RED 3D Camera??

[chuck colburn]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Not meaning to belabor a point; but to me, Avatar was Dances With Wolves in space."

Ahahahahah! Good one.

 

[C_Skaff]

How about a Scarlet 2/3" 3D brain? With two mini-PL mounts... Could the mini primes be small enough to allow 2.5" interocular distance?

Inspired by the Ikonoskop A-Cam3D

A 3D-camera with only one viewfinder???
Isn't that like having a stereo mic, but only one earpice headphone

 

[vsv]

A 3D-camera with only one viewfinder???
Isn't that like having a stereo mic, but only one earpice headphone

This is André de Toth special edition cam

 

[Stephen Strangways]

The shallow DoF in Avatar didn't bother me at all, and I had quite expected going in that it would, from what I have read.

What did bother me was some of the fast movement or panning. The good old "judder" seemed really pronounced and flickery when it alternated from one eye to the next. I left the movie thinking, "well, shallow DoF just might stick around in 3D, but we might have to abandon 24 fps with a 180 degree shutter."

 

[Bruce Allen]

All that is well and good. But without convergence you have no control over where the window is.

In post, you can blow up both eyes 10% and then shift them horizontally, so yes you can set the convergence that way.

To me, it is just as essential as the interocular distance. And, BOTH should be adjustable in a good 3D system.

Agree it'd be nice to have both adjustable, but interocular.

If I were shooting POV shots for the next Slumdog Millionaire, I'd probably use that Aaton camera.

There are a few things that I didn't like with respect to the Avatar experience:

The supplied glasses are too small and uncomfortable for prescription spectacles wearers. They'd be ok for a 15 min theme park ride, but not for a long movie.

Sorry you didn't enjoy! Which technology did you see it in? Real-D, Dolby or Xpand?

Personally I liked the 3D very much - and my parents seemed to enjoy it in South Africa too. They saw it in 2D first, 3D the second time, and went completely nuts about how good the 3D was. Out of my friends, about 80% prefer the 3D. And amongst those who prefer the 3D, the majority LOVE it - they go and see it twice or three times.

Hope you guys still put 3D and 48fps in Red 4K (your playback system) - to me it is actually more important than the 4K part.

I say this reluctantly - I'd have loved it if 3D sucked because doing vfx in 3D adds another whole layer of pain, especially for indies. Plus you have a less indie-friendly camera rig. I think it's here to stay though, so am going to embrace it. Especially since I just can't help liking the 3D films so much...

So, what are Red's plans for lightweight 3D with maximum flexibility in interocular? Those mirror rigs sure look cumbersome - if there were a way to shave off the width of the Red sensors blocks so that we can achieve a range of side-by-side interocular distances that meet our needs for 95% of shots, that'd be awesome, of course.

Otherwise I'll just stick 4 Scarlets side by side and synthesize my own OD using some fancy software not invented yet Hey, at least it'll be forward compatible for 50 years in the future when we're doing multi-view autostereoscopic (where you need 7-8 different views of an object).

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Graeme Nattress]

I saw it in RealD, which is not bad, and certainly a lot better than those Panasonic shutter glasses at CES. Put it like this - if I have to pay extra to see a movie in stereo, I'll keep my $ and see the flat version.

Graeme

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

It's interesting to mention that also Iconoscop A-Cam3D has two IMS mounts.

 

[Pedro Guimaraes]

Does anyone have any idea how I can get "any" info at all on the RED 3D Camera System?

Thanks.

As far as I know they are not developing a "3D camera". That would be great if they did.

2 scarlets/epics side by side still leaves the IO way too large for any usable kinda of shooting. So I don't count that. IMHO, we still need a beamsplitter for epic/scarlet 3D shooting.

To me a "3D camera" is one that is developed for 3D with 3D adjustments and preferably with on board recording.

Very few cameras fit this description. The 3DVX, The Panasonic, the old Ikagami 3D (standard def), This new A-cam, Gemini (35mm film) and probably a few other more obscure cameras.

On the issue of convergence that has been discussed.....I'm of the opinion of shooting parallel as much as you can. Leaving convergence for post. To be done by sliding images rather than toeing in cameras. For me the only reason to converge during a shoot is for live 3D broadcasts and naturally a few other situations.

anyways....I'm sure a few of the big camera manufacturers are busy working on purpose built 3D cameras. The annoucements of discovery, espn and sky about 3D broadcasting are big reasons to do that. Imagine all the thousands of hours of programming they will all need? There going to need some purpose built, self contained 3D cameras you can throw on your shoulder to do that!

Preferably one that adjust convergence by moving the sensors rather than toeing in the lenses. leaving the lenses to move just for IO adjustment. Purpose built high quality c-mount sized optics to offer us small IO's.

One of the major issues for these cameras will be zoom function. Very tricky function in 3D. (For many reasons.) Naturally it's what all broadcast camera MUST have. Dying to see what kind of 3D cameras we sill start seeing out there......it is a big challenge and not to be underestimated.

The flexibility of a beam splitter will take alot of cleaver engineering in a single camera system to make the use of a beam splitter obsolete. As much as I hate dealing with beamsplitters, they will be around for awhile. So go hit the gym! I can tell you my arms are getting more toned with all the beamsplitters/cameras I've had to lug around lately

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

Graeme maybe you will change your mind after you have incorporated
s3D functions into a REDworkflow. wink wink