Avid 3D question

[J Obertone]

I am trying to solve the problem of post workflow on an Epic 3D shoot. We will be using RCx and Avid. Does RCx do 3D playback to a 3D monitor? After transcoding, will Avid be able to playback and view images in 3D? What is a general good workflow so the editor can see 2D and 3D while editing?

 

[Jeffrey T. Morgan]

This is not helpful unless NO ONE answers, but I can only speak for sure that Premiere Pro has a pretty smooth process for editing 3D footage. Especially with Cineform helping out. If you want to talk about that, email me or whatever. I am not sure where Avid is at with 3D editing...

or use google:

http://www.avid.com/US/industries/workflow/Stereoscopic-3D

;-P

Jeff

 

[M Most]

This is not helpful unless NO ONE answers, but I can only speak for sure that Premiere Pro has a pretty smooth process for editing 3D footage. Especially with Cineform helping out. If you want to talk about that, email me or whatever. I am not sure where Avid is at with 3D editing...

Avid has had 3D editing for at least the last 3 versions, going back to 3.5, I believe.

The common approach is to use side by side or over/under for transcoded offline files (for Red material, RedcineX can produce this directly). Avid allows you to output this directly, or as an anaglyph image. Nearly all 3D monitors can display 3D from either side by side or over/under images. Avid keept track of the metadata for both eyes and outputs any lists needed for conforming. The caveat is that you cannot perform convergence adjustments in Media Composer, as you can with the Cineform approach.

 

[kenneth gruyaert]

It does not make sense to me that there is a fixed convergence in the video, is this the same for viewing at home (on tv as well as on a computer display) as it is for viewing in the cinema? If this is how it works then it is inherently flawed. If i got this wrong i hope someone can explain it to me.

 

[M Most]

It does not make sense to me that there is a fixed convergence in the video, is this the same for viewing at home (on tv as well as on a computer display) as it is for viewing in the cinema? If this is how it works then it is inherently flawed. If i got this wrong i hope someone can explain it to me.

It's only "flawed" if you think of Avid Media Composer as a finishing system. However, Avid doesn't think of it as that, and they don't market it as that, even though some people want to use it that way.

 

[kenneth gruyaert]

Sorry i was referring to the idea of fixating convergence in a video in general, my question is if this is really done that way or if i got that wrong? I understand the geometry of stereoscopic imaging and how it should be done but dont know how it is done in practice right now.

I know i probably should have made a new topic? I saw you mention convergence adjustment so i replied ...

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I haven't been working with Avid and 3D, but can you get a true 3D image out of Avid to a 3D television which can be used with 3D glasses to view a true 3D image?
I know it's not for finish, but if you edit 3D you seriously need to be able to watch it in true 3D, otherwise what's the point?

 

[M Most]

I haven't been working with Avid and 3D, but can you get a true 3D image out of Avid to a 3D television which can be used with 3D glasses to view a true 3D image?
I know it's not for finish, but if you edit 3D you seriously need to be able to watch it in true 3D, otherwise what's the point?

A side by side frame IS a "true 3D image," and any 3D monitor I know of will display it as such. What Avid does to make it simple is allow you to change your GUI display to show either left eye, right eye, side by side or upper/lower, or anaglyph. The SDI output can be the side by side for "proper" 3D display on the client monitor.