketable. I did this when I learned how to create interactive CD (and DVD) ROMs with Macromedia Director. Thus was born a CD about Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I knew I'd never be able to sell it, but I had a blast doing it and learned some marketable skills along the way.
post #48 of 1087
Joe- Good deal on the 100th aniversary video. In 2 weeks I'm going to PA to a family reunion. It is the 100th aniversary of that too. This isn't the usual close family reunion but rather an international one that is professionally done with guest speakers and presentations. I plan to shoot some interviews and experiment with 3D as well. Because I know if I shoot in 3D I can always make it 2D too. To prepare for it I have been doing my homework on ancestry.com and have 100 relatives now documented with a line that goes back to Europe to 1533. Pretty fascinating stuff! This could make for a nice interactive 3D BD with a menu structure that resembles a family tree, click on a person and see a short video clip in 3D. I plan to spend a few days shooting some of the older homes dating back to 1700's. One is my great great grandfathers farm.

Anyway- did you down load the Fireworks video I uploaded? BTW- I see YT lost all my videos I uploaded, so I have to reupload all of them. I had a dozen videos on my channel and this morning they were all gone! I can't wait to see Franks effort on Fireworks after tomorrow. I hope he can pull it off. Those Canon cameras are not cheap. His biggest challenge will be dealing with all the people unless he has scouted a good private spot.
post #49 of 1087
No, I didn't get a chance to download the video. I'll try to get it when you upload it again.

My Godfather was his family's historian, and I produced a genealogy tape for him many years ago. When he passed away in '07, I redid it as a DVD, similar to what you're talking about. He traced his heritage back to Germany, also in the 1500s. Oh, what I'd give to have footage of him in 3D! He was a gifted artist and musician, a tremendously generous humanitarian and my best friend. He's the one who gave me my love of Shaw's Garden, and I was fortunate enough to get HD footage of him there before he died. I feel close to him just being there.

What I'm inclined to do is offer this video to the Garden as a tribute to him. He was a patron of the arts, and of the Garden, so it would be great to know that people were seeing this and being reminded of him. Of course, I don't know if 3D is at a level of public awareness close enough for the Garden to know what to do with this video. Oh well, I have quite a bit of work to do on it before I'd think about approaching them.
post #50 of 1087
Just got my YT channel working again. I think they killed some of my uploads because they were longer than 15 minutes. They told me I could do it but apparently they deleted everything when I took them up on the offer. Reuploaded the under 15 minute videos and all seems to work again.
The Epcot fireworks video is finally at after 6 aborted tries:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtv2lXdB2Aw
post #51 of 1087
Thread Starter 
My attempt to shoot the local 4th of July fireworks display was for the most part a dismal failure.
I posted the only usable clip on YouTube and here it is.
fireworks

Unfortunately, I had little to no time to prepare for it and rushed out there at the last minute to try to get something. As luck would have it, just as the main show started the right camera battery failed and that was it.
post #52 of 1087
Maybe a failure to make a complete show but you definitly demonstrated the advantage of the 5 ft. IA separation for shooting Fireworks. If you look at what I did both at Disney and here in town last night, it doesn't come close to the separation you get at those distances.
I'm really pleased to know that you were able to prove the requirement of a bench to shoot something like that that you can't get closed to.

I didn't look at it in anaglyph, rather on my Vizio 32" 3D monitor.

Here is what I shot last night. There were two sites downtown that I could capture. Because of the crowds, Jacksonville sets up several locations around the city and syncs them up. From my shooting point, I could see both up river. The only 3D effect I could get with the TD10 was Zaxis separation between the two locations and the buildings. Nothing to brag on inside the explosions. Not like you got!
post #53 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

Maybe a failure to make a complete show but you definitly demonstrated the advantage of the 5 ft. IA separation for shooting Fireworks. If you look at what I did both at Disney and here in town last night, it doesn't come close to the separation you get at those distances.
I'm really pleased to know that you were able to prove the requirement of a bench to shoot something like that that you can't get closed to.

I didn't look at it in anaglyph, rather on my Vizio 32" 3D monitor.

Here is what I shot last night. There were two sites downtown that I could capture. Because of the crowds, Jacksonville sets up several locations around the city and syncs them up. From my shooting point, I could see both up river. The only 3D effect I could get with the TD10 was Zaxis separation between the two locations and the buildings. Nothing to brag on inside the explosions. Not like you got!

