Cesar Rubio

There are a few basic and simple rules for good stereo 3-D photography (they apply to video as well). THE 1/30 RULE: The 1/30 Rule refers to that the Stereo Base or separation between lenses (from center to center) should be no more than 1/30 the distance of the NEAREST object to the camera lenses. Example: For a Normal Stereo Effect (Ortho Stereo) the Stereo Base is of 2.5" or 6.5cm (65mm). You multiply 6.5x30 and that gives you 195 cms Or 1.95mts. So your nearest (not necessary the main) subject, has to be at least 1.95mts away from the 3-D camera lenses. ORTHO STEREO: Ortho Stereo refers to a normal view of things like we see them with our own eyes. The Stereo Base (or interaxial) is the distance between lenses from center to center and must be 2.5" or 65mm (6.5cm) HYPO STEREO: Hypo Stereo Is not the same as Hyper Stereo, and actually is the opposite, scenes and objects appear to grow larger and is used to make appear normal objects or people like if they were bigger or giants. Other use for hypo stereo is to be able to record insects or tiny objects (Macro stereo work) In order to use hypo stereo properly, the 1/30 rule s a good starting point (usually with measurements in mm.) For 3-D photography of inanimate objects and scenes usually 1 camera is used on a slide bar, changing positions for the second picture to be taken. For 3-D video, if the cameras are small enough to permit a side by side shooting it would be ok, if not, then a Beam Splitter rig must be used. One of the 3-D movies that amazed me, was the IMAX movie Bugs 3D, where they were able to film tiny insects in 3-D. That was never been done before, and it was a breakthrough achievement by a team led by Peter Parks. HYPER STEREO: Hyper Stereo derivates from the Greek prefix "hyper" that means above or beyond, and in 3-D use is achieved by increasing the stereo base (distance between lenses) to make distant objects or scenes appear with sufficient depth, in order to have the correct stereo base you have to take into account the 1/30 rule to have a proper 3-D effect. In 3-D photography this can be achieved with a single camera and successive exposures (for inanimate objects or scenes), or with 2 cameras (spaced some distance apart) and fired simultaneously. There are 2 ways of interpreting a hyper stereo picture or video, one is to think of the observer as a giant looking at a smaller world. The other way is to think of the scene as a shrinked model of the real scene. Now, in real world use how can I apply such rules? It would be great if we could use Ortho Stereo (65mm SB) with a 35mm Focal Length (in FF 35mm photography) all the time just like the Stereo Realist camera used, but its impractical for all kind of shootings, so we have to combine all stereo techniques. For FULL LENGHT shots of people I use a wide 30mm lens approximately (in terms of FF 35mm photography, so you have to make calculations for your lens format) . In the 2/3” format that would be something like a 8.5mm lens. To get a full length view of people I need to be at least 3 mts. away from my main subject, so applying the 1/30 Rule the Stereo Base must be 100mm (3mts/30=0.1mts or 10cms). For MID SHOTS I use a normal lens (16mm in the 2/3” format) with an Ortho Stereo base (65mm) so my main subject need to be at 1.95 mts from my camera lenses. (6.5x30=195 or 1.95 mts). For CLOSE UPS I can use a 25mm lens (again in the 2/3” format) and use a narrower Stereo Base to avoid too much frame separation and get closer to my subject. My subject being at 1 mt away from my camera lenses with a 33mm Stereo Base will do the trick. (1/30=0.033) . And without compressing the background too much. Cesar Rubio.

I just came back from a Mexican grocery store here in Los Angeles CA, and saw two 3-D auto-stereoscopic displays! (don't need glasses to watch 3-D). They were showing a few 3-D clips, mostly CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) 3-D and even there was a “real life” stereo clip, but the real life footage was 2-D and they only added 3-D CGI to cause the “3-D”effect... There were like 42” LCD 3-D screens and they had engraved “Exceptional 3D” in the front. http://www.exceptional3d.com/index.html There is a HUGE potential 3-D market for this kind of advertisement, and for live production 3-D with such screens in the market place. I was researching that 3-D market back in 2009, and now it seems that is here! Cesar Rubio.

