3D Shooting

How to shoot best high-definition video in various specific situations, regardless of camcorder model. Accessories: tripods, stabilizers, lights...
Post Reply
Arkady Bolotin
Posts: 60
Joined: 24 May 2010 16:46
Location: Beersheba, Israel

3D Shooting

Post by Arkady Bolotin »

After Avatar success, 3D has become a buzzword. Nowadays, everything must be three-dimensional: movies, TV programs, computer games and operating systems. Various manufactures are standing in line vying with each other to offer a new 3D gadget almost on a daily basis.

So, it is natural that the interest to shoot in 3D keeps growing. Only a double price for a 3D camera (comparing with an ordinary 2D one) is still holding people. But is it really necessary to pay literally twice for 3D recording capabilities? I do not think so.

In fact, the 3D solution that the Avatar’s creators realized and many others propose (and which is called stereoscopy) is not the only one.

To see a picture in 3D we have to have a depth perception of the picture’s elements (not all of them, but at least, the key elements: a talent’s face, for example). That depth perception may arise from a variety of so-called depth cues.

The most obvious depth cue (and, naturally, most explored in 3D techniques) is parallax. When looking at an object with the right and left eyes we see a displacement in its apparent position, which gives our brain the exact information about the object’s depth position (closer to us or remoter from us). Therefore, if we capture the object with two identical cameras placed at some distance from each other, and then blend somehow these recorded two different pictures in a viewer’s brain, we will get a 3D movie in the form familiar to everyone now.

However, such technique has many disadvantages, of which most noticeable one is the need for matching cameras and visual merging device (i.e. stereo glasses) for each viewer. Other shortcoming (more severe than just technical demands) is the total lack of motion parallax in modern stereoscopic movies.

In the real world, when you move your head, you can gain different viewpoints of an object (even observing behind it). But this is impossible in any commercial 3D movie, once you move you immediately realize what you see is not real: you cannot change your viewpoint. It contradicts our senses and kills depth perception.

Another depth cues (so-called monocular cues) have been developed in classical visual art for many centuries: color shading, geometric perspective and aerial perspective (i.e. distance fog) – just to name a few of them.

And videography created its own depth cues, such as depth from motion (put your camera in a driving car and watch your recording – you will probably have the most vivid 3D experience better then in Avatar or Clash Of The Titans) and accommodation (more known as shallow focus). Despite the fact that the latter is often abused and used for no reason, still it is a very powerful method to create depth illusion.

The trick, however, is how shallow your focus must be in order to maintain this illusion. If the picture background is out of focus totally (uniformly blur), then the illusion ceases to exist in the same way when the background is in sharp focus.

I have done some experiments trying to achieve the maximum of this depth cue. Please observe the screenshot I am about to upload and tell me what you think.
Attachments
3D-Picture.jpg
(92.32 KiB) Not downloaded yet
User avatar
Stephan
Site Admin
Posts: 592
Joined: 20 Mar 2010 18:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Stephan »

Interesting... The first plane seems to 'pop up' a bit with shallow DOF, but I think it's no comparison with binocular 3D - which, even with lack of motion parallax (which I didn't know of - thanks for the info) is what I would really call 3D.

Looking at your picture, without all the text explanation, I would think that you're trying to reach 'film look' and would say that you're only half way there. Most commonly people wouldn't associate shallow DOF to 3D.
Arkady Bolotin
Posts: 60
Joined: 24 May 2010 16:46
Location: Beersheba, Israel

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Arkady Bolotin »

Thank you Stephan for your comments (and observation).
Stephan wrote:Most commonly people wouldn't associate shallow DOF to 3D.
Unfortunately, people usually say what they have been told. And they are told that a parallax-based video (i.e. stereo) is the only 3D ever existed. Who told them this, you may ask? TV and electronic manufactures and Hollywood financiers who see in the recent wave of 3D frenzy an opportunity to squeeze from a customer some more cash. Not just money, but big money, because here we are talking about a full new range of customer’s devices: a 3D TV set, a 3D Blu-Ray player and 3D BD disks, a 3D computer monitor and software, a 3D camera, etcetera, etcetera…

However, is it really worth to spend that money for the new 3D technology? I doubt this… I think it is just a gimmick, very attractive one, no doubt about, but still a sales gimmick.

