Shooting Extreme Close-ups in 3D

[Ben Jones]

I've just signed up for these forums in hopes that I might gain a little more information on 3D filming. I apologize in advance if anything is a re-post, but I couldn't find much of what I was looking for in other threads.

I'm an intern working on a project that is going to be shot in 3D, and everyone else on the project is very unfamiliar with the technology. While we have the basics figured out, we are struggling with one shot: an extreme close-up of two insects on a leaf. It would be part of a shot in which we tracked into the close up. We realize that a beam splitter rig is what we need, but in terms of the close-up, how can we prevent any jitters? We're afraid that even a slight breeze will cause the camera to shake when at such a close distance.

The second problem we've run into is the issue of lens choices. In going with a master diopter I'm afraid that it's shallow depth of field would clash with the 3D effect. What are some lens choices for he type of shot we are trying to achieve?

If someone could take the time to explain this in layman's terms, or point me in the right direction, it would be greatly appreciated. And again, I apologize for any re-posts, I'm new to this forum.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Ben, first, welcome to REDUSER!!

I also tend to love the Master Diopters, and have used them often, as well as I use other Close Ups lenses in Still Photography.

When there is the need to really get up close you only have really two choices, well actually "3" but if you shoot with a sensor such as in the RED ONE, then the inner cropping vs. full frame sensors will bring already closer.

I usually shoot Micro with the longest Super-telephoto I have, just so not to scare away the little subjects, but in 3D the longest the lens the more Flat and less of a 3D effect you get, unless you have a Parallel, side by side configuration and allow to play with Parallax distance in order to create Giantism.

In the other hand if you get very close with an Image Splitter set up, and using Wide Angle lenses, the 3D effect will be greatly pronounced.

Now as far as Extreme Shallow Depth of Field, this will occur more with the use of the Super-Telephoto, and or a Wide Angle with a Diopter attached, you need to test all your options, as 3D is a very particular animal and gives various looks depending even on the smallest changes.

Your best choice, and need will be, first shoot as closed Iris as you can accordingly, and illuminate that much more, this will ease up the DOF.

[Ben Jones]

Hey Ketch,

Thanks so much for the reply, it cleared a few things up. I'm a little worried about diopters though, will they be as sharp as a macro lens? We only have a beam splitter system to work with so maybe wide angle lenses are a good option. While the 3D effect would be great with wide angle, would we be able to get very close to the action?

Also, as much as I would love to use telephoto, that only works with a parallel system, correct? Or is it possible to use telephoto lenses with a beam splitter system? That would probably be the best of both worlds, but it seems like conflicting technology.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Most welcome Ben,

Arri/Zeiss Master Diopters are simply exceptionally good, so no worries there, just must keep in consideration the fact that this will give a stronger blur to the images in the BG accordingly to the Diopter used.

Getting close to the action with 3D is different as it is just about everything else from 2D, you can get close, and very close that is, but if you use a Image Splitter with wide angle lenses, then you need to get really close, and this can make the 3D effect some what exaggerated, similarly to what Cameron has done in Avatar when Sam Worthington ... Jake Sully, was video/recording him self, as you see there his face is very rounded and the 3D effect is some what exaggerated by the use of extreme close up with wide angle.

For action scenes, you have either a Shoulder mount 3D rig, and or a fast dolly, and or off course Steady cam mounted 3D rig.

I believe that anything can be done, but you have to try out the system in order to see if the look is what you are looking for, Telephotos in general are for Side by Side, Parallel 3D rig, here you can use extremely long focal and adjust accordingly, depending on what distance you are filming at form your subject, and what the intended look is, Super telephotos, can be use ad example to shoot mountain ranges, and you can truly exaggerate the distance of parallel placement by FEETS, not Inches.

I for one, believe little of what some one says, you can't do this or that, I try it for my self before discarding, and so far thru my tests, research, and talks with industry pro's they all agree with me, innovation comes form those that push the envelope and tests out new technics to get what they want, so before going out and shoot, you might want to try and do as much research and testing accordingly.

Some people continue to say that any one can make 3D, and they are far from been right, the thru fact is that any one can make BAD 3D, but those that can make GOOD 3D are very few, and I hope that you do your home work first and not let any one discourage you to test any technique you might think could work, but 3D is very complicated and complex, it gets easy only by the use of the best technology and Crew.

[Leonard Coster]

Hi Ben,

I've had some experience shooting macro and close up in 3D.
As Ketch says there are no hard rules and you need to find what will work. Some on-set monitoring will help you there if you can arrange it - even red/cyan anaglyph will give you an idea if its working or not.

1) Be careful of really long focal lengths in mirror rigs unless you have REALLY good glass. The reflected image will begin to distort as the area of mirror that you are actually using becomes smaller and smaller as you go to longer focal lengths (and/or crop the sensor as well).
Stopping down will greatly improve this but you may need a 10k on your bug !

You don't get this problem with parallel but then your IOD will be way big.... might be ok - ask the maths!

2) Whatever you do obey the divergence limits. Background and overall - even if your background is out of focus. Get a calculator or tables - don't break it!
Up to that point use as much IOD to get as much 3D depth as suits the programme and the cut.

I'll run the numbers for you on this shot if you ping me the numbers.
Closest object (the bug? a leaