Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

3Deep - 3D underwater housing for Epic

Hard to say, that article is vague. Seems like there is some partnership with Band Pro and RED, but if you check Band Pro's site, there is no mention of REDs being offered. Maybe you buy the EPIC from RED and the lenses from Band Pro. I am pretty sure only RED sells RED cameras.
 
23kg (50 lbs) ready to dive... I love titanium :laugh:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • DSC_7125.JPG
    DSC_7125.JPG
    75.1 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_4721.jpg
    IMG_4721.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 0
3Deep and RED Epic on Catalyst

3Deep and RED Epic on Catalyst

OK, so I ended up on the wrong side of the camera again. :blush:

Dave Hudspeth (ACS), DOP suggested that our invention could be a good idea for the Catalyst science programme on the ABC (our national broadcaster) and before long I was contacted by the producer and presenter, Mark Horstman, to star in his programme.

For the last two days we were shooting the programme, which is scheduled to appear on national television in March or April.

I invite anyone interested in learning the difference between flat port, dome port and submersible lenses, or in seeing 3Deep being set up, prepared for a dive and in action, to watch the show.

It is great recognition not only for us, but for all RED community and RED Epic cameras in particular as the host speaks very highly of the quality of the images and resolution produced by the RED Epic.It is a great honour to star in such a high profile, prime time series on the national television.
 

Attachments

  • SnapShot(3).jpg
    SnapShot(3).jpg
    95.4 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_0042.jpg
    IMG_0042.jpg
    61.7 KB · Views: 0
:emote_happyhappy:Congratulations Pawel!

Let's just hope we're not all over at NAB when it airs! :beer:
 
Yes, it works very well. The angle of view is about 140 degrees.

We are also working on an RS adapter that will allow Nikonos RS 13mm.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5278.JPG
    IMG_5278.JPG
    76.2 KB · Views: 0
We have just shot giant kelp forest off the coast of Tasmania.

The Vimeo clip is here: http://vimeo.com/60042999 and YouTube is here: http://youtu.be/FZAwsZDYQiw

The convergence (HIT) was optimised for monitor viewing. The positive parallax should be less than 2% and negative parallax should not exceed 0.5%.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
Hi Les,

Have your tests been underwater or topside?

As I explained earlier, there is big difference shooting stereoscopic 3D underwater in that there is never background further than maybe 20m away and, in most cases, there is no background at all. It is the background that creates limitations in your inter-axial distance. Otherwise, there is no reason why you can't shoot subject distance to inter-axial distance of 5:1 as our eyes are used to converge and fuse the images this close with no problem.


Lucas, as to sample images on an IMAX screen: they are coming soon. As they say, the proof is in the pudding and I would be delighted to fly to US and display them next to images produced by Cameron/Pace.
Click to expand...

This is not right. If you can't change your IA your system is very limited... period.

Not saying it's unusable but you will have to use highly advanced post processes to get closups good, especially if the object shot is close to camera and any background is there.

5 meters distance to camera sure no problem, shooting a fish at 1m distance and having a background at 1,5m then things is not so easy any more. My advice then is a big bag of money and people that are very tanlanted with NUKE Ocula. Problem arises that when you do post enhanced 3D you loose resolution and quality of images....

Also an even cromatic aboration is possible to remove to 100% in post. There is tools for such, basically the image is seperated into layers for r,g and b and those are warped until they align Same goes for distortion a known distortion is quite easy to correct.

Im' not saying that your system does not work Pawel, but it for sure comes some with a whole lot of issues if you shoot with such setup.
 
Björn Benckert said:
This is not right. If you can't change your IA your system is very limited... period.

Not saying it's unusable but you will have to use highly advanced post processes to get closups good, especially if the object shot is close to camera and any background is there.

5 meters distance to camera sure no problem, shooting a fish at 1m distance and having a background at 1,5m then things is not so easy any more. My advice then is a big bag of money and people that are very tanlanted with NUKE Ocula. Problem arises that when you do post enhanced 3D you loose resolution and quality of images....

Also an even cromatic aboration is possible to remove to 100% in post. There is tools for such, basically the image is seperated into layers for r,g and b and those are warped until they align Same goes for distortion a known distortion is quite easy to correct.

Im' not saying that your system does not work Pawel, but it for sure comes some with a whole lot of issues if you shoot with such setup.
Click to expand...
Pawel's solution to this is to take 2 rigs on location. One for doing close ups and one for doing all the wide and medium shots. For other producers this doubles the amount of gear you have to either hire or purchase to shoot a project.
 