My point is, to create depth illusion is not necessary to spend a lot for new equipment. Be creative, search, and try out, and maybe you will achieve the same 3D effect (or even better) without stereo.
Arkady Bolotin
Posts: 60
Joined: 24 May 2010 16:46
Location: Beersheba, Israel

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Arkady Bolotin »

It seems I was too late with my stupid advices to use alternative depth cues (for creating 3D look). But whom I am kidding? Everyone knows that the most widely accepted 3D would be a parallax-based video and wants a piece of that marvelous 3D technology. Therefore, you do not have to be a fortuneteller to envisage that the next year we all will witness a wave of new 3D camcorders from the major video manufactures such as Panasonic, Sony and Canon.

I have just found a proof to that. In fact, I came across an article by Scott Wilkinson (posted Thu June 17, 2010 on UltimateAVmag.com) in which he described his recent involvement in 3D recording a video album in Los Angeles. The most intriguing part of the article (to me of course) was the photos and brief description of a prototype 3D camera from Panasonic.

Judging by the photos, the camera looks exactly as the Panasonic AG-HMC150 camcorder (which records full-resolution AVCHD to SD memory cards), apart from the front end. The prototype camera is fronted with a hefty 2-eye lens; each eye looks smaller than 50 mm.

The article’s author (Scott Wilkinson) says that the camera can shoot in 1080p/24, 1080p/30, uses AVCHD compression and stores the data on 32GB SD memory cards, one for each eye. This is actually makes great sense to me.

First, such design allows diversity in the ways to present a stereoscopic 3D effect: using either the advanced state-of-the-art TV polarization systems or alternate-frame sequencing TVs (240 Hz for NTSC or 200 Hz for PAL) or old-fashioned superimposing of two anaglyph images.

Second, this design offers the easiest way of backwards-compatibility with 2D TV and monitors: just throw out all the left images, for example.

Third, to have two independent sets of sensors for each eye but the common electronic circuit is cheaper and more movable solution than a 2-camera rig.

It has also disadvantages, obviously. I predict each of the images of this 3D camcorder will be inferior to those of a conventional 2D cam with the only set of 1/3" sensors. But it does not matter, I already imagine a throng of customers who will be die to see their weddings or bar-mitzvahs in 3D at any cost.

So, guys, start to save your money for the new lap of technology.
User avatar
Stephan
Site Admin
Posts: 592
Joined: 20 Mar 2010 18:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Stephan »

Is that the one? Panasonic Begins Pre-order on Professional Full HD 3D Camcorder

$21K is a hefty price. We still have time till all this comes into consumer range.
Arkady Bolotin
Posts: 60
Joined: 24 May 2010 16:46
Location: Beersheba, Israel

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Arkady Bolotin »

Hmm, it’s hard to say: the photos I saw were taken from the left angle whereas the picture in the announcement you pointed out shows the right side of the new camera.

However, since Panasonic has introduced only one new Full HD 3D camcorder I must concur, yes, this is the one. Thank you Stephan for the clarification.

Well, 21 thousands for a 3D-capable camcorder – it is something definitely out of reach for the majority of professional customers.

So, sorry guys, it was a false alarm, we still have a plenty of time to enjoy 2D video (and alternative 3D effects).
User avatar
DouglasAraujo
Posts: 23
Joined: 06 Dec 2010 20:53
Location: Brazil

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by DouglasAraujo »

We can use 2 cameras to do this kind of work, with a little distance between the lenses.
Now we have 3D pocket cameras, with a lower cost.
User avatar
Stephan
Site Admin
Posts: 592
Joined: 20 Mar 2010 18:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by Stephan »

2 cameras... and a few things more to care about - 3D is so unbelievably complex.

Check this: Hands-on with the Panasonic AG-3DA1 S3D Camcorder
and that: Panasonic HDC-SDT750 consumer 3D camcorder
User avatar
DouglasAraujo
Posts: 23
Joined: 06 Dec 2010 20:53
Location: Brazil

Re: 3D Shooting

Post by DouglasAraujo »

Post Reply