Here is an interesting article about 3-D hand held shooting: http://steadi3d.com/2011/09/handheld-and-3d-oxymoron/#comment-12695 It made me think. Another thing to consider (besides the ones that Pedro mentions ) is how to maintain PERFECT horizontal alignment when shooting hand held 3-D. I remember seen the extra footage (behind the scenes) on the Transitions 3-D DVD. It was a challenge to keep the IMAX 3-D camera aligned when they were recording on the back of a truck! http://www.razor3donline.com/transitions3d.html Those IMAX 3-D veteran guys have more experience in 3-D, than most of us that are relatively new to 3-D... Cesar Rubio.

Does anyone has an idea how Laser 3D “passive” projection technology will affect companies like Real-D,Dolby 3-D , XpanD etc? http://tinyurl.com/3buo48n http://tinyurl.com/3t7bwot It seems that 3D passive projection technology has been on the market for some time now: http://tinyurl.com/23j5exh Thanks, Cesar Rubio.

SPECS OF THE CAMERA: Maximum resolution: 2048x1088 pxs. Progressive Scan. Maximum frame rates at full resolution: 340 fps. (in uncompressed RAW mode) It can do 25p,50p for PAL countries and 24p,48p,30p and 60p. for NTSC countries. Connectivity: Camera Link. Sensor: 2/3" CMOS sensor with Global Shutter. ISO: 640 at 0dB. Pixel size: 5.5x5.5µm. Lens mount: C-mount 2/3" lenses. Housing Size (LxWxH): 42 mm x 29 mm x 29 mm. (minimum Stereo Base or IA for side by side stereo 3D shooting is 29mm. but also depends on the lenses width) Pricing: $1526 US Dlls. (each camera body without lens) And also there is a camera (optical size is 1") that can do 2048x2048 pxs. up to 180 fps. Price $2226 US Dlls. I see that the extra horizontal resolution can be of help in 3-D shots that were not properly adjusted while shooting. I would probably shoot at 2048x1188 pxs. resolution at 50 or 60 fps to have margin for cropping to 1920x1080 pxs and then down convert to 1280x720 pxs for HD-3DTV or 3-D Bluray delivery. With those camera specs and pricing I doubt that you can find anything better than that in the market! With one DVR Express recorder and a laptop we can record 2K+/60p stereo recordings, see the image on top: http://www.ioindustries.com/solutions/multicamera.html Here you can download a grab from a camera that has the same CMOSIS 2kx2K sensor on one of the Basler Ace camera: (Lens: Pentax 25mm at F5.6 Speed: 30 fps at 1/30th) The Pentax lenses are "TV" resolution lenses that resolve pretty poorly for HD resolutions, there are better c-mount 2/3" lenses on the market like the Fujinon 5MP or these 10 MP lenses: http://www.machinevisionstore.com/catalog/ByCategory?category=4&group=11&pageSize=10 Thanks, Cesar Rubio.

