I've been lurking for a bit now, I love the site (and informative forum), and am now typing my inaugural post in the hopes of tapping into the deep knowledge base here.
After reading an article my Lenny Lipton in an old Super 8 Filmaker mag on how to make a stereoscopic film, I was very intrigued. I picked up his Super Eight Book that has the last few chapters devoted to it that solidified my desire to do this for a short film idea I've been planning to make.
So has anyone made a stereoscopic film. I'm curious to know of any problems, unexpected hurdles, equipment used, projection? I'm in pre-production now, so any info would be great. [/u]
Stereoscopic Super 8!
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
-
TomFoolery
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: Detroit
Stereoscopic Super 8!
All that is, is light.
-
TomFoolery
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: Detroit
also...
should have added, that i don't think i've ever seen a true stereoscopic film. so does it look good? Lipton claims if done right, the effect is better than 3D glasses type film?
All that is, is light.
-
aj
- Senior member
- Posts: 3556
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 1:15 pm
- Real name: Andre
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
super8 book
Where did you pick up this book. Just like that.I picked up his Super Eight Book
Did they have more?
Because I have been looking for the special S8 edition myself
and never found one.
Kind regards,
André
André
-
TomFoolery
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: Detroit
-
aj
- Senior member
- Posts: 3556
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 1:15 pm
- Real name: Andre
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
lipton
I could find one 801 for you and I have no trouble charging extra for shipping if that makes you happy.TomFoolery wrote:check amazon. a few months ago i bought the paperback used for $1.01 (US)! well worth it... i love when shipping is more than the purchase. if only i could find a Nizo 807 the same way :lol:
I'll keep an eye on amazon used department. Although I checked it before.
Kind regards,
André
André
-
FILM-THURSO
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:57 am
What type of stereoscopic film are you planning to make.
There is a bottom line with 3D in that the viewer has to wear some kind of glasses unless you have access to Imax technology. Although two lenses or cameras are not required for some systems there are always wider considerations.
First of these is LIGHT- you will need a hell-of-a-lot of light in filming and projection whether you are filming for monochrome (red-green), standard color (red-blue) or full color (polarised).
It is possible to film monochrome with a Matrex 3D filter but this produces a soft picture even though it does have obvious depth. There is also the Spondon 3D anaglyph system which works with a serries of mirrors and also makes monochrome 3D. If your super 8 camera can take SLR lenses, try out the Vivitar Q-dos lens which does standard color 3D in a single lens. I've got one of these babies and it doesn't get the use it deserves, a damb fine bit of kit!
Something to bare in mind- many people can't actually see in 3D, you might be one of those people! See "Spy Kids 3D" in a cinema if you can or on a good quality video projection and you'll find out. As such the human eye does not register 3D beyond 100ft, our brains emulate it on the basis of our experience of motional dimensionality, i.e. knowing that we can move around objects.
Filming a 3D image means that the frame will contain TWO images which in turn means HALF the resolution until the brain puts the two together. Framing your shot should take consideration of the amount of detail the film is likely to see.
Mind you, you don't have to actually film in 3D to show a film that way. The Spondon and Matrex 3D systems can be used at the projection stage to create monochrome 3D- Jaws works well in this way. There are other techy things you can do like 1/3 apertures or duo-lensing but you have to be a brave man to try.
There is a bottom line with 3D in that the viewer has to wear some kind of glasses unless you have access to Imax technology. Although two lenses or cameras are not required for some systems there are always wider considerations.
First of these is LIGHT- you will need a hell-of-a-lot of light in filming and projection whether you are filming for monochrome (red-green), standard color (red-blue) or full color (polarised).
It is possible to film monochrome with a Matrex 3D filter but this produces a soft picture even though it does have obvious depth. There is also the Spondon 3D anaglyph system which works with a serries of mirrors and also makes monochrome 3D. If your super 8 camera can take SLR lenses, try out the Vivitar Q-dos lens which does standard color 3D in a single lens. I've got one of these babies and it doesn't get the use it deserves, a damb fine bit of kit!
Something to bare in mind- many people can't actually see in 3D, you might be one of those people! See "Spy Kids 3D" in a cinema if you can or on a good quality video projection and you'll find out. As such the human eye does not register 3D beyond 100ft, our brains emulate it on the basis of our experience of motional dimensionality, i.e. knowing that we can move around objects.
Filming a 3D image means that the frame will contain TWO images which in turn means HALF the resolution until the brain puts the two together. Framing your shot should take consideration of the amount of detail the film is likely to see.
