Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Capture 2 Streams simultaneously for 3D

That looks great!
But doesn't seem to be in the few-k ballpark I was hoping for. Is there a solution that lets me sync two standard capture cards for dual stream recording?
I was hoping to be able to get me two syncable camera modules (SD would be fine for starters) and try out different rig configurations and shooting practices as well as post workflows before I spend a ton of money on a professional pipeline.
 
Well, not really. You can capture 2*640*480 in 15 fps or 2*320*240 in 30 fps. But I'll use it for a Steampunk-Short in 3D and will double the 15fps and give it a handcrank feel, which works good.

But the 3d looks good. And you can capture the Video fully 3d (red/Cyan) or both Videostream side by side in a 1280*480 Video. I's a fun thing to test some 3D not more. Bought it as I needed a Webcam and thought that the 30 € more are okay for 3D.
 
Benni Diez said:
That looks great!
But doesn't seem to be in the few-k ballpark I was hoping for. Is there a solution that lets me sync two standard capture cards for dual stream recording?
I was hoping to be able to get me two syncable camera modules (SD would be fine for starters) and try out different rig configurations and shooting practices as well as post workflows before I spend a ton of money on a professional pipeline.
Click to expand...

Good, fast, cheap. Pick two. : )

The only solutions I can think of would involve multiple systems and an external sync source. But that is certainly going to be much more expensive than your budget.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, inc.
LA, CA, USA
 
Yo Benni!

When we were researching various stereo solutions last year, we did stumble across some industrial solutions that might suit your needs. At the time we were looking at HD res and 2k by 2k globally shuttered cameras with minimum 15mm sensor size, prices 5k to 8k each for a camera. These cameras either used the Camera Link standard interface or Gigabit Ethernet. We came across several cards that could at least handle two live inputs, and found one card that could handle four (I think they were all MATROX cards), and I think the 2 input card was just under $2k. I’ll see if I can dig up some more concrete information for you next week.

For regular dynamic stereo output, we basically hacked into the AVI format and made it do full, frame sequential stereo, compressed, uncompressed and imagery of any size. We did this just as a place holder until we implement something more sophisticated such as a binary XML type format that can contain 3d geometry as well as streams and other bits and pieces.

At the moment we are mainly concentrating on high end applications, however there certainly seems to be some merit in a lower end applications market, what I would call a “discovery” market. The problem for folks such as ourselves in producing almost turn-key solutions for such a market is the relatively massive amount of educational materials and tech support that would be required to help technical enthusiasts and film students etc. get a handle on the technology. It’s not only a case of providing capable software but also decent hardware accessories that can still deliver high quality and precise results at an affordable price, (something we have a strong interest in providing). I think a lot of this type of capability at a good price will certainly be available within the next two years especially as more mainstream software products will be implementing stereo capability. However I think there must be some more affordable solutions out there right now, I just haven’t dug around enough. I would think that the launch of the new Nvidia glasses and the new Viewsonic stereo monitors would have spawned a few new (freebee type) stereo based apps by now?

About 14 years ago some VR and stereo rigs were certainly run using two computer systems in parallel using very crude synchronization methods so if you get really stuck this method does work. Many years ago I even saw two laser disk players producing decent stereo by just starting them both by using just one infra red remote:)

Benni what method of stereo display are you using or thinking of using?
 
It is possible to Rent a RaveHD for a day or 2 to capture the HD streams.

I would personally recommend getting in touch with Robert Glassenberg at Codex Digital in North Hollywood.

I recommend the "Portable" which is 2x HD-SDI 4:4:4 data capture to Jpeg-2000 solution. There's still in some R&D and only have a few. I'm sure he could work something out for you. Output is GiG-E and each FlashMag is 50minutes.

www.codexdigital.com

I don't work for them.

--
Dane
 
Thanks for the link, GP! Their stuff looks a bit weird, but it might be pretty much what we need for early testing.
I'm also in contact with Matrox (thanks Eric!). Their x.mio boards seem to be exactly what you need for 3D production. 2 channels uncompressed and rs422 capable for sync and camera control.
Since I have no programming skills (yet) and those cards are developer systems, I'll have to wait if they can recommend any software solution. Or I'll have to find someone who can do it.
Or maybe, since I'm not the dumbest person, I can get my head around SDK and .net programming. :)
 
If you get up every morning at 4.30 am take copious amounts of Ritalin and have an espresso machine in arms reach you could probably acquire the necessary programming skills in less than eighteen months to do what you want to do, (C/C++, OpenGl, windows/Visual Studio etc.)