I want to start saying that all video must be compressed for final delivery. But if you start capturing video in the best quality possible, it will show also in your final compressed video. That's why many prime time TV productions still shoot film. Film is the equivalent to Uncompressed Raw in Digital Capture. Some will argue that there is “no difference” in quality recording Compressed Raw or Uncompressed Raw. But it is. When you are compressing video in capture, you are taking away color information (making the video more “pale” in comparison and with less contrast or dynamic range) , add “blockiness” to the images or take away complete frames! That's why some codecs “break” in high movement shots (either form the camera or subjects in the frame). Also, compression adds more “mosquito noise” into the video. Don't believe me? Make your OWN tests. Basically the “defendants” of compression is because they cannot offer that recording on camera. Uncompressed Raw requires HUGE file sizes and FAST recording media. Lets go back in history a little. When the Silicon Image 2K camera was released, they only offered Cineform Raw recording, mainly because the laptop hard drives back then were slow and Cineform Raw did not require faster drives due to the high compression. Later they went with less compression with Cineform Raw. Now they offer Uncompressed Raw as well. The Red One camera when it was released also had to use a lot of compression to deal with those huge 4K resolution files recording into CF cards and slow mechanical laptop drives. I remember that people were requesting the possibility to record Uncompressed Raw with that camera, but the Red team were not very fond with such idea. They even went to the extreme to compare the Redcode compression with “Uncompressed Raw” projected in a big screen at NAB. People saw that there was “no difference”... I don't know how they recorded the Uncompressed Raw version since the camera doesn't offer outputs for that. I have made Uncompressed RGB recordings with my Panasonic DVX-100 camera (via the firewire output) and there is indeed no visual difference with that and the DV compression on camera. So when looking for a camcorder you have to make sure that the HD-SDI outputs are indeed outputting truly Uncompressed RGB before ANY compression in camera. In the past the Andromeda solution permitted to record truly Uncompressed RGB from the Panasonic DVX-100 camera, but you had to send it for “surgery” and use an external laptop for recordings. People when saw the huge image quality difference immediately were in love with it. I wanted to send mine as well, but somebody in the industry “bought” the Andromeda project....mainly to get rid of them. Now they are history. Lets go back to the Red One camera, if that is true that there is no difference between Compressed Raw and Uncompressed Raw ,WHY then now they offer less compression in the camera and up to 3:1 compression on Epic-M/X? Easy, now there are super fast SSD's (Solid State Drives) in the market. Mark my words, the day is coming when they will offer totally Uncompressed Raw recordings for the Red Cameras. Now, the drawback of working with Uncompressed Raw material is HUGE file sizes and the need for Raid Hard Drive setups in post production. What are the sizes? 8 bit-1080/24p is 3GB per minute. 50MB/s -Media speed needed for capture: (minimum write speed NOT sustained). 12 bit-1080/24p is 4.5 GB per minute. 75MB/s 8 bit- 1080/60p is 7.5 GB per minute. 125MB/s Make those numbers TRIPLE when you de-bayer to Uncompressed RGB! And then DOUBLE that for Stereo 3D! ;-) The Alexa-M camera recording Arriraw (Uncompressed Raw), requires like 9 GB per minute at 2880x1620 pxs. 24 fps. at 12 bit. And requires media capable of writing 150MB/s. There are many SSD's in the market that can easily write such speeds now, and if you make a Raid configuration you can write larger frame rates or even larger resolutions. I have made comparison recordings between Uncompressed Raw/RGB at 8,12 and 16 bit and saw no visual difference at all. I have also scanned 35mm film at 8 and 16 bit (Uncompressed TIFF). And the same, there is no visual difference. Probably because my monitors are 8 bits...(24 RGB). That's why I prefer Uncompressed Raw/RGB 8 bit, for its smaller file sizes and superb image quality. That's the price you have to pay working with Uncompressed video, but I can tell you this; IT'S WORTH IT! Thanks, Cesar Rubio.

