Upgrade from the 3D Bloggie: the Panasonic 3D1 - Page 3

-
I want lenticular prints

[/quote]2. There is a simpler way, depending on what 3D equipment you do have. If you have a Panasonic 3D bluray player or a Panasonic 3D TV, you can take the sd card right from the camera, put it into the sd card slot in the player or TV and you can watch the 3D videos instantly - no conversion, no burning.
[/quote]

I do have a new Panny bluray 3d player with that slot but would like to be able to burn them onto bluray as well.

What is the shortesst distance to the object for 3D1?

Could you elaborate as to playing files "natively"? While I have both a Panasonic 3D TV and Panasonic Blu-ray player - what steps would I need to take to play 3D video taken by the 3D1 "natively" and how is that different than playing 3D video taken by the 3D1 on say a Sony 3D TV (which I also have.)

NorthTV- I can connect my Vizio 32" TV to the 3D1 with a mini hdmi to regular hdmi cable and play the camera's content. In addition, my Vizio remote control can advance the pictures.

I can also connect my 3D1 to a Panasonic plasma with the same cable as Don. The TV remote controls the picture / video selection.

Marty

I'm guessing this is a feature more of the hdmi 1.4 control protocol than the brand TV or camera. HDMI control must be enabled in the menus to work, however.

I have a 3D1, and a Panasonic BD player. What you described is exactly correct.

I have a somewhat different setup, a 3D1 camera and Panasonic GT30 plasma TV.

When I put the card in the back slot of the TV, it was instantly recognized and the 3D videos play in good quality 3D. It is not much different than just plugging in the camera; it is another option.

Marty

Thanks everyone for your comments. I finally pulled a trigger and ordered 3D1 on Amazon.
It is difficult to recognize/evaluate the real, actual pictures and movie quality on YT posted footage. I have decided to get one and play with it. Will get it in a few days.

I guess that video files will be possible to play directly from the HDD connected to Oppo player. I tried it before, all SBS 3D were playing fine.

I would need to get few extra batteries, any recommendations on brand/model/capacity and places to get?

Markr041, you have mentioned cheap, $18 batteries you got.

I ordered one off of Amazon as well, plus ordered these two batteries for $25, will post if they work.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...ls_o01_s00_i00

I also ordered 5 16g sd cards. I think the 3 batteries should be enough for my vacation as I will still be using my HV40 (still got a lot of blank DV tape to use and it will be hard to let go of the tape thing).

What SD memory cards need to be considered, in today days? I am currently using 8GB Transcend for my SLR, for several years, never had any problems.
Ordered 16GB Class 10 Transcend SDs, ready for my 3D1 arrival.

Just curious, which format on 3D1 gives better video, is it AVCHD or MP4?
What SBS 3D file type, extention will be generated for 3D recording?
I saterted worrying if Oppo player would play them from HDD.

How does the video pq and sound of the 3d1 compare to the Sony hd10 and the Fuji w3?
Also, is there minimal 3d effect on faraway shots meaning it isn't worth the effort? I have a Canon HV40 hdv cam, this summer I am going to the following places, here's my intended usage:
Las Vegas:3d1
Water park: 3d1
Kona: On top of mauna kea- hv40
beach: HV 40 and maybe 3d1
Kona brewing:3d1
AK cruise:
cruise ship interior: 3d1
AK scenary from ship;HV40
AK scenary up close (hiking) 3d1
Does this sound right? I have never shot 3d and want to make the most of my footage this summer.

mts

Mark has done this comparison. Check out his test videos.

My opinion:

Sony TD10/20 can be zoomed while recording. With 3D1 you'd have to zoom ahead of time then it's fixed at that point. Sony has autostereoscopic screen; 3D1 doesn't (not necessarily better or worse, just based on preference). The 3D1 can take photos, the Sony cannot. With color, I think the Sony is a bit better. I didn't do much test with the built-in mic for sound, but neither are as good as an external recorder.

It sounds like, ideally, one would have a TD10/20 and a 3d1. Hopefully, the 3d1 and HDV combo can serve me for the next year. I really wanted to pull the trigger on the td20 but I still think it doesn't offer enough and the sensors looked too close together, like the camcorders that have two mics 1/4" apart with the word "stereo" printed above them (two channel mono!) .Maybe in another year, there will be something better in the $1200 range.

I have hear enough- two mics next to each will lack separation. Experienced this with my last two cams. Play back the audio through dolby IIX and all the sound is steered to the front center speaker. I have managed by using Vive surround sound mics, sort of a pseudo dolby surround mice (two front, one rear mic which is matrixed in with the stereo output).
My old Ricoh H18 (Sony 101 clone) had the stereo speakers mounted on the sides of the cam- result was the best stereo separation I have heard from a cam, played through IIx, all the speakers come alive.

I still am amazed at the lack of understanding regarding IA and what makes good stereography. There is nothing wrong with the IA in the TD20. It's just that these self contained 3D camcorders all have shooting range limits that need to be respected. The TD20 is an excellent tool for home video shooting. It really doesn't get any better. The principle difference in the TD 20 and the 3D1 is the ability to carry it with you everywhere. To have this portability, you give up certain features that the TD 20 has. Today I carried the TD 10 and the 3D1 but shot mostly with the TD10 and only pulled out the Panasonic when I wanted a 3D still. Neither camera shoots adequate 3D when you try to shoot outside the range of its design. If you require good 3D for all ranges from macro of a flower to mountain ranges, several cameras including a twin variable IA is the only way you will be happy.

Also, not on topic but thanks, Mark, for explaining about stereo mic placement. There is just so much audio engineering not understood and not considered when people with no experience except owning two consumer camcorders know.

The JVC TD1 has a similar IA to the TD10. When I ordered the camera, I thought the relatively small IA was going to be an problem.