However I think there are some simpler no-brainer apps that you could find that would carry out basic management of data streams, camera control and imagery but these are usually bundled with the software for example with a particular industrial camera you might buy, but it is possible to buy the software separately (assuming appropriate compatibility with the cameras you want to use). It would be a case of dropping these streams into a “stereo player”. The one we built is just a place holder for grander things, but I thought Nvidia were bundling some kind of player software with their glasses?
Smaller industrial sensors that are progressive scan/rolling shutter are much cheaper than globally shuttered larger sensors. So you could get HD res (rolling shutter) for about $1200 vs $5500 for larger sensor with global shutter. We shelved/postponed the industrial camera idea as were unsure about image quality and did not like the idea of having to bring computer tower systems, generators and power conditioners into the field, as many of our applications are field based. However, they should be fine for studio applications. I don’t think that there is a laptop that can competently manage high res uncompressed stereo streams just yet. [The raveHD (posted by Dane looks interesting)].

We may have a project coming up in the next three months where the Matrox cards would become relevant, perhaps (time willing) I can check out what would really be required to bridge this gap for you. What type of image acquisition systems were you hoping to use, and what kind of subjects were you interested in shooting? Our little player app is just rigged right now for frame sequential stereo, what kind of stereo display techniques are you thinking of using?
 
Well we'll really start small. At first I'm planning to get a pair of syncable SD consumer cams. That won't deliver the best 3D and not the control you need for professional production, but we'll be able to practice on timing and framing, editing, basic post workflow etc.
I'd like to play around with all kinds of shots and sequences, just to get a feel for filming depth.
A consumer 3D monitor will do for starters I think. Maybe some Nvidia bundle.
Once we know what we're doing and feel safe with creating 3D content, we'll take it a step further and try rental rigs like the P+S mirror rig.
But I'd still like to build my own one when the time is right. Maybe Scarlets are out and working until then and we can skip all the machie vision and capture mumbo-jumbo.
I don't want to rush things as all that stuff is pretty expensive for a small company like us and I don't intend to spend lots of k€ on components I won't use for a long time in a professional workflow.
 
Benni, to study s3D feeling I suggest to use 2 cheap projectors (important they should have lens-shift controls, Epson has some nice LCD projectors which work fine) and a good silverlscreen (base at least 2 meters) ruther then a 3D-monitor. s3D is much more then a simple feeling of the depth of the objects or actors. Once you start to understand the empathical power of feeling (!) the distances between the actors, or the excitment of the empathical perception of the texture of objects and its power for storytelling you start a new life:))

Good luck
Istvan
 
I think a 120Hz projector used with shutter glasses like the Sanyo PLV-Z3000 (around $2000) might be even better and cheaper because you don't need a silver screen. And you can put an extra 120Hz monitor next to it and compare the small-screen/big-screen 3D effect instantly.
 
Benni Diez said:
I think a 120Hz projector used with shutter glasses like the Sanyo PLV-Z3000 (around $2000) might be even better and cheaper because you don't need a silver screen. And you can put an extra 120Hz monitor next to it and compare the small-screen/big-screen 3D effect instantly.
Click to expand...

You need silverscreen with every pol-filters approach. Only using the Infitec solution you can use normal screens. Infitec is a spin-off of Mercedes and is based in Ulm, Germany http://www.infitec.net/infi_e.html.

Dolby uses their technology, and improved it a lot.

But back to the pol-slolution: those filters eat up a lot of light and s3D experience is only good if you have a lot of lights pushed to the screen. So even considering all the problems on having 2 projectors, you just get more light to the screen then with only one.

But if you really want a monitor solution too then in Hamburg is a person, named Stahl who builds a screensolution with 2 monitors using a beamsplitter. http://www.virtual-adventure.net/.
Good luck
Istvan
 
It’s amazing how the various 3d display and viewing technologies leap-frog over each other over time. Things that were once considered nearly dead have a way of coming back, as well as new technologies that fifteen years ago would have been considered very unlikely or absurd.

Fifteen years ago I remember using a single Barco CRT projector with a normal high contrast screen and many pairs (40) of Lenny Lipton’s CrystalEyes for demonstrating VR simulations of St Peters Basilica and Nefertari’s Tomb (Getty project/Infobyte). It looked great (no polarizing/silver screen required) but the room had to be completely blacked out so the image was strong on a fifteen foot wide screen. Projector cost $45k, glasses then were about $1200 a piece, but could be rented, Si Onyx Reality Engine $400k.