Bjorn,

You are incorrect that Chromatic aberration or astigmatism caused by flat port can be removed in post. They can't. If the MTF is ZERO in each R ,G and B channel: there is no miracle in the world that can get the resolution back. The fact is that flat port does not achieve even standard definition quality away from the centre and I find it amusing when people use 5k or IMAX cameras to shooot through one. Not to mention geometric distortions and magnification. Please go to post #15 of this thread.

You are also incorrect that fixed stereo base of 100mm is limited underwater to subjects 5m away. This is complete nonesens. ALL underwater IMAX 3D films were creaded with side-by-side rigs with approximately 75mm stereo base. James Cameron also films side-by-side Sony HD cameras with two Fujinon lenses and even larger stereo base..

My sample above, nearly all 3D underwater films released and the full Bercovitz formula clearly show that the parallax is well within IMAX screen range for subjects more than about 1.5m away. Please go to post #33 of this thread and show us if the distances for foreground/background are incorrect.

Interestingly, the only IMAX film, The Last Reef 3D, that was filmed with a housed beam splitter suffered from poor and eye straining 3D, albeit mainly for reasons other than the equipment used.

Ross, it is not always a matter of taking two rigs to each underwater shoot. Although, even five of those rigs would be smaller and lighter than a housed beam splitter.:sneaky2:

It is a matter of using the right tool for the job. It is seldom that on the same underwater 3D shoot you would shoot small as well as large subjects. You either play in the muck or in the water column with big fish :)

But, of course, there is nothing wrong with using two rigs and getting the best of both worlds if there is such need. Both rigs are well below 30kg each all set up with cameras, batteries, monitors, lenses and lighting ready for diving. Those rigs can be very quickly and easily set up with not much fuss.

We also have a wet beam splitter for dual DeepX - the only housing capable of producing 4k underwater and beyond. It has variable stereo base. Again, it is a matter of using the right tool for the job. For the giant kelp forest, I saw no reason to use a beam splitter as we are well within the depth limits for the largest of the screens.

Side-by-side has another advantage of having twice as much light in each eye and no weird reflections or distortions caused by misallignments. It is my favourite setup and I use it for 2-camera 2D shoots with two different lenses as well.
 
Dave Blackham said:
I understand there is a new housing built for C300 by Seacam....
Click to expand...

And I understand that there are thousands of other different housings, none of which can produce sharp or undistorted images underwater and, in particular, one that shoots through two mis-aligned cameras through a dome port. This is what sets 3Deep apart that for the first time in the history of motion picture we can shoot images that are free of distortions, image plane curvature, chromatic aberrations and which are sharp to the edge and at all f-stops. For all other housings - chose one from above.

However, what I do not understand is why you bring a housing for Canon C300 on a forum for Red cameras and why you bring up Seacam housing on a thread intended for Achtel housing.

jimhare said:
What a cool idea! Two shots for one! I saw the 3Deep in person the other night, it's unbelievably light and truly amazing!
Click to expand...

Thanks Jim, it was great to catch up at Adam's studio and see the images from 3Deep on his editing suite.
 
Today we took 3Deep for a deep dive.

Despite diving on a sunny clear day at mid-day, the light levels are very low here.

Shooting 3D with 20,000 lm of light at f/4, 1600 ISO. 2 x Nikonos 15mm.





 

Attachments

  • IMG_5385 (Small).JPG
    IMG_5385 (Small).JPG
    33.5 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_5391 (Small).JPG
    IMG_5391 (Small).JPG
    27.1 KB · Views: 0
  • IMG_5400 (Small).JPG
    IMG_5400 (Small).JPG
    30.2 KB · Views: 0
DeepX and 3Deep nominated as finalists, best innovations in film production, NAB, Las Vegas ...[more]
 
 

Attachments

  • StudioDaily Innovation Award (crop) 10.04.2013.jpg
    StudioDaily Innovation Award (crop) 10.04.2013.jpg
    84.2 KB · Views: 0
Hats off Pawel and congratulations.
 
Thanks Hrvoje. I'm still trying to digest the enormity of what's happened:

The most innovative product at NAB 2013 was not Canon EOS C300 (finalist) or Canon EOS C500 (also finalist), it was not Blackmagic Cinema Camera (finalist) and it wasn't Sony NEX-FS700 (another finalist)...

The most innovative product wasn't the 6k RED Dragon Sensor, and it wasn't the RED EPIC camera ...but, it was for a housing designed for the RED Epic....actually two underwater housings from a small Tasmanian company: DeepX and 3Deep!

I still cannot believe my eyes what happened :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top