Where's the realtime stereoscopic 3D green screen keyer nodes in Nuke?

[Clyde DeSouza]

As we all know, creating good stereoscopic 3D images and footage is never baked in at the time of capture. Nuke, Aftereffects etc are standard tools in post.

After all the RED footage, shot on expensive rigs gets reviewed, it goes through Nuke, After effects etc to sweeten or tweak for better stereo.
With computing power now getting better and cheaper, I see the line between production and post prod getting very blurred.

I myself always carry high end computers (I have a fetish for portablility however) to sets....

to that end... have compositing software kept up with the hardware trends?
http://realvision.ae/blog/2011/05/realtime-stereoscopic-3d-green-screen-keying-on-location/

Regards
Clyde

 

[paulherrin]

...you'd be much better off with a dedicated system that uses the same principles as the keyers available for those softwares. i see no great benefit in developing that into either software. i would be much happier with their r&d funding to go towards post-tools, not real-time production. while i think it's certainly preferable for many reasons to have a background or virtual set that can be seen on monitor real time, that can already be done. it's not that difficult to determine the quality of a greenscreen shot, especially when waveforms and scopes are available. if you have nothing else, adobe onlocation has those. also, a guy i've seen around here developed V-Scope, which I highly recommend.

 

[Clyde DeSouza]

Thanks for your thoughts Paul. It is nice to have another point of view of fellow professionals on this subject.

>>while i think it's certainly preferable for many reasons to have a background or virtual set that can be seen on monitor real time, that can already be done. it's not that difficult to determine the quality of a greenscreen shot, especially when waveforms and scopes are available.

The thing is, i'd like to be a 100% sure that the tools (when i say "i" i mean the post prod dept) that I will be using for the final composite will give me 100% results, or at least will allow me to make a judgement call based on the key that gets pulled with this toolset (nuke, aftereffects or even fusion etc) while on location itself.

While vectorscopes certainly give measurements with scientific accuracy...having the tools of the trade allow me to go beyond simple green-screen key quality. Like I mentioned, with highperformance computing becoming a commodity, as well as portable, it's nice to blur that line between what is post and on-location and in real time

Regards
Clyde

 

[M Most]

The thing is, i'd like to be a 100% sure that the tools (when i say "i" i mean the post prod dept) that I will be using for the final composite will give me 100% results, or at least will allow me to make a judgement call based on the key that gets pulled with this toolset (nuke, aftereffects or even fusion etc) while on location itself.

I would suggest that if you're looking for "100% perfect" results, you should probably never do any green screen shooting, because that is just not realistic. It's an inexact science at best. You're dealing with real world light physics, and you're dealing with real world imperfections, as well as unpredictable actors that will give you performance moments that are stellar, but technically imperfect (crossing tracking marks, stepping off the screen, casting floor or wall shadows that are undesirable, etc.). The only way you'll ever get "100% perfect" matte extractions is by using CG objects. Anything that you photograph will yield less than that by definition.

 

[paulherrin]

Mike makes a good point, but green screen work is pretty standard these days and many times necessary. While I would always say shoot on location if possible and without a greenscreen unless necessary, sometimes that's the only reasonable choice. In that case, get a visual effects supervisor that's a really good compositor, who will be able to look at the shot even without scopes and know if it's good or not. And always reduce your green (or blue) spill by blocking as much as the screen (or floor) as possible with curtains, etc. And certainly don't bounce any light off the screen once it's lit correctly.

It is always great to have some neat on-set tools though, that never hurts as long as it doesn't slow down production. And I suppose there may be a day in the future where pulling a high-quality initial key won't have to wait until post, but if it's that easy, it's not going to take that much post-production time. There could be a day later than that where you could do your final composite on set with the proper support... but we'll see. That brings up other issues about continuity and such, it is nice to be able to sit down in a different environment and look it over before you finesse the composite.

If you're doing that for every shot on set, it is going to take time. While automated software might get you somewhere in range for viewing purposes, there's a human element to the process. Tweaking every shot on set would be inefficient when you can spend less time with better tools in post focusing only on frames that are going into the final composite. I like to have at least a one-light of the grading when I'm compositing, that can change a whole lot of things technically and creatively.

 

[M Most]

Mike makes a good point, but green screen work is pretty standard these days and many times necessary. While I would always say shoot on location if possible and without a greenscreen unless necessary, sometimes that's the only reasonable choice. In that case, get a visual effects supervisor that's a really good compositor, who will be able to look at the shot even without scopes and know if it's good or not. And always reduce your green (or blue) spill by blocking as much as the screen (or floor) as possible with curtains, etc. And certainly don't bounce any light off the screen once it's lit correctly.

I didn't say it wasn't necessary. I said it was imperfect. And it is, regardless of how meticulous you are and regardless of how much experience you have as either a VFX supervisor (I have 8 years doing that) and/or a compositor (I have almost 13 years doing that). Having said that, your suggestion of masking off excess screen area is a good one, as is the suggestion to avoid spill from other set lighting.

 

[paulherrin]

you're absolutely right. another reason why it's nice to have some extra resolution! other than that, we just have to do the best we can... and it tends to work out