interstellar Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Hi Everyone, I need advice on producing 3D (stereoscopic) animations; I know nothing about this and I would appreciate your words of wisdom. I read the Animator manual about rendering stereo, and I rendered a test. I put the left and right views side-by-side in this clip: http://www.joetucciarone.com/a_3D.mov If you cross your eyes, you can merge the images. I know it's hard to tell anything from so small an image, but are my settings approximately right? In my Camera/Stereo Tab, I set the "stereo separation" to 0.2 and the "Converge" to "in Infinity". Who sells software that can merge left-and-right renders? Where would I find glasses to view the merged clip, and do I need a special monitor on which to view the resulting 3D clip? Thank you very much for your help! Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S. Houtzager Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I have seen that topic before. Looks like Diego is working with it in AE and EI I believe.http://www.eias3d.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=638&highlight=stereoscopic Intuition - 3d Renderings and Graphics for Product and Architectural Development Atlanta GA http://www.intuitionusa.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I have seen that topic before. Looks like Diego is working with it in AE and EI I believe. http://www.eias3d.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=638&highlight=stereoscopic Hi S. Thank you very much for the link! Sincerely, Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtF Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Don't know about your settings, but I was able to cross my eyes and get the overlap. The depth looked good, even with about a two inch wide image. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted October 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 Don't know about your settings, but I was able to cross my eyes and get the overlap. The depth looked good, even with about a two inch wide image. Thank you for your opinion, Kurt! My first image was bigger but I couldn't sit far enough back and still reach my mouse to start the clip! Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJoly Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 Joe, Nice job! Your settings seems OK to me, the 3D depth is correct. One important thing to remember when making a cross-eyes test is to flip the Right and Left images otherwise the 3D effect is inverted. See "Anaglyph_Tutorial" attached. Have you see Barry Berman' 3D tools? http://www.3dtv.at/Index_en.aspx This is a place with interesting info: http://www.3dtv.at/Index_en.aspx Here is Your movie with Right and Left images reversed for Cross-eyed view: flip-R-L_3D.mov Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Hello Joe, Sorry I did not see this thread before. As Richard said you have to invert channels if you are testing the stereo separation and convergence with the Cross-eyed way. I have a little PC with a nvidia card + 3D vision Glasses Kit also from nvidia + Acer 3D monitor. On this way I can test convergence and stereo separation more precisely. I have some clients who ask me stereoscopic animations, generally everyone wants at some point in your scene put an object in -0 (objects flying off the screen into the room in which the viewer is). This you have to be careful because if the object touches the edges of the screen then produces a strange effect unpleasant. The bottom edge of the screen is that more tolerable -0 effect, after the one above, but the left and right edge is better not to touch with objects with a sharp -0 EFFECT or you stun people. Also if you want a meteorite hit the viewer over the head:P then you better make the object fade to transparent just before the object touch viewer head's, this avoid unpleasant visual effect. Is best to combine a few relaxed +0 stereo scenes (all objects inside the screen) and sometimes have a powerful -0 effect so 3D is nicer and people don't stress, the convergence point will determine if the object is in -0 or +0. You asked me how to compile the two channels to be seen with a shutter glases, on my case the 3D vision Glasses kit come with a realtime compiler viewer, so just load L and R channel separately and you see direclty. And for final master 3D TV I send the stereo pair to MSM in Munich and they do for me:), but be sure that next Toast version will come with a stereo compiler. I forget that you have to make your animation in 23,976 fps, if it is for 3D tv. I hope this help, please ask any thing more if you need. Cheers Diego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted October 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2011 Hello Joe, Sorry I did not see this thread before. As Richard said you have to invert channels if you are testing the stereo separation and convergence with the Cross-eyed way. I have a little PC with a nvidia card + 3D vision Glasses Kit also from nvidia + Acer 3D monitor. On this way I can test convergence and stereo separation more precisely. I have some clients who ask me stereoscopic animations, generally everyone wants at some point in your scene put an object in -0 (objects flying off the screen into the room in which the viewer is). This you have to be careful because if the object touches the edges of the screen then produces