Sony 240 fps Single Lens 3D Camera

[M Most]

...the new SXRD 4K projector and the S3D lens Mount Adaptor, which btw, will be the first to allow True full 2K play back per lens, meaning it will utilized the full 4K resolution of the Projector as well of that of my RED's images.

The Sony projector's scheme for stereoscopic projection is clever, but it is certainly not the the first "true 2K" stereo system. DLP Cinema projectors using either RealD or Dolby systems are "true 2K" and always have been. The only difference between their approach and the Sony approach is that the Sony approach can deliver both eyes simultaneously, while with the DLP Cinema units they are delivered sequentially and triple flashed to give the appearance of simultaneous display. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the resolution of the delivered images, it's just a different approach that Sony took because their chip design basically allowed them to do so.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Sony will be the very first true 2K "PER LENS, eye" as it is delivered strait out of the 4K projector adapted with RealD technology.

 

[M Most]

Sony will be the very first true 2K "PER LENS, eye" as it is delivered strait out of the 4K projector adapted with RealD technology.

You're playing with semantics. The fact is that the images delivered by the Sony projector are the same resolution as those delivered by the DLP Cinema system. The only difference is in the lack of a need for a multiple flash technique, and the use of two projection lenses instead of one - which, quite frankly, potentially makes for some additional matching issues, as no two lenses are identical and their alignment is critical.

You seem to be trying to take a simple difference in technique and turning it into some kind of "4K good, 2K bad" argument. Except that in this case, that's not the issue.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

You're playing with semantics. The fact is that the images delivered by the Sony projector are the same resolution as those delivered by the DLP Cinema system. The only difference is in the lack of a need for a multiple flash technique, and the use of two projection lenses instead of one - which, quite frankly, potentially makes for some additional matching issues, as no two lenses are identical and their alignment is critical.

You seem to be trying to take a simple difference in technique and turning it into some kind of "4K good, 2K bad" argument. Except that in this case, that's not the issue.

I'm not trying anything here, I'm for one to never argue about anything I discuss based on my knowledge and fact presented to me directly by manufacturers, and any one can form an opinion, the fact that I could at times miss write what I mean, english not been my first language, but I do believe that Sony/RealD technology with this adapter will outperform anything currently used, PERIOD.
Again this is just my opinion, based on the facts that I know of, off course they will vary by each, and that really does not concern me at all.

What concerns me is to research and after getting Private Demos of new available gear, choose the best suitable for my business and my clients needs, that is all, thecnicalities can be discussed with no end on site, and that is absolutely not my interest, first of all because I'm not that technical, well a little, and secondly because I just don't have the time, I prefer be shooting beautiful girls :laugh:

 

[M Most]

I'm not trying anything here, I'm for one to never argue about anything I discuss based on my knowledge and fact presented to me directly by manufacturers...but I do believe that Sony/RealD technology with this adapter will outperform anything currently used, PERIOD.

Well, I do believe that Sony said that to you. How true it is depends on one's point of view as to what constitutes "performance." But I would point out that very, very few Sony projectors have been placed in post production (i.e., Digital Intermediate) environments, not because of resolution issues, but because of color and contrast issues. Color and contrast are generally felt to be much more significant in that environment than pure resolution - especially when one is targeting film as a basic deliverable - and that's where the DLP Cinema units really shine.

Newer isn't always better. Resolution isn't everything. There's more to any piece of technology than meets the eye. All points to consider.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

RED uses the very same Sony projector, I think I trust Jim to have the very best fro showing his RED generated Images.

I will be suing the Projector for dailies and Film viewing, not post.

 

[Iannis Holwech]

RED uses the very same Sony projector, I think I trust Jim to have the very best fro showing his RED generated Images.

I will be suing the Projector for dailies and Film viewing, not post.

I think the correct thing to point out here is that Sony has the only 4K cinema projector, so I guess the choice must have been made on basis that there was nothing else to chose from in 4K and not based on quality.

I believe it is a mistake to order a Sony 4K now, just before the 4K DLP projectors from Barco and Christie are released (release schedule info. expected later this month), without doing a comparative audition between Sony SXRD and DLP 4K projectors.

When it comes to Sony 4K 3D; what Sony present as an improved solution for 3D together with RealD as "very first true 2K "PER LENS, eye" compared to the DLP triple flash single lens, is in fact not an "innovative" way of doing it but a "workaround" to be able to do 3D on SXRD/Lcos at all, due to the fact that these Lcos panels are to slow to do 3D in any other way.