One of the weakness of the system was that it was not easy to demonstrate to larger audiences because of the expense and number of shutter glasses that would be needed, but never the less it was a shutter glasses system, one projector at 120HZ no silver screen, no polarizers.

Throughout the past 15 years for desk top VR and 3d/stereo we have been using CRTs and CrystalEyes. About twelve years ago many folks also switched to an alternative system using the Lenny Lipton Z screen (an active switching polarizer bezel that fits over a monitor and you wear much cheaper passive polarizing glasses). The idea is that one Z-screen was cheaper than five pairs of CrystalEyes, so you could show it to small groups (I never liked the low contrast and internal reflection between the monitor and the Z screen, and the polarizing effect seemed a little weak, but never the less represented a practical solution for geospatial photogrammetric work.). One would think that the Z screen would become a dead duck over time…

So to present to larger audiences (when I set up my company in 2003) we purchased twin Epson projectors, a twelve foot silver screen, linear polarizer’s and glasses (much sharper and clearer than circular!). However we were using frame sequential stereo output from our 3d Labs cards as we used CRT monitors 120HZ and Crystal Eyes for day to day work. So to carry out what Benni is talking about here, is that we had to use CYVIZ frame sequential to dual passive convertor box (an amazing piece of signal processing equipment that still sells for $10K). That way we could present to large audiences in an affordable way (because passive eyewear is cheaper than many pairs of shutter glasses), but still control the system from a smaller CRT (120Hz/shutter glasses). We were even able to drive two stereo screens side by side when we borrowed more equipment. This was a valuable learning experience as we could figure out how to adjust parallaxes for small screen and large screen (just what Benni wants to get a feel of). That system (we still have it) cost back then in 2003, about $35k).

One would think that dual projection systems with polarizer’s would be the way to go, however, with the advent of the Nvidia glasses being about $120 a piece, and 120Hz capable projectors now being very affordable thanks to new LCD and DLP technology, this now becomes a real game changer, (i.e. no dual projectors and no silver screens, but active eyewear instead). Viewsonic 120Hz DLP projector (although 1024 by 768) for $1300 or perhaps the higher res LCD projector from Sanyo (that Benni indicated) for $2400, plus new Viewsonic LCD monitor (1280x1024) for about $400, graphics card ($1200). This means that Benni can experiment with large screen and small screen stereo simultaneously for less than $4k a capability that would have cost him $40k just five years ago, (no CYVIZ converter box, dual projectors or silver screen required, but instead a frame sequential stereo system throughout). Back then one would not think that active shuttered systems would be the major driving force shaping the S3D industry today.

So what Istvan is advocating is a dual passive system throughout, beam splitter monitor, dual projectors etc. which is very good, whereas just this year it is now possible to also have a frame sequential system throughout, for monitors and projectors because of this year’s new technologies. The real sticking point for a mixed system (frame sequential and dual passive) is the graphics card, especially if you need to show the interface capability of your software on screen. NVIDIA cards for a brief period could do dual passive (in a window) and frame sequential stereo thereby negating the need for an expensive CYVIZ box, but unfortunately NVIDIA retracted this capability so now you can only show dual passive as a full screen bleed effectively on separate monitors or just carry out stereo in a window frame sequentially.

The thing that’s really amazing to me is that the two most unlikely technologies on the planet DLP and Lenny Lipton’s Z screen have gotten together to create 3d digital cinema, and hence a new industry (for which I and many others are very grateful for). Ten years ago very few people would have ever have thought that this would be the way to go or that (inter-digitated) frame sequential DLP TVs would make into people’s homes to pave the way for 3d at home.

P.S. Has anyone seen the 120Hz LCD Sanyo do frame sequential/shutter glasses stereo ?
 
Eric, I follow you all over with your describtion except when you talk about the dual-projection system.

The very best s3D experience I ever had in my life was last year during NAB, when Pace (a company who knows well about s3D) projected their "personal" show on a dual 4k Sony system with linear polarization, where the distance between the screen and the projector was probably less then 15 meters.

If I'm well informed then the Sanyo 120Hz monitor (I suppose we talk about the PLV-Z3000) screens in DATA-mode at a max 1200 ANSI Lumens. I haven't yet touched that device, but I suppose that in Cinema-mode, where you see the better blacks, much less lights gets to the screen.

I agree that there are issues with a dual system, but to learn to see all the possibilitis a s3D system can give, we should choose the way which gives the max possible lightoutput to the screen. I still believe that in going low-cost the dual system brings the best possible s3D experience for its money..
Istvan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top