a strange effect unpleasant. The bottom edge of the screen is that more tolerable -0 effect, after the one above, but the left and right edge is better not to touch with objects with a sharp -0 EFFECT or you stun people. Also if you want a meteorite hit the viewer over the head:P then you better make the object fade to transparent just before the object touch viewer head's, this avoid unpleasant visual effect. Is best to combine a few relaxed +0 stereo scenes (all objects inside the screen) and sometimes have a powerful -0 effect so 3D is nicer and people don't stress, the convergence point will determine if the object is in -0 or +0. You asked me how to compile the two channels to be seen with a shutter glases, on my case the 3D vision Glasses kit come with a realtime compiler viewer, so just load L and R channel separately and you see direclty. And for final master 3D TV I send the stereo pair to MSM in Munich and they do for me:), but be sure that next Toast version will come with a stereo compiler. I forget that you have to make your animation in 23,976 fps, if it is for 3D tv. I hope this help, please ask any thing more if you need. Cheers Diego Hi Diego & Richard, Thank you very much for your advice. Richard, thanks for the tutorials and thank you for all the information, Diego. I'll be looking at all of this as soon as I can. Sincerely, Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted November 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Hi Everyone, I would really appreciate your thoughts on 3D productions. Do you see 3D movies at theaters, and do you like them? Do you own a 3D TV? Do you think 3D is here to stay? Basically, these are the same questions that someone asked on a DV Info forum (http://www.dvinfo.net/) last month. He received mostly negative responses when he asked people what they thought about the "success" of 3D. On the other hand, three companies who produce TV shows for the History & National Geographic channels have asked if my stuff is available in 3D. Before I dive in head-first, I thought I'd see what you all have to say . . . Thanks, Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted November 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Hi Everyone, I would really appreciate your thoughts on 3D productions. Do you see 3D movies at theaters, and do you like them? Do you own a 3D TV? Do you think 3D is here to stay? Basically, these are the same questions that someone asked on a DV Info forum (http://www.dvinfo.net/) last month. He received mostly negative responses when he asked people what they thought about the "success" of 3D. On the other hand, three companies who produce TV shows for the History & National Geographic channels have asked if my stuff is available in 3D. Before I dive in head-first, I thought I'd see what you all have to say . . . Thanks, Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigayoda Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Regarding 3D TV or watching 3D movies. I've tried to watch some of the recent movies ever since Avatar (my favorite 3D for now). I'm in the camp that may come off negative. I don't own a 3D TV and don't plan to get one since the movies that are using 3D force the 3D. By that I mean that unlike Avatar that help you immerse into the scenery other movies either by production or sheer joy of throwing something close to the viewer has prevented me from both bothering to learn 3D(stereo) or to purchase a TV. I even got a hold of a nintendo 3DS and was actually blown away by what that 3D action can deliver but then the monitor optics or angles at times destroyed the experience. I've seen the new holograms and I think they really are the next evolution and have worked with an AV company that used angular projection to yield some great results. The technology that was used was patented by this company (for projection) http://www.musion.co.uk/. If holographic technology gets refined as I have witnessed I think that that, might be a better experience than the current 3D. George Lucas has eluded to this technology in the past and as recent as this article I quickly pulled up. http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/30/cinemacon-2011-james-cameron-george-lucas-and-jeffrey-katzenberg-discuss-the-future-of-movies Hologram discussion is towards the middle of the article Parallax 3D. Hope this doesn't dissuade you. The way I see it those who work on 3D stereo now will later be seen as the film makers who used real pyrotechnics and puppets for creatures and now use CG. Once 3D parallax is out if its as successful as only a live experience can tell you how alive that 3d really is. It's a gradual evolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigayoda Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Regarding 3D TV or watching 3D movies. I've tried to watch some of the recent movies ever since Avatar (my favorite 3D for now). I'm in the camp that may come off negative. I don't own a 3D TV and don't plan to get one since the movies that are using 3D force the 3D. By that I mean that unlike Avatar that help you immerse into the scenery other movies either by production or sheer joy of throwing something close to the viewer has prevented me from both bothering to learn 3D(stereo) or to purchase a TV. I even got a hold of a nintendo 3DS and was actually blown away by what that 3D action can