I had no idea weddings could be so exhausting!
It seems to have taken me a week to recover from my grand daughter's wedding on the 2nd. I did manage to shoot it in 3D with my JVC GS-TD1 and it looks pretty good, probably because the bride looked so incredibly beautiful.
For the most part, I find the small IA of the new consumer 3D camcorders more like 2D then 3D. This might have something to do with the fact that I have shot and watched maybe thousands of hours of 3D in the past year with a minimum IA of 2 7/8th inches.
All the 3D video I've seen from the Sony 3D camcorder looks 2D to me.
I believe 3D has been dumbed down to the lowest possible common denominator so as to make it as widely acceptable as possible.
I hate the compressed Z axis that is so common.

As far as the fireworks is concerned, the advantage of the large interaxial is obvious and I'm quite upset at the missed opportunity.
I talked to my grandson about me funding a trip for him and his wife to Orlando conditional on him shooting the show with my rig. He loves the idea and just needs some training.
post #54 of 1087
So you won't come down? Just plan the trip in mid October to mid November with no hurricanes bearing down on us, especially in the gulf and the crowds should be low, plus weather great. If you set up about 90 minutes before show time you will get your pick of the best shot so you will be in the clear. After an hour, the squatters will be crowding in.

I think if you can't see 3D with the JVC or the Sony camcorders you must have vision problems.

Have you looked at my Victoria Gardens video? Plenty of gratuitous pop out in that garden.

Weddings- When my daughter got married I was warned not to shoot the wedding so I hired two of my people (professionals) to shoot it with my equipment.
post #55 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

So you won't come down? Just plan the trip in mid October to mid November with no hurricanes bearing down on us, especially in the gulf and the crowds should be low, plus weather great. If you set up about 90 minutes before show time you will get your pick of the best shot so you will be in the clear. After an hour, the squatters will be crowding in.

I think if you can't see 3D with the JVC or the Sony camcorders you must have vision problems.

Have you looked at my Victoria Gardens video? Plenty of gratuitous pop out in that garden.

Weddings- When my daughter got married I was warned not to shoot the wedding so I hired two of my people (professionals) to shoot it with my equipment.

I refuse to fly on airplanes anymore because of the TSA but that's another story.
My grandkids will go and I'm sure with proper training they'll do a great job.
Your advice is very welcome and should be very helpful.
As far as me not seeing 3D with the JVC and Sony, it's pretty much true.
My vision is not good as my Ophthalmologist will certify.
Two artificial lenses and retina operations later, my left eye has little contrast and resolution remaining.
I don't remember if I saw the Victoria Gardens video. Perhaps you could point me to where it is.
P.S. I'm from Miami originally and lived there 22 years so I'm familiar with the weather...and more then familiar with the hurricanes.
post #56 of 1087
Quote:


I refuse to fly on airplanes anymore because of the TSA but that's another story.

I hear ya- I travel as a cybernetic organism so I have to get the pat down every time and some of them are just idiots. I carry the card that allows me to bypass the metal detectors but that doesn't exempt me from a full body search.

Here is the link to the Victoria Gardens video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg5pJDiKo9M

There are some intentional popouts that I set up that have extreme range. One that comes to mind is of a duck with a broken wing. I shot her about 20" from the camera at full wide angle. Any closer and the image would be diverged and ghost out. That was about minimum for the TD10. I saw where one guy fixed two close up diopter lenses and shot some 3D 6 " away and it was impressive. With the duck, I can feel like I can reach out and pet her. The male duck is farther back, about 4 ft from the camera. Another full range shot is of the rock with the plaque "Victoria Gardens" the rock should come right up to you and as I elevate the camera you will see the distance of the garden shoot all the way back behind the screen plane at the same time. With my Sony projector it fills the room with an experience of being there. With my 32" Visio the effect isn't quite as impressive but the ratios of z axis are still there.

I've been meaning to ask you, when you decide on a spread between the cameras, do you look the IA recommendation up in a chart ( like I would use here from the text book ) or do you calculate it based on the expected lens to subject distance or do you just wing it?
post #57 of 1087
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

I hear ya- I travel as a cybernetic organism so I have to get the pat down every time and some of them are just idiots. I carry the card that allows me to bypass the metal detectors but that doesn't exempt me from a full body search.

