Dimensionalization of footage

[Ross Isaacs]

Can anyone recommend a cost effective way of dimensionalization of 2D Epic footage ? We are looking at shooting a 3D film and a component of the film will need to be shot in 2D and dimensionalized.

 

[paulherrin]

pretty sure you could manage it in after effects... otherwise, nuke/ocula

 

[Ross Isaacs]

pretty sure you could manage it in after effects... otherwise, nuke/ocula

I am pretty sure it is far more complex than that?

 

[M Most]

I am pretty sure it is far more complex than that?

Only if you consider knowing what needs to be separated, very large amounts of roto work that must be close to perfect, paintbacks of areas that are now obscured, 3D object creation and matchmoving, relief and depth maps that must be created by hand, and creation and hand animation of stand-in 3D geometry for things like moving people followed by projection mapping of the photography to the stand-in geometry to be complex.

Stereoscopic conversion is a highly specialized art that is done well by only a handful of companies. If you need that kind of work done, it is not something to attempt in a do it yourself environment unless you've done it before or can enlist the help of people who have. As my friend Tim Sassoon (owner of Sassoon Film Design, one of those handful of companies) is fond of pointing out, there are no real secrets to doing conversion work. But that hardly means that just anyone can do it.

 

[paulherrin]

yeah, what he said.

 

[Ross Isaacs]

Only if you consider knowing what needs to be separated, very large amounts of roto work that must be close to perfect, paintbacks of areas that are now obscured, 3D object creation and matchmoving, relief and depth maps that must be created by hand, and creation and hand animation of stand-in 3D geometry for things like moving people followed by projection mapping of the photography to the stand-in geometry to be complex.

Stereoscopic conversion is a highly specialized art that is done well by only a handful of companies. If you need that kind of work done, it is not something to attempt in a do it yourself environment unless you've done it before or can enlist the help of people who have. As my friend Tim Sassoon (owner of Sassoon Film Design, one of those handful of companies) is fond of pointing out, there are no real secrets to doing conversion work. But that hardly means that just anyone can do it.

Yes M I agree
I will be shooting deep underwater from 100m to 600m and there will be little or no background as the subjects will be illuminated by artificial light. I have had quotes of $60,000 per minute but am trying to find a company which can do a reasonable job for far less as they would be dealing with far simpler images relative to a topside shoot.

 

[paulherrin]

i'm pretty sure i can do it for less than 60k/min...

what would make the images more complex is - say you've got one of those prickly lookin' fish with a bunch of pokers stickin' off it. you may very well be creating and tracking/animating a 3d model of that thing by the end of it. it's not as simple as "cut out fish, put him in the foreground"

are you trying to do conversion for your whole film or is there a specific sequence that you can't shoot stereoscopically?

 

[Ross Isaacs]

i'm pretty sure i can do it for less than 60k/min...

what would make the images more complex is - say you've got one of those prickly lookin' fish with a bunch of pokers stickin' off it. you may very well be creating and tracking/animating a 3d model of that thing by the end of it. it's not as simple as "cut out fish, put him in the foreground"

are you trying to do conversion for your whole film or is there a specific sequence that you can't shoot stereoscopically?

We estimate that up to 20 minutes of the program might require dimensionalization. The main body of 3D material will be shot on our Deep Atom beam splitter rig. The 2D material would be shot on a single Epic X.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Yes M I agree
I will be shooting deep underwater from 100m to 600m and there will be little or no background as the subjects will be illuminated by artificial light. I have had quotes of $60,000 per minute but am trying to find a company which can do a reasonable job for far less as they would be dealing with far simpler images relative to a topside shoot.

$60,000 per minute is very, very inexpensive from what I hear from the half-dozen companies in LA that do this.

 

[Ross Isaacs]

$60,000 per minute is very, very inexpensive from what I hear from the half-dozen companies in LA that do this.

That is what I was afraid of!

 

[Björn Benckert]

I am pretty sure it is far more complex than that?

How much footage is it that needs to be "dimensionalized" We have done some work buy using 3DSMAX and our proprietary plugins for nuke. If the imagery is not to complex it looks quite good. We where budgeting for a project and then it we came down to about 19k USD / 30 seconds. But it's off coruse then dependent on the pictures. Number of shoot etc.

 

[Joseph Coleman]

You might want to check out Speedshape.com, get in contact with them. I am a lead conversion artist there. They are very fair with their pricing.