deliver but then the monitor optics or angles at times destroyed the experience. I've seen the new holograms and I think they really are the next evolution and have worked with an AV company that used angular projection to yield some great results. The technology that was used was patented by this company (for projection) http://www.musion.co.uk/. If holographic technology gets refined as I have witnessed I think that that, might be a better experience than the current 3D. George Lucas has eluded to this technology in the past and as recent as this article I quickly pulled up. http://www.badassdigest.com/2011/03/30/cinemacon-2011-james-cameron-george-lucas-and-jeffrey-katzenberg-discuss-the-future-of-movies Hologram discussion is towards the middle of the article Parallax 3D. Hope this doesn't dissuade you. The way I see it those who work on 3D stereo now will later be seen as the film makers who used real pyrotechnics and puppets for creatures and now use CG. Once 3D parallax is out if its as successful as only a live experience can tell you how alive that 3d really is. It's a gradual evolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Hi Joe, The first stereoscopic images are from 1842 from that date essentially nothing has changed and seems that will not change in the future unless we grow a third eye or four:P No doubt in the coming years will be produced everything in stereoscopic 3D. Actually the visualization systems are still a bit primitive and sometimes cause dizziness and not very nice, but within a short time, 3D systems will be better and better. The good thing here is that your stereoscopic work may be adapted safely to future technological changes, just as now you can see daguerreotypes from 1842 in perfect quality with Shutter Glasses. So yes! absolutely a good idea to prepare your space animations to be viewed in stereo, please do it I want to see. I have seen very good work in 3D Shutter glasses, I assure you that have been hair-raising being surrounded by prehistoric sharks:) Cheers Diego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Hi Joe, The first stereoscopic images are from 1842 from that date essentially nothing has changed and seems that will not change in the future unless we grow a third eye or four:P No doubt in the coming years will be produced everything in stereoscopic 3D. Actually the visualization systems are still a bit primitive and sometimes cause dizziness and not very nice, but within a short time, 3D systems will be better and better. The good thing here is that your stereoscopic work may be adapted safely to future technological changes, just as now you can see daguerreotypes from 1842 in perfect quality with Shutter Glasses. So yes! absolutely a good idea to prepare your space animations to be viewed in stereo, please do it I want to see. I have seen very good work in 3D Shutter glasses, I assure you that have been hair-raising being surrounded by prehistoric sharks:) Cheers Diego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJoly Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 My wife and I are 3D buffs... We simply adore the stereoscopic effect that gives us the impression of depth in movies or pictures. In every trip we make, we always take pictures and a couple of them are taken so we can turn them into anaglyphs. We rarely miss a 3D animated movie. Some «normal» movies are horrible in 3D. We ADORED Avatar. Lets say we saw it more than once... We tried 3D television and found it despicable. It's like watching a movie played in a fish tank... That is something we will never buy. I check some 3D videogames in a store and was impress with the effect. Still, I would not buy a 3D TV Set. I will always love 3D but not in every situation. That may change with holographic display... But not for now. Some members of my family simply cannot watch 3D movies without getting a terrible headhache. Check out what Oscar-winning film editor Walter Murch has to say about it: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJoly Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 My wife and I are 3D buffs... We simply adore the stereoscopic effect that gives us the impression of depth in movies or pictures. In every trip we make, we always take pictures and a couple of them are taken so we can turn them into anaglyphs. We rarely miss a 3D animated movie. Some «normal» movies are horrible in 3D. We ADORED Avatar. Lets say we saw it more than once... We tried 3D television and found it despicable. It's like watching a movie played in a fish tank... That is something we will never buy. I check some 3D videogames in a store and was impress with the effect. Still, I would not buy a 3D TV Set. I will always love 3D but not in every situation. That may change with holographic display... But not for now. Some members of my family simply cannot watch 3D movies without getting a terrible headhache. Check out what Oscar-winning film editor Walter Murch has to say about it: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted November 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2011 Thank, guys, for your thoughts on this subject. Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interstellar Posted November 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2011 Thank, guys, for your thoughts on this subject. Joe T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.