Here is the link to the Victoria Gardens video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg5pJDiKo9M

There are some intentional popouts that I set up that have extreme range. One that comes to mind is of a duck with a broken wing. I shot her about 20" from the camera at full wide angle. Any closer and the image would be diverged and ghost out. That was about minimum for the TD10. I saw where one guy fixed two close up diopter lenses and shot some 3D 6 " away and it was impressive. With the duck, I can feel like I can reach out and pet her. The male duck is farther back, about 4 ft from the camera. Another full range shot is of the rock with the plaque "Victoria Gardens" the rock should come right up to you and as I elevate the camera you will see the distance of the garden shoot all the way back behind the screen plane at the same time. With my Sony projector it fills the room with an experience of being there. With my 32" Visio the effect isn't quite as impressive but the ratios of z axis are still there.

The Victoria Gardens video is quite nice. I can easily see the 3D effect on the extreme closeups but the compressed Z axis is distracting to me. If you had shot it with an IA of 2.5" or more I think it would have looked fantastic. No doubt that I'm unusually sensitive to the small IA having shot so much myself with a min of 2.875".
Quote:


I've been meaning to ask you, when you decide on a spread between the cameras, do you look the IA recommendation up in a chart ( like I would use here from the text book ) or do you calculate it based on the expected lens to subject distance or do you just wing it?

My technique is quite simple. I have both the composite video outputs of the cameras connected to a laptop and I monitor the live 3D with Stereoscopic Player and can observe the parallax real time and adjust the camera spacing according to what I think is appropriate. Rules be dammed!
post #58 of 1087
Don,

I had somehow missed watching your Victoria Gardens video so I just watched it to completion in anaglyph. It was really a splendid example of 3D editing with an excellent sense of 3D depth, nice composition, very nice music, etc. It was a genuine pleasure to watch it. You are certainly making excellent use of both the Sony HDR-TD10 and the editing features in Vegas 10. I am only sorry that I can't watch the MVC version of this on my 90ES. It would really be stunning then. Well done!

Tom
post #59 of 1087
Thanks Tom. The anaglyph really screws up the color definition I saw. eg the bright red flowers come out yellow in anaglyph.

I knew this ever since I started working with 3D. So, that was one incentive I needed to get a decent 3D monitor in my edit room and thus, I have the Vizio 32" passive. I am very pleased with it. For YT and looking at WMV player, I just slide the app to the secondary monitor on my computer graphic6s card and then expand to full screen. IN YT I ahve to switch it to SBS half and I can enjoy all the YT videos in full color and good 3D with more than adequate resolution. Remember the Vizio is not 65" Passive but 32" so sitting 5 ft from it the perspective is good. In other words, the resolution looks fine with no objectionable jaggies.
post #60 of 1087
Frank- I'm happy you could detect some of the 3D effect in that video since the particular scenes were so extreme. Guess you need to change your mantra now about the Sony always looks flat to you.
Quote:
If you had shot it with an IA of 2.5" or more I think it would have looked fantastic. No doubt that I'm unusually sensitive to the small IA having shot so much myself with a min of 2.875".
Well, I'm more of an engineer when it comes to cameras and production requirements. I use the "rules" as my starting point and see how far I can push the limits.
When I took the classes on 3D stereography, I learned what the rules were and yes the wider IA would have given me a greater range in the far wall of the scene but also would have moved that up close minimum I now enjoy. However, if the lenses on the camera could be had at 28mm rather than 35mm, the minimum could be held to the same. As I recall the JVC has an even longer lens than the Sony, I recall somewhere around 40mm? and then only 5X zoom so with that limitation it results in a similar 3D zone of 3D because the JVC has a slightly wider IA. But in those special requirements, your 5 ft IA is great to achieve a satisfactory range of depth in the scene from a half mile ( 50% rule) to a mile and a half away using a normal 50mm lens.
Note- for those who may get confused, 3D scene zone is not the same as wide angle field of view. The 3D scene zone is a stage with the screen at it's center, the back wall is as far back as you can detect 3D separation and the front of the stage is as far front as you can shoot before the image goes double or your eyes have to greatly cross to bring it together. I have a DVD with a training series on this using 3D Max to demonstrate how the stage changes as you adjust the IA and lens angle.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Source Components
AVS › AVS Forum › 3D Central › 3D Source Components › When small interaxials just don't cut it!