First off, I don't want to sell you anything with this topic post (I don't sell anything anymore) . I just want to share all my knowledge and experience that I've acquire working with Digital Images for more than 8 years. 3-D CINEMA: What is the best resolution and frame rate for 3-D Cinema? In my opinion, true 2K at 48 or 60 frames per second. True 1080p resolution would work too as demonstrated by Avatar 3-D and U2-3D. Nobody complained about the resolution on the BIG screen with such movies. By “true” I mean a 1080p (1920x1080 pxs) capture by a 3 sensors camera or a 2880x 1620 pxs .capture by a single bayer sensor camera down sampled 1.5 times to 1920x1080 pxs. Like the Alexa camera. (Or 35mm film scanned at 2K). Why not 4K? For many reasons, first because unless is for IMAX 3-D screens there is NO need for that. How many IMAX 3-D screens are installed in the world? Not many. What it would be the percentage of those screens in comparison to all other cinema screens worldwide? Probably less than 1%. If that 1% is important for YOU, then by all means shoot true 4K. That would be 6K bayer resolution capture down sampled 1.5 times to 4K. There is not yet a digital camera that can do that. But it seems that the Sony F65 camera will capture at 8K and output to 4K. That would be down sampled 2 times, even better than 1.5. The Epic can do 5K bayer or true 3.3K resolution. I think they will release more resolution cameras in the future for a true 4K output. I saw Avatar 3-D in a HUGE screen almost the size of an IMAX screen and it looked good. 3-D since its projecting double frames per second (left and right) doubles the perceived resolution. Also double+ frame rates like 48 fps. or 60 fps. seems to increase the resolution as well. Another important issue would be the ability to record uncompressed RAW or RGB, it doesn't really matter which format you choose in controlled circumstances when you have the time to use a exposure meter. I shoot RAW for event photography where most of the time you don't get perfect exposures due to the fast pace of shooting. Then I can manipulate the Raw file if I underexposed or over exposed a shot. Unless you are shooting documentary style video, there is not a real benefit between RAW or RGB besides the media space needed on the camera/ recorder. Raw files are 1/3 smaller than RGB. But in post it does not matter since all RAW must be converted to RGB anyways. What would I use for 3-D cinematography capture with what is available in the market at present time? Two Alexa-M's recording Uncompressed RAW (Arriraw) at 2880x1620 pxs. (then down converting to 1920x1080 pxs. in post) Or direct Uncompressed RGB 1920x1080 pxs. Into the Codex or S.Two recorders. The Raw format would permit record more data into the recorders since 1080p RGB will take double the space of 2.88K Raw. Either way at 48 or 60 fps. Another extra reason to go for true 2K or 1080p is that there are not 3-D cinema projectors capable of 4K/48p or 60p. The most you can go up to 60 fps is 2k or 1080p 3-D projection. Why I prefer the Alexa-M over the Epic-M/X? Simple, because I prefer Uncompressed Raw over Compressed Raw even with more resolution. I have used Cineform Raw and Uncompressed Raw and compared the results of both. There is NO comparison, when you see Uncompressed RGB against Cineform HD (already debayered) even at the highest 4:4:4 Filmscan 2 quality, Uncompressed RGB will take your breath away. Hands down is the best video I have ever seen in my life, period. Close to film scans. The colors are so rich and saturated that the images almost pop up out of the screen. Even 8 bit Uncompressed Raw/RGB is way superior to Cineform Raw/HD at 12 bit. (The Redcode is similar to Cineform Raw). Working with Uncompressed Raw/RGB there is no visual difference between 8,12 and even 16 bit. Probably because most monitors/projectors are 8 bit anyways. (24 bit in full RGB color) I saw a huge quality difference between Cineform Raw when recording 8 and 12 bit, so using compression higher bit is helpful. And last but not least, the bigger pixels on the Alexa-M camera offer 1 more native stop of Dynamic Range over the smaller pixels on the Epic M/X camera. 3-D HDTV: For 3-D HDTV I would use true 720/50 or 60p. What cameras I would use? If you CAN, by all means use the Alexa-M's as well! If not (like me), then look for more affordable solutions. Like the Sony F3's cameras (recording Uncompressed to external recorders). Recording 1080/50 or 60p will give us a true clean 720/50 or 60p output that would work for 3-D networks or for Bluray 3-D delivery. If those cameras are still out of the game for you, then see this camera: (note: I don't have affiliation with Basler nor I sell their cameras or get paid for promoting them). Basler acA2000-340km/kc http://www.baslerweb.com/beitraege/unterbeitrag_en_115108.html It offers almost the same quality wise as the Sony F-3 camera. The Basler cameras advantage that I see over the Sony F-3's for 3-D capture (other than the price for a complete 3-D recording system) would be a little extra resolution (2K vs 1080p), the ability to record side by side stereo without a beam splitter rig and the advantage of recording Uncompressed Raw. The Sony F-3 advantages over the Basler camera is that offers a half stop more of native Dynamic Range, and like a half stop more of base ISO/ASA (ISO 800 vs ISO 640), but that is lost with the more than a full stop that you lose with a beamsplitter rig. Cesar Rubio.