 

[Eric Lange]

All good advice and recommendations…

You might want to track down an individual that has the skills but might be more cost effective.

I know Bernard Mendiburu did a lot of good early dimensionalization stuff for example a really good looking 3d version of the original Family Guy Star Wars Episode (commercially contracted).

Just Google his name and track him down he is fairly accessible or at least used to be…

Maybe he’s too busy giving lectures but probably could put you in contact with an individual that “can” do it (cost effectively) or get you up and running if it seems you guys have a knack for it.

Cheers,

Eric

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Ross,

unfortunately for you I have bad news, besides the fact that I strongly advise against doing any Post 3D separation, for more then one reason I leave yet to be answered here...


The only facilities I respect are only oh wait ONE!!!


Few respected Directors, have searched extremely exhaustively for this very same solution, and both James and George have found such solution, however their cost is well in the 250K per minute...

After that there is the actual Post work, more money... For you there is an added element, WATER PARTICLES, this will yet place an other obstacle in the way of separation of anything and of course cost more money.

However it is possible, just needs a TONE of CASH!!


My question is since you will be shooting on the Deep Atom with Atom and Epic why do you need this in post?

Is this for additional material you already have?

Any way, what also will need to be considered of course, is the amount of frames, and the material itself, as to determine what and how much of the content per frame needs separation and conversion.

Not just the Per Minute rate, even so the time is determined by what is in each frame, or second of the footage, it is more important to see the delivery of such material.

What comes cheap brings cheap results, as simple as that, don't even go near any one facility saying that they would bring cost effective solution to your needs...


GUESS WHAT?


It does not happen ever in your favor, you need Highly Skilled Qualified people to do this process, and its not an easy one, or a short one, and also need powerful computers.

So I really hope that you get the budget to get it done right my friend.

And don't believe those that spread rumors around that Titanic 3D Conversion with the 4K remastering was to be done for less the 10 Million dollars,
it was budgeted initially for 18 Millions with over 300 people working on it, don't ask were that budget went now...

But then again, if you dived 18 Millions by 194 Titanic minutes, then the cost is just Shy of 100k per minute, that is if it was to stay on Budget which of course it will not...


Any ways, I LOVE underwater 3D well done material, so I really hope you get it done right Ross!!

 

[Bruce Allen]

Dear Ross

My 2c: if you're looking for the absolute best deal... think of this from the perspective of the vendor. They are taking a huge risk by just agreeing to a flat rate per minute regardless of content, so they will of course price a sizable profit margin in. Because if they get tricky footage and a client that is cantankerous or demanding revisions... they will probably be working at a loss.

If I were budgeting this I would feel uneasy about going below $60,000 without seeing what the actual footage looks like, or having a relationship with the client, or having previous guarantees.

So, you need to work with them to minimize their risk, and in turn you'll be rewarded with a better quote.

Suggestions:
1. Be explicit about what is "good enough" for you. Do a test.
2. If possible, either wait until the footage has been shot... or provide explicit promises RE the content of the footage... AS in "here's an example. We promise that everything's going to be damn near identical. If it's not, we'll be prepared to pay more."
3. Possibly a flat rate is not a good idea - if you think you're going to approve stuff really quickly, then getting the vendor to bill you per day / week of work or per revision might help?

One thing: if it's just a fish in the distance against a defocused blue background... it's not going to be fantastic. Even if you make the fish kinda round.

3D is all about having background, mid, and fg. Look at Hugo, for example.

Rather than trying to get things perfectly modeled, fins rotoed, etc... your budget might be better spent just pushing the 2D footage back a little and adding cg stereo water bubbles in the FG I am only half joking...

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Craig Parkes]

As an audience member, I probably agree with Bruce the most. I don't expect every shot to be mind blowing 3D and if the effect is very minimal in some scenes, and it is becuase you simply could not capture that footage in 3D, I'd certainly prefer less going on than a poor 3D effect that could come from low cost post 3D. Maybe something to discuss with your distributors?

 

[Bob Gundu]

I was a senior compositor for IMAX where we converted about 7 feature films to 3D starting with Superman Returns. We had a team of 300 people, from rotoscoping, 3D modeling, and compositing. We were confident that we were the best people out there doing these conversions. It was a highly skilled team that was artist driven combined with the best technology. But guess what... we were also the most expensive. Competition was too fierce and IMAX is no longer in this business. Too bad, it was a nice gig to have over the past 5 years.