Sony 4K 3D projects two 2K images above each other to make 3D, compared to RealD, Dolby3D and XpanD on DLP that flashes the two images on top of each other. You will also need the expensive dual lens for 3D in addition to the regular lens for 2D projection + I guess the RealD silver screen which is not the best solution for 2D projection
Sony 4K Projector 3D Adapter

Here is a link to the a Sony 3D system Video, just "don't drink their cool aid" rogar-Smoke(DBG):; Sony 4K Digital Cinema 3D

Sony has been very good at mixing and confusing the 3D and 4K concept in their promotion so that many people misunderstands and think that they get 3D in 4K in Sony equipped cinemas, which is not the case. The real question is rather whether Sony will be able to deliver 3D in 4K in the future which is expected that 4K DLP will be able to do almost from the start of their 4K rollout.


Breakdown of the 3 leading 3D systems that can be used on all DLP 120Hz and 144Hz 2K & 4K projectors.

RealD> Projected through;In front of the lens LCD screen polarizing attachment + silver screen + passive glasses. Greatest Lightloss of all systems, largest modification of lightpath.
The New RealD-XL regains some of the lightloss, possible misalignment/ghosting issues; explained here; The RealD-XL 3D system. Better, brighter 3D.

Dolby 3D > Modification of lightpath/projector with a colorwheel mounted in front of the lamp for polarizing/filtering the light, removable for 2D projection + normal screen + passive glasses + Light loss.

XpanD > No modification of projector is necessary + uses the normal screen in the theater + only equipment needed are active glasses & Ir emitter + No light loss from projector.
(for some DLP equipment, IR emitter is not necessary)
This system has the easiest set up and are most similar to the Panasonic 3D system for TV and Blu-ray that they are starting to demo now (using the IR emitters and the glasses from XpanD)
The official system for this years Cannes and Venice film festivals.

There's a lot of facts to take in to consideration when choosing the best 3D system, DLP gives you most choices.


When we look at what the High End private home cinema owners chooses;
"Low" High End for screens up to 5 meters wide++;
#1 now is Italian SIM2 3Chip DLP,
#2 is UK/US Digital Projection International (DPI) 3chip DLP,
#3 (#1 For 1chip DLP) is Norwegian projectiondesign (also for 1chip DLP 2D/3D post production)(makes the 1chip DLP projectors for DPI & Leitz)
(Note that first gen. 1chip DLP LED projectors are out,with wider colorgamut, no colorwheel (no more rainbows), 50K lamphours and ability to hold color/lightoutput calibration much longer than lamp based projectors. Ideal for post production)

The "High" High End owners goes mostly for BARCO cinema projectors, sometimes Christie.

To get the most out of a BARCO I can suggest checking out Cineramax's modification of Barco in something he calls "The Supercontrast".
He is also active on AVS forum in these two sections D-cinema Equipment and Theaters and Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) which is a great place to follow information about new projector technology in general and 4K DLP info&rollout in particular.

Hope some of this information is useful, a lot of expensive holes to step into when choosing high end projector. Maybe even more so than with camera equipment.

 

[Dan Hudgins]

Why one lens?

Why one lens?

The idea of using one lens for 3D is not a new one, it was used in stereo microscopes maybe 200 years ago.

I think the reason Sony is interested in that old idea is that when the image is in "focus" there is zero stereo disparity between the two images. (if they have the relay optics set at the right points).

Why would they want that? Because of their plans for 3D TV sets using lenticular screens, in lenticular screens anything that has disparity looks out of focus (blured) anyway, so the camera needs to converge the subject all the time to keep the subject at the point of zero disparity.

If you use two cameras shooting 65mm apart parallel in the normal way for true stereo you always have some disparity for subjects closer than inf, and that blurs the image on lenticular monitors, more so for close subjects.

So using a normal 3D rig is not good for some kinds of autostereoscopic display, maybe some other kinds Sony is planning for later release. If content is made in the normal two camera way of fixed parallel shooting that content will not be useful for distribution on compressed disk for display on lenticular monitors.

Also using the single lens system with zero disparity in the subject plane reduces the bandwidth required since image points that are in the "difference" signal made by subtracting the right and left views can be transmitted and stored on disk at lower bandwdith since it difference is always in the out of focus part of the image, being blured you can hide the lower bandwidth in the blur.