Things always change for the better by visionary people. Here are 3 of them who have changed 3-D. 1-Robert Zemeckis who started using Machine Vision Cameras for Motion Capture 3-D in “A Christmas Carol 3-D” back in 2008, now MVC's are used all over the word for MC-3D. Where did he get the idea? www.davidrubio3d.com 2-Brian Gardner who started using Machine Vision Cameras for Stop Motion 3-D capture in “Coraline 3-D” back in 2008. Where did he get the idea? www.davidrubio3d.com 3-Josh Klatt who started using Machine Vision Cameras for Live Action 3-D back in 2009. Where did he get the idea? www.davidrubio3d.com For those of you that doesn't know him, he is an extraordinary stereographer from NY city and a dear friend of mine. Here is his web site: http://joshklatt.com/3dvideo/ For some of you who are not familiar with www.davidrubio3d.com (and since it is offline) you can have a glance of how it looked back in 2009: http://web.archive.org/web/20090222015235/http://davidrubio3d.com/ Live Action 3-D with Machine Vision Cameras hasn't died just yet, in the contrary it has improved. Just see these two examples: http://www.ioindustries.com/solutions/multicamera.html http://www.easylooksystem.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=76 People all over the world were always asking me for a more portable solution other than a workstation for recording 3-D with MVC's, here it is NOW. And things will get even better as time passes. Like more resolution camera heads, with better light sensitivity and dynamic range rivaling film capture. Cheaper and smaller recorders. Larger capacity and cheaper Solid State Drives for media storage. Native Uncompressed Raw support by major Non Linear Editing systems, etc. When I started my research with MVC's for 3-D capture for cinema & 3D-HDTV applications 5 years ago in the summer of 2006, and then my forum on December 2nd of 2006, I didn't realize how a simple idea could change some many things in 3-D. But it did, and I am happy for that...after all, I wasn't that “crazy” like some people called me at the beginning. I only wish that my two beautiful boys, David and Alexander Rubio can see one day what their poor PA-PA (who loves 3-D since he was a boy like they are now) started... Cesar Rubio.

I apologize because this project has been canceled due to the fact that we are going out of business. Thanks, CR.

You don't have to worry about me anymore Paul.....I won't blame you for us going out of business either. We cannot continue with our little 3D System Project anymore. It's quite expensive and we "ran out of gas" if you know what I mean.... Feel free to post more "funny" 3D pictures as you wish.....until ALL the 3D Biz goes down perhaps? Is that your main purpose, see the failing of 3D as a whole? Would you make any money out of that? Have a nice weekend. CR.

ouch!.... :rolleyes:

Paul: You are a "genius" trying to change the subject.... This thread is NOT about my system....is about ALL 3D equipment out there... NOR is a thread about who makes the most "funny 3D" pictures... But it seems you only care for one person...YOU. CR.

Everybody??? Or just ONE person with too much time on his hands? CR.

Here a couple more grabs, now I used a Fujinon 12.5mm l” C-mount Lens. (saved as BMP straight out from the recording software) Wide open at f1.4, 1/30th 30 fps. I resize the frames (from 1080p) to 720p in Photoshop without any color correction at all. This time I had less light on the scene, just 3 small lights in a fan overhead, plus the 2 lights in the background. (all 13 watts Compact Fluorescents) Last time I had an overhead kitchen light on, that consist in two 2 feet 40 watts Tube Fluorescent lights with a plastic diffuser. I lowered the contrast in camera to be able to “gain” a little bit more exposure (but is not the same as real Gain per say...) : http://www.dna-rubio3d.com/Grabs/720p/David.bmp http://www.dna-rubio3d.com/Grabs/720p/Alex.bmp With my Nikon D700, I had to use ISO 400 to have a similar exposure... Sometime in the few days I will go out and record something (with my Macbook Pro). Probably a LOT of snow or something.... Thanks, CR.

BTW, the grab is from a camera of our 3D HDTV system: http://www.dna-rubio3d.com/HDTV/hdtv.html Thanks, CR.