Mind you, you don't have to actually film in 3D to show a film that way. The Spondon and Matrex 3D systems can be used at the projection stage to create monochrome 3D- Jaws works well in this way. There are other techy things you can do like 1/3 apertures or duo-lensing but you have to be a brave man to try.
I posted a similar topic back in novemver (?) I believe, so it may do you well to do a search on this site for that. I have done some 3-D, and here is what I've found out from my personal experiences:
I found a midseventies issue of Peterson's photographic that outlines plans for a 3-D rig with a super 8 camera and polarized lenses-if you want outstanding image quality, this would be the way to go-unfortunatly, the camera should be a fixed focus one (the article featured a kodak instamatic) to keep the ammount of possible abberrations (sp) to a minimum. Shooting can be difficult, but projection is rahter insane, as it requires a pretty involved calibration of your equipment to pull it off. I tried it, and about 80% of my shots had a noticable depth quality to them, and all in all, it looked pretty nice when it worked.
the easier way would be to attach a box-type rig over your camera, which will break down the image into the red/green monochromes to produce the 3-D that most of us are familiar with-in other words, it is headache inducing and generally rather hard on the eyes. What's nice about this though is that you can use it on your video camera and calibrate it from you tv set-no waiting for film to come back, etc etc. I personally got the greatest kick out of this on my vhs camcorder, and I have some rather lovely home videos of my friends making fantastic fools of themselves (throwing things at one another, reaching out at the camera) all in the name of producing exciting 3-D images. I got the plans for this one from a copy of a magazine sent to me by one of the members of this forum. (Probably the same article you read, though)
If you were interested in either article, pm me, and I shall arrange sending them to you.
Also, keep and eye out for the stereo Yvar lens made for the bolex cameras-they have popped up on ebay before, and sold for rather low prices, simply because no one knows what they are. This would be used in a system not unlike the first one I described, but without the frustration inherent in setting up the camera rig shot after shot.
hope this gets you where you need to be...
wade
I found a midseventies issue of Peterson's photographic that outlines plans for a 3-D rig with a super 8 camera and polarized lenses-if you want outstanding image quality, this would be the way to go-unfortunatly, the camera should be a fixed focus one (the article featured a kodak instamatic) to keep the ammount of possible abberrations (sp) to a minimum. Shooting can be difficult, but projection is rahter insane, as it requires a pretty involved calibration of your equipment to pull it off. I tried it, and about 80% of my shots had a noticable depth quality to them, and all in all, it looked pretty nice when it worked.
the easier way would be to attach a box-type rig over your camera, which will break down the image into the red/green monochromes to produce the 3-D that most of us are familiar with-in other words, it is headache inducing and generally rather hard on the eyes. What's nice about this though is that you can use it on your video camera and calibrate it from you tv set-no waiting for film to come back, etc etc. I personally got the greatest kick out of this on my vhs camcorder, and I have some rather lovely home videos of my friends making fantastic fools of themselves (throwing things at one another, reaching out at the camera) all in the name of producing exciting 3-D images. I got the plans for this one from a copy of a magazine sent to me by one of the members of this forum. (Probably the same article you read, though)
If you were interested in either article, pm me, and I shall arrange sending them to you.
Also, keep and eye out for the stereo Yvar lens made for the bolex cameras-they have popped up on ebay before, and sold for rather low prices, simply because no one knows what they are. This would be used in a system not unlike the first one I described, but without the frustration inherent in setting up the camera rig shot after shot.
hope this gets you where you need to be...
wade
-
FILM-THURSO
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:57 am
Nevermind building it why not just buy one. You need the Spondon Anaglyph which can be used on cine or video cameras.
http://www.spondonfilms@freeserve.co.uk/3-d.htm
and it can be used for monochrome, standard color and I think, polarised as well. They build them to order as per your requirements.
I have bought from Spondon and I recommend them. They can supply some interesting purpose built gadgetry.
Alternatively you could go real cheap and cut red and green lighting gels into strips of 2mm width and mount them alternatley in a slide mount, place infront of your camera lens and touch the focus slightly off until you see the split image and that's Matrex 3D!
http://www.spondonfilms@freeserve.co.uk/3-d.htm
and it can be used for monochrome, standard color and I think, polarised as well. They build them to order as per your requirements.
I have bought from Spondon and I recommend them. They can supply some interesting purpose built gadgetry.
Alternatively you could go real cheap and cut red and green lighting gels into strips of 2mm width and mount them alternatley in a slide mount, place infront of your camera lens and touch the focus slightly off until you see the split image and that's Matrex 3D!
