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 :)

Scarlet - Motion Capture Camera?

Peter Majtan

Peter Majtan

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Messages
3,986
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Website
www.petermajtan.com
Brook Willard has mentioned in his "facts" about "What we know..." (about Scarlet)

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7200

... that it is going to be a "Motion Capture Camera". Did he mean actual Motion Capture Camera (as in captured 3D motion of subjects, usually done by multi-camera setups - being the "proper" use for the term), or was he just referring to variable frame-rate (camera "controlled" from slow to high-speed motion frame-rate)?

I bet is the latter, but if the camera could capture Z-depth, this would give us the ability to track its (and the subjects) motion in 3D space and use the information for 3D animation and compositing in post...

That would be AWSOME!!!
 
I'm fairly sure that the motion capture quote was a response to someone asking if Scarlet was going to be an SLR still camera. So, I doubt that it would capture z-depth (although I agree it would be awesome).
 
Stephen Gentle said:
I'm fairly sure that the motion capture quote was a response to someone asking if Scarlet was going to be an SLR still camera. So, I doubt that it would capture z-depth (although I agree it would be awesome).
Click to expand...

Therefore he should have stated Motion Picture Camera instead of Capture - it is very misleading, altho I am sure it was not meant to be...

Brook - could You please fix this if it is this case...?

It will prevent others from getting confused...

Cheers
 
Ethan Cooper said:
There is nothing for Brook to fix, that's exactly how Jim said it.
Click to expand...

My bet - Jim, could You please elaborate (if You can)?

And then...

Brook - could You adjust Your post (if Jim does elaborate...)?
 
That is quite true. In this case the development must have found it quite entertaining to watch all the other posts of list the 5 most and its likes.

However one should examine why was the pocket size feature necessary to mention? On top of that there is also the trade mark scarlet 2k. And there is always the last known feature that Scratch will support Scarlet. I’m mainly working with AE and I do know it makes fair use of z-depth but I’m not sure if Scratch even has that support (by all means correct me if I’m wrong). Looking into the press material from Assimilate, Scarlet is mentioned as RED Digital Cinema’s New Scarlet Pocket Professional Camera.

So I think this pretty much covers it all. Although I must say, a z-depth feature to a camera will be extremely handy for post work!

There is also this little guy,http://dvice.com/archives/2008/04/toshibas_unbeli.php
we are certainly not far from a pocket sized pro cinema camera.
 
DSNR said:
So I think this pretty much covers it all. Although I must say, a z-depth feature to a camera will be extremely handy for post work!
Click to expand...

So aside from being RED, Pocket, Professional... It'll capture z-depth?

If that's true I'll understand why they kept saying we were going to be blown away.

:biggrin:
 
Unfortunately I think we should leave the Z-depth out of the picture. Professional MoCap requires an integrated system of many cameras and a complex system to translate the information, certainly nothing that could fit to any pocket. And even with MoCap the output is not a z-depth picture that is something similar to an alpha channel it is more in the lines of XYZ points in an enclosed room that are transferred to the 3d environment.

To build a real life z-depth image, oh gosh, you would require a system with many small lenses running in parallel at slightly different angles creating multi-aperture array. Although this is in development right it will be more than a few years before we see it public. Even then the image will require further processing to compensate the many 2D pictures into a z-depth image. You can go the other way and zap a fast laser at anything that stand in front of the camera, but something has to catch that beam other than your object :)

All I do know is that scarlet is a strong orangy red color. We have 4 more days to go. I assume we’ll all have our answer then.
 
DSNR said:
Unfortunately I think we should leave the Z-depth out of the picture. Professional MoCap requires an integrated system of many cameras and a complex system to translate the information, certainly nothing that could fit to any pocket. And even with MoCap the output is not a z-depth picture that is something similar to an alpha channel it is more in the lines of XYZ points in an enclosed room that are transferred to the 3d environment.

To build a real life z-depth image, oh gosh, you would require a system with many small lenses running in parallel at slightly different angles creating multi-aperture array. Although this is in development right it will be more than a few years before we see it public. Even then the image will require further processing to compensate the many 2D pictures into a z-depth image. You can go the other way and zap a fast laser at anything that stand in front of the camera, but something has to catch that beam other than your object :)

All I do know is that scarlet is a strong orangy red color. We have 4 more days to go. I assume we’ll all have our answer then.
Click to expand...

Not at all...

A) for Z-depth You need only ONE camera (unlike for Motion Capture - which is what You are talking about).

B) Using modern 3D tracking technologies (such as those used in Boujou, RealViz and others) you could use Z-depth to track and calculate the relative position (and motion) between the subject and the camera and any other static (or moving) objects in Your scene.

C) You are talking about acquisition for 3D projection (To build a real life z-depth image, oh gosh, you would require a system with many small lenses running in parallel at slightly different angles creating multi-aperture array).
Z-Depth uses "radar-like" waves or laser that bounces of the objects in Your scene and gives You the distance from the camera in form on B&W image.

D) Z-depth is not designed to "see behind" object - You will only get the "depth" info for visible pixels (which is what matters). Don't mix Z-depth with 3D projection projects...

E) Your info is way out of date. There are plenty of cameras that are designed to capture Z-depth already and available commercially - I am sure there will be some at NAB...

Please do at least a "little research" before You argue terms and facts...

No hard feelings thou...
 
Its true and definitely possible that a z-depth image can be acquired via acoustic imaging devices. If that’s what you were referring to as “radar-like”. Again I might be not up to date, but as far as I know there is no camera on the market that I know of that capture large moving picture and has a built-in acoustic imaging device.
So I took some time to “research” or what should actually be called “quickly surfing the net” . And you were right, I am out of date, there are few cameras out there and they quite cleverly make use of infra-red light. (http://www.3dvsystems.com/) for intense, is one example that I found.
I’m sorry, I didn’t have the time for a “little research” before I wrote the post, I took a small break from work to write in the forum since moving picture is a hobby of mine. Now I took another much longer one, and have to get back to work on genuine research (unfortunately not in this field though, more in the line of animals :) ).
 
DSNR said:
Its true and definitely possible that a z-depth image can be acquired via acoustic imaging devices. If that’s what you were referring to as “radar-like”. Again I might be not up to date, but as far as I know there is no camera on the market that I know of that capture large moving picture and has a built-in acoustic imaging device.
So I took some time to “research” or what should actually be called “quickly surfing the net” . And you were right, I am out of date, there are few cameras out there and they quite cleverly make use of infra-red light. (http://www.3dvsystems.com/) for intense, is one example that I found.
I’m sorry, I didn’t have the time for a “little research” before I wrote the post, I took a small break from work to write in the forum since moving picture is a hobby of mine. Now I took another much longer one, and have to get back to work on genuine research (unfortunately not in this field though, more in the line of animals :) ).
Click to expand...

As I've said before - no hard feelings...
Good luck with Your research!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top