Here is a preliminary test with the NEW Kodak 2/3" CCD sensor cameras. I used a cheap Pentax 2/3" Standard Definition TV lens in the test, hence the softness...besides it was wide open at f1.5 30 fps video grab with normal house lighting. No Color Correction at all: http://dna-rubio3d.com/Grabs/720p/My-Kids.bmp Cesar Rubio D&A Rubio 3D Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. www.dna-rubio3d.com

Good points Paul. You are a smart person....so how many times you have to MAKE a point to be heard? I think we've all here got your POV of 3D, and I respect that. But I think you could invest your time wiser than photo-shopping that monster all the time! BTW, Isn't that monster copyrighted material by someone?....and here it comes, the "violations" talk... I apologize if I did something wrong, if I did, moderators feel free to delete my posts. Thanks, CR.

Hey Paul: I like your sense of humor, but can you please start a NEW thread with all your "3-D art"..... Not disrespect, but I think you are polluting an otherwise serious an interesting info thread. Thanks, Cesar Rubio D&A Rubio 3D Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. www.dna-rubio3d.com

Hi: We offer 3K/24p Uncompressed Raw Digital Cinema CCD Cameras. For more info, please visit our website here: http://dna-rubio3d.com/Cinema/cinema.html Thanks, CR.

Basically AFAIK, I don't know of a current laptop in the market that can record Stereo 1080/24p (or 2k/24p) streams. Sorry, you need two laptops like you already have or a workstation like this: http://dr-3dcameraco.com/product_info.php?...;products_id=56 I've seen that SI offer a small field recorder for stereo for their mini cameras, but I don't know how much it cost and if is good enough.... CR.

You need a laptop with at least a Quad Core 2.4 GHz CPU in order to compress Two 1080p/2K Cineform Raw streams in RT. And that laptop must have independent Buses in order to transport the Uncompressed Raw streams over Gig-e. In my testings with a Macbook pro 2.4 GHz (Duo 2 Core), I can only record Uncompressed Raw stereo 720/24p to fast drives without dropping frames. If i use Cineform Raw compression, only one camera at 1080/24p is possible with the Macbook pro... Cesar Rubio. Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. http://www.davidrubio3d.com/

Hi David: You might want to contact Marco Neiva, he's done 3-D with two EX-1's. You can find him here: http://www.davidrubio3d.com/view_topic.php...mp;forum_id=118 Thanks, Cesar Rubio. Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. http://www.davidrubio3d.com/

The Panasonic HCM-150 gets pretty good reviews for weeding work (I do events my self with a DVX-100). It has 3 1/3" CCD's with pixel shifting (540x960 pxs) that yield pretty descent 720p footage. (look for videos on the net) I would recommend you 760/60p for weddings or any "gun& run" kind of shooting. (or 1080/60i for that matter) You can read lots of stuff about that camera for wedding work here: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=163679 Thanks, Cesar Rubio. Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. http://www.davidrubio3d.com/

Thanks for your input John. But since the DCI requires "especial" (read expensive) servers and 2K projectors combination in order to "decode" the "key" to project BIG Studio movies in digital cinemas, it wont be as easy as you mention.... I am planning to use self made workstation as "digital cinema server", and this kind of 720p projector that with 5000+ lumens will be enough for a 4 mts screens. (two for a 3-D set-up) http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5183...XGA_1280_x.html http://dr-3dcameraco.com/product_info.php?...cdac2c1a1188828 Now we need to figure out a method that would work with such simplified projection setup...that is "anti-piracy" which is what Hollywood cares more about (I would too). Thanks, Cesar Rubio. Cambridge Wisconsin, USA. http://www.davidrubio3d.com/

John: In your experience, don't you think that 720/60p DLP projection might work for a 14 feet (4 Mts) wide screen for 3-D stereo? I am planing to see if Hollywood will approve a DCI 720/60p "addendum" for Small Venue 3-D cinemas in poor countries...or small cities in prosper ones: http://www.davidrubio3d.com/view_topic.php...amp;forum_id=88 The theater project I am planning would have only 56 seats...7 seats by 8 rows. Thanks, Cesar Rubio.