It wasn't. In fact it was about right. The issue is a lot more complex than I realized. There are at least four variables involved

1) Distance between camera lenses
2) Distance between viewers eyes
2) Field of view for the camera lens
3) Field of view the viewer sees of the display (based on distance from the set and size of the set)

These four parameters form ratios that, when just right, lead to an image where the depth scale matches the width and height scale. In other words, if a ball was recorded, would it appear flattened or elongated, or would it look round in any direction?

Try this as an experiment. Start a 3D movie and freeze on a scene with good depth. Now approach the screen. Notice what happens to the apparent depth. It collapses! Why, because the apparent width and height increase, but the IA of the camera stayed the same. The scene looks unnaturally flat.

Now try the reverse, back far away from the set. Now the scene looks unnaturally deep.This illustrates why doing 3D right is so challenging and why professionals have to use mirror rigs to reduce their IA for some scenes. They also have to take into account that what looks right for the big screen won't look right for TV's. They have to readjust the convergence plane for the home edition.

I've started reading 3D Movie Making by Bernard Mendiburu. His book goes into a lot of detail about getting good, watchable 3D.

I used to wonder why stereo mics were placed so close together. It turns out the design goal is to have them placed as close as possible. The reason for this is to avoid distortions if the two channels are mixed together as mono.

If the mics were separated, like our ears, there would be phase differences in the two channels since sound from side directions take longer to reach the farther mic. It turns out that our brain uses these phase differences to recreate a sonic 3D image. In fact Binaural Recording takes advantage of this.

The problem happens when the two channels are mixed for mono playback. Some frequencies will cancel out due to the phase differences. Since amplitude of Binaural channels is very similar, the best way to make a mono version is to just use one of the channels.

Binaural sound is also best heard from head phones since loud speakers add there own phasing to the playback that interferes with the Binaural phasing.

Conventional stereo uses amplitude rather then phase to differentiate the two channels. This approach is simpler to create in a recording studio, is compatible with loud speakers, and is compatible with mono mix down. It also, unfortunately, sounds less natural.

As I began reading your post, I was planning to suggest the above to you so you can have a better understanding of the science and art. By some of your statements I can tell you are not fully understanding it yet but that's OK. Be sure you load the included DVD and review the 3D Max explanations of how all these factors ( there are more than 4) interact.

BTW- the reason why mirror rigs are needed is so the IA can be reduced to that which is not possible because of the physical size of the cameras. If the DP wants to shoot a stage that is 2 ft to 12 ft in depth, and using twin Red cameras, the IA of 1.5 " cannot be achieved unless he uses a mirror system. In my SBS rig I shoot from 4" to 1 meter IA so there is a gap in what IA I can do but this has never stopped me. If I needed a calculated 3" IA, the shoot could be achieved with no trouble but some compromises in other parameters can be made. The rules are not absolute, just guidelines to use as a starting point.


Funny story- I was hired to shoot a concert as part of a production team about a dozen years ago. But the youngster hired to do sound was obviously inexperienced and had set his mics up with fairly wide separation on each side of the auditorium . He was busy taping down the xlr cable when the director walked in and saw where he placed the mics. There were some words and the kid was fired. Having a resume for this sort of work in the past with the director, I was called to do sound and he took my place at the last minute running my center camera. I set the two shotgun cardioid mics in xy fashion center front auditorium to generate an in phase center channel, with good side lobes for right and left. The sound was well balanced and had excellent stereo with no hole in the middle. To a newbie in the business, the mic configuration seems illogical unless he understands that sound has time delay that is significant and has phase cancellation that varies as the frequency increases. This performance was being done for a DVD for limited distribution so the budget wasn't great. Enough for 4 cameras and an audio tech. I got double pay on that one. In a higher budget, outdoor concert, we have multiple mics and feeds from the instrument amps all mixed on a large board for the PA system with a separate mix board and separate engineer to mix for xy channels for the video feeds sent to each camera wirelessly. This is how its often done and why the video generally never sounds the same as if you were there listening to the mix from the PA in the audience.

I agree with Don that the IO of the TD20 is not worse - for specific uses. The major impact to the IO are points like depth bracket, distance to the near and farpoint. Especially for shooting with a low distance to the nearpoint a low IO is fine - other people use mirror-rigs to get such a small IO. So for shooting in a closed room both the TD10 and TD20 are fine - but if you shoot th Grand Canyon for sure you will like to have a larger IO.

I liked the Mendiburu, but looking back I am not so happy with the quality of some explainations. Sometimes it is hard to follow him, especially if you are not a native speaker. So for German reader the Tauer is also a great book.

What I think is most import for camcorders like the TD10, TD20, TD1 and even Z10K is to understand how you should adjust the convergence. The fact that there is such a small "convergence wheel" makes that 3D-novice believe, that it is always clever to adjust the convergence to the nearpoint or the object someone is shooting. But even with such camcorders you can end up with a huge disparity in the farpoint, what brings up the danger of ghosting especially with high contrast. From that point of view I like the convergence setting in a closed room, but in the tendency parallel shooting allows a higher flexibility in the postproduction.

Re- Grand Canyon 3D.

Now that I got my first and second large scale projects in the can, that is the Valley of Fire and Bryce Canyon. I do plan to shoot the Grand Canyon some day. For this squeeze of the size stage I will be shooting with an IA of 75 to 100 meters. I'm thinking of using the NEX5n cameras with 16mm wide angle lenses. The two cameras will be set up on separate tripods and using a Laser transit to aim them accurately. No panning or zoom possible with this novice hyper stereo rig. I haven't figured out what method I will use to sync the cameras yet but one possibility is to use walkie talkie's and do a countdown to the audio track. Then just line them up in post. Another location for hyper stereo is monument park in southeastern Utah.