It seems to be a gimmick, not good true stereo, desigined to save bandwidth and to allow for displays and storage can require zero disparity in the plane of the subject to get the best resolution at the lowest bandwidth.

As anyone knows, if you zero the disparity in the plane of the subject you can get excess negative disparity on the screen causing the viewers eyes to diverge on points at inf, perhaps Sony picked the single lens trick to reduce the divergence issue also, if you "pigon toe" two cameras on the subject, then you get the negative disparity issue on the points behind the subject.

At any rate, there would seem to be a set of issues that they think they are solving with the one lens camera for their "3D system" and if their future 3D displays for home use, and the difference signal Blu-Ray 3D disks require zero disparity for clear image of the subject, then people will be forced to use their special camera if they want their content to look right on the Sony system.

You cannot just adjust the left and right images on a computer in post to get the same kind of zero disparity in the subject plane that the single lens system can give. It say more I would need to have one of those cameras for testing to look at the images with the optical system focused on various planes for complex 3D subjects.

Anyway, I do not know who at Sony thought the single lens camera was a good idea, but it seems they have more than one reason for going that way, some of which I have gone into above, its even possable that not all departments know these reasons because the bandwidth issues are not something they would want the public to be thinking about maybe, how could that help their marketing?

But it does bring up the question of how will other two camera derived 3D content fit into the Sony system based on a single lens camera? What issues in post will be required to fix to resolve the zero disparity in the subject plane is that is needed for best results? Will footage shot with the Sony camera look better on playback in a Sony theatre or from a Sony Blu-Ray on a lenticular TV in the home?

 

[Sven Seynaeve]

The most interesting subject , is indeed if they are all aware of and taking care about the future distribution models. But imho they must be and it might be the most clever way if they take it into consideration due to the lenticular displays we've seen on IBC. This seems to be the future for home theaters instead of using polorised glasses, which most people would hate to wear in a regular home environment, especially when the tv set is used to watch while doing other stuff at the same time.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

In truth nothing has been purchased as of yet, as the studio project is still at his beginning quest, so still time to do more research, Sony has been my first option, and the One lens for 3D is not new, yes but it is this the first time that such option his been generated with a funnel of the imaging reflected in to two lenses and then in to one.

Again so much to research still, but for now, Sony/realD do offer what I see as by far the best solution.


..also, again I'm talking about the Projector not the camera..

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

why cant you just shoot an image how you would now.. with say RED... and in post just split the image so you now have 2 images.. Overlay them ontop of each other.. send one image off skew to be right eye.. then do the color shift... would that not work>?

 

[Dan Hudgins]

3D with one lens.

3D with one lens.

why cant you just shoot an image how you would now.. with say RED... and in post just split the image so you now have 2 images.. Overlay them ontop of each other.. send one image off skew to be right eye.. then do the color shift... would that not work>?

You can use a large lens, like a f/1.2 85mm and cover the left side with a cyan filter and the right side with a red filter, then focus on the subject, that will give you "3D" with one lens on the REDONE camera now, you can view with anaglyph glasses. To see 3D the subject must have depth, and the background or foreground not too far out of focus.

You can make the two images more distinct if you use a Petzval lens of f/0.7 and cover the font element with a "binocular mask" a black sheet with two holes in it spaced about 65mm, then cover one with a cyan filter and the other with a red filter. The front element needs to be about 125mm wide. It's like shooting with two lenses, but they end up in the same place for things that are in focus and out of register if they are for closer or more distant parts of the subject.

You can do tests on closer objects with a smaller lens, but the Petzval works better since the pair of stops can be in front of the front element, with a Double Gauss it may not work as well.

==

About Sony doing anything new, I published two papers for autostereoscopic television systems about work going back to the 70's. In those was a related design for using a single large lens to produce over a million views of the subject at "once" (to reduce the bandwidth only the views needed to cover the viewer's eyes were displayed, the others were skipped until needed), and accommodation depth clue as well as parallax for movement in 3 axis. Steve Benton of the MIT media lab later patented something similar using head tracking to move the exit pupils around in space as I had decribed and discussed with him, he is dead now. Using a single large lens rather than many small ones is not a new idea for 3D photography, such designs go back almost 120 years now, and were used to capture many views without needing a "bug-eye" lens. There is very little in 3D that has not been done before, 3D comes in fads people sometimes think they have a new idea until they check the patents to see that it has been done before and past into obscurity.