In search of the "perfect" 3-D Video Camera system...
Posted 23 November 2011 - 01:06 PM
I am not at home currently, and the only files I could find comparing Uncompressed Raw 8 vs 16 are these Tiff files. (note that even the 16 bit is double in size than the 8 bit)
You can download them here:
Alternately I have uploaded them in Picasa, the 8 bit is a Jpeg file, while the 16 bit is PNG:
The files info say they were created in 2002, but it's wrong, I recorded them like 3 years ago or so...(don't remember exactly)
After my comparison tests (and to make sure) I contacted Norpix (creators of Streampix DVR software) and asked them if they could perform a similar test...they did it and their "verdict" was the same as mine. NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE in both.
Right now I don't have a camera with me to make a new comparison test, but it occurs to me that it would be even better if YOU can do your own tests...how?
Even though it would not be precisely "the same" it'd be interesting to perform and you might learn a thing or two in the process..
If you have a DSLR pro camera, you can take some Uncompressed Raw pictures (normally they will be 12 bit, but there are some cams that can do even more like 14 bit) Then open your files (I use Photoshop CS4 or Lightroom) and save them to Uncompressed TIFF 8 bit and 16 bit.
Re-open those two Tiff files again and compare them...do heavy color correction...do you see a visual difference in both?
Posted 23 November 2011 - 03:21 PM
The Pike F-210c camera only has a 14 bit A/D
Posted 25 November 2011 - 12:00 PM
Here are the pics:
He made this comment:
“Notice the lack of many values of gray in the 8 bit version?
The 8 bit file contains only 74 "shades"(a lot missing in the shadows), while the 16 bit has retained all 255.
I can see differences in the resulting tifs. They are subtle....but visible.”
And this was my response:
-Good Job “X”!
See how "experimenting" leads to great discoveries? :-)
But any how, I still prefer Uncompressed Raw 8 bit than Compressed Raw at higher bit depth...I need to make a comparison test about this sometime in the future. (I've already done it in the past, but I need to make another one with newer cameras, and make it public...)
I need to get the original Uncompressed Raw/RGB files to make a more accurate assessment of the situation.
Regardless of that, if you shoot properly exposed footage, you don't really NEED to do heavy editing like in this particular case...
Posted 01 January 2012 - 03:51 AM
I want to apologize if I offended someone with my search of the "perfect 3-D camera" that doesn't exist, and maybe it wont ever..what is "perfect" for me, might no be perfect for YOU...
Sometimes we concentrate too much in things that we forget the people who are behind them, the MAKERS. For the most part they put all their heart and effort and maybe years of HARD work to make them possible...and if some one comes and "kill it" in just 30 seconds is NOT very funny is it?
What I think WE ALL need is a school for Stereo 3-D, so we can figure this thing out ALL together...Camera makers SHOULD hire a few good experienced Stereographers when designing cameras...if they skip in that very IMPORTANT matter, then how can they make a good product of a complicated subject they don't know well?
I've been in "3-D concentration camp" for almost a month now, and doing a LOT of thinking in the matter, I have reviewed my own work and the work of others as well....
And leaving "sides" aside...I think I now better what I like now. PLEASE DON'T take it as an offense if I don't mention your product...after all they are PERSONAL preferences not BIG deal right?
I like the SinaCAM for 3-D TV productions for a faster workflow and size of the cameras, and the Indie POV for 3-D Cinema...like its own name reflects is intended for Indie 3-D producers, I like that system very much. The CinemaDNG Uncompressed workflow is very promising...
In the fixed lenses cameras, believe it or not I like the Fuji W3, with a 1/50th Rule for your nearest point you can record almost everything with the 35mm-105mm (FF35mm equivalent). From around 4 mts away...but obviously the f4 max aperture is not good for interiors nor that long distance in small places, but for exterior work and the beginner Sterographer is a good choice for practicing...
The Lumiere 3-D having a 65mm SB are good too..with the same distance limitations of course.
In the Beam splitter camp I like the CPG rig that they showed with two Alexa-M's and the Arri-Fuji zooms at IBC 2011...it looks very good...
There are others 3-D rigs that I like too, but I will leave it at that, at the end what IT MATTERS is the FINAL product not so much what tools you used...you can use MANY to achieve what YOU want.
My best wishes for 2012 for ALL. 3-D camera manufacturers and STEREOGRAPHERS