First, let it be known that, practically speaking, it is not currently possible to convert an existing TV program or film to REAL 3D (3DR). There have been gags for many years that use various tricks to give a "depth-like" effect. And recently, SUPERMAN has demonstrated fake 3D that some might find acceptable. It is when not compared to REAL 3D. By this we mean it remains fact, that to achieve REAL 3D, you have to produce it (shoot it) in REAL 3D. Any form of "conversion" will yield less than "real" 3D. Like colorized films, fake 3D will become a footnote. There are two primary systems for professional 3D television production: NATURAL VISION
(Anaglyph) Shot with a special camera rig comprised of two cameras, producing a "left eye view" and a "right eye view." The two resulting video tapes are edited (more-or-less conventionally), then encoded using our patented 3D encoding system. The result is a single video tape, in 3D, ready for broadcast. This is the only, REAL 3D system, F.C.C. approved for broadcast. It allows "off the screen" 3D effects. But, without 3D glasses, the image looks somewhat "out of register." In practice, this has not been a problem in the many 3D broadcasts world wide. Natural Vision Historical Background SPATIAL VISION
(Pulfrich) Shot with a single camera, mounted on our modified Steadicam. The 3D effect is like looking out through a window. Without 3D glasses, the image looks totally normal. But, "off the screen effects" are not possible. Spatial Vision Historical Background D3 STUDIO OTHER SYSTEMS SEQUENTIAL (or FIELD SEQUENTIAL) (SQ) - A good 3D effect is achieved by taking the left and right eye images and recording them interleaved (left, right, left, right). When viewed with electronic "shutter" glasses that alternately cover and expose your eyes (right, left, right, left), the mind combines the images into 3D. Amazing, since the images are at least 1/60th of a second apart. The glasses are composed of electronic LCD "windows" that are rapidly switched off and on to be either transparent or opaque. This technique has been explored in the U.S. and, especially, Japan. But, the shutter glasses are usually uncomfortable for prolonged viewing and costly. Recently there have been a number of workers trying to commercialize SQ, but none have yet to become mainstream. We entered this field in 1981, producing programming for the Philips company which was experimenting with the idea. We built an encoder/decoder and crude viewing glasses and provided programming. Nothing apparently came of their efforts.In 1989 we built the first known wireless glasses using infrared technologies. Head of this development was our chief engineer, John Long. In spite of this improvement, and those of other researchers, SQ 3D remains an "industrial" curiosity, as SQ broadcast is not particularly practical except perhaps via satellite. For special presentations, such as the 1997 Mars Lander project, museums, trade shows and the like, SQ can be quite exciting. D3 has just developed an improved SQ system and has entered into an exclusive agreement with StereoVision Entertainment for the production of original programming using the system.
PROJECTION - For non broadcast, projection displays can use polarized techniques, producing superior 3D quality. Virtually any projection venue ("theater") can be converted to 3D. We provided technologies for Eli Lilly and Company for the production of The Quest for Understanding Humanity, a corporate presentation featuring Charlton Heston. Projected using polarization in a small "theater" during a Toronto convention in 1998, it was very well received. We conceived and demonstrated the first live, 3D projection system for rock concerts, for the 1998-99 tour of KISS. Recently we provided technologies to General Motors Brazil for a special presentation of a new vehicle in Brazil.
3D WITHOUT GLASSES - We often are asked "when will there be 3D without glasses?" There have been several techniques developed over the past 100 years or so. Remember the 3D post cards and (often) religious pictures? 3D without glasses! But, you might also remember the effect was only possible when viewed at certain angles. There has been considerable research by D3 as well as international organizations, and the final result is usually the same - limited viewing angle and/or high cost. We developed a B&W TV prototype system in 1978 (invented by our associate, the late James Butterfield) that had virtually unlimited viewing angles. But, as the system was complex and bulky, it had virtually no commercial value. Currently one or two Japanese firms are demonstrating rear projection TV's using this technique, but by all reports, with the usual restrictions. WIGGLE VISION - While this technically fits under the previous category, it is NOT 3D, and therefore deserves it's own category. We first heard of this concept in 1972, but only saw the first attempts in 1982. Without going into "who did what," we'll simply explain the idea. By taking two cameras and quickly switching between them, it is proposed the human mind will somehow combine the jiggling images into a 3D image. One approach had the cameras placed horizontally (like our eyes), while another placed the cameras vertically (one above the other)!! With either idea, the picture would jiggle and, to anyone we show a sample tape to, there is no 3D. Further, it can be annoying to watch. A newer twist on the idea comes from Georgia, and has managed to attract considerable investment dollars. The scheme involves a specially modified camera whose lens is able to move during photography. The movement is computer controlled, and quite impressive--from an engineering view point. The resultant images don't jiggle - being more of a wiggle. The "wiggle vision" demo tape we have does not demonstrate 3D whatsoever. The inventor has even back-peddled and stopped calling it 3D. It's now a process of "enhancement." ANY way you look at it, it's still NOT 3D. It's difficult for the public to understand and see through such "smoke and mirrors." "New," "Improved," "Best," "Amazing," "Magic," and a thesaurus of similar words continues to sell. It is our hope that producers will use our proven technologies in a way that builds "brand identification." The public will then know in advance that it will be getting the best 3D possible--3D that works.
D3 does not promote any particular technology or technique. It is up to the producer to decide which is appropriate for his production. We treat the 3D systems as tools. It's a matter of choosing the right tool for the particular job. As mentioned earlier, one of the primary visual differences between NATURAL VISION and SPATIAL VISION is that the former displays images having a "mis-registered" look, i.e. certain objects have cyan/red "fringes." This is only a consideration if you want to watch the program without glasses. In all fairness, anyone watching a 3D program is likely to want to watch it in 3D and will therefore wear the glasses. Properly produced NATURAL VISION programming, to the average person, can be watched without glasses (see the Hondo scene in the Natural Vision section as an example). But, there are some who think (right or wrong) there may be a large number of the public who will not want to (or can't) watch a 3D program in 3D. The SPATIAL VISION technique is perfectly normal without glasses, so it meets this requirement. With our many years of experience, we must remind the prospective producer that the typical public wants to see 3D "off the screen gags." And that is only possible with NATURAL VISION. At one time it was thought the F.C.C. would not allow anaglyph broadcasts. In 1981 we visited the F.C.C. in Washington, D.C. and showed them our process. The reward for our efforts? Shortly thereafter a ruling was issued, allowing unlimited use of 3D on the American airways. If you are considering producing a REAL 3D program, do not hesitate to contact us. We will save you time, save you money, AND provide you the best 3D possible. |