-
MovieMaker
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:44 pm
- Location: Vienna / Austria
-
studiocarter
- Senior member
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:13 pm
- Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
- Contact:
-
TomFoolery
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: Detroit
I may be wrong, but as i understand it, there is another way that doesn't require 3D glasses, and which is the way i'm interested in making it.What type of stereoscopic film are you planning to make.
There is a bottom line with 3D in that the viewer has to wear some kind of glasses unless you have access to Imax technology
Basically we are talking about 2 super 8 camera's, crystal synced, with distance apart, lens, etc, callibrated. and projected in sync. with 2 projectors. You have to have identical cameras and lenses, and also identical projectors, connected with a timing belt.
Sense i have a Nizo 561, which Lenny Lipton uses in his book, i'm going with that. which means i need one more. I also already have a Kodak Ektalite screen, which solves the problem of not enough light for projection.
I have access to projectors, but not 2 of the same, plus they need to be high quality, and able to be connected somehow. Lipton suggests an Eumig 807, as a timing belt can easily be added to connect both. Does anyone know of other projectors that can be easily modified to run in sync?
So, has anyone attempted this, seen this type of 3D? I'm willing to make the financial investment, because i'm very passionate about the subject matter, which i feel has to be viewed in 3D, and i love the idea of not having to wear glasses.
All that is, is light.
-
FILM-THURSO
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:57 am
I think you are taking about polarised 3D which is very specialised technology and the screen is the special element. Polarized 3D still requires glasses although (and I'm not sure about this) I think Imax may be somewhere near glassless 3D. The last I saw however they were running with glasses and a special twin gate projector.
I had some ideas about Satin as a material good for polarization having noticed the way that light doesn't always directly reflect from it. White satin from man-made fibres had a polarizing capablity. But even then you will still need glasses. Polarised images are all about the direction of light and the film has to be filmed thru two polarizors. Although as I've said already, two cameras are not nessecary as any standard film has the required images for 3D but I'm happy to let you figure that out yourselves.
However if you are lucky enough to find out what ever became of John Logie Baird's Television inventions you might even find his color TV invented in the 1930s which actually rendered 3D without glasses- YES REALLY. got to hand it to us Scots!
I had some ideas about Satin as a material good for polarization having noticed the way that light doesn't always directly reflect from it. White satin from man-made fibres had a polarizing capablity. But even then you will still need glasses. Polarised images are all about the direction of light and the film has to be filmed thru two polarizors. Although as I've said already, two cameras are not nessecary as any standard film has the required images for 3D but I'm happy to let you figure that out yourselves.
However if you are lucky enough to find out what ever became of John Logie Baird's Television inventions you might even find his color TV invented in the 1930s which actually rendered 3D without glasses- YES REALLY. got to hand it to us Scots!
-
aj
- Senior member
- Posts: 3556
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 1:15 pm
- Real name: Andre
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
bolex attachment
Tuesday I went to visit the Nikonmuseum in Rotterdam
One off topic items the owner showed was an original Bolex special lens and attachment which can shoot stereaoscopic images on a single strip of 16mm film.
The lens consists of two separate half moon shaped lenses in one single holder which projects two images side by side on the film. Very nice and in original box too.
All this special gear was once designed and manufactured.
One off topic items the owner showed was an original Bolex special lens and attachment which can shoot stereaoscopic images on a single strip of 16mm film.
The lens consists of two separate half moon shaped lenses in one single holder which projects two images side by side on the film. Very nice and in original box too.
All this special gear was once designed and manufactured.
Kind regards,
André
André
-
FILM-THURSO
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:57 am
Ah so that'll be the gadget I just won on ebay- coool! It's going to be an interesting toy.
If your super 8 camera has SLR lens compatability you could try the Vivitar Qdos lens which can be used as standard flat or Red/Blue color 3D
It is also possibly to film 3D without 2 or split lenses. The Vivitar system is the perfection of another system that was never fully developed or publically exhibited. Picture House Films tried a technique in the 1980s which used a Matrex filter and successfully shot some monochrome 3D movie images on Super 8. They recently had another forey with a Red/Blue version but it only worked in the viewfinder and didn't hit the film the right way.
It's pretty incredible whats out there whether produced or just experimental.
If your super 8 camera has SLR lens compatability you could try the Vivitar Qdos lens which can be used as standard flat or Red/Blue color 3D
It is also possibly to film 3D without 2 or split lenses. The Vivitar system is the perfection of another system that was never fully developed or publically exhibited. Picture House Films tried a technique in the 1980s which used a Matrex filter and successfully shot some monochrome 3D movie images on Super 8. They recently had another forey with a Red/Blue version but it only worked in the viewfinder and didn't hit the film the right way.
It's pretty incredible whats out there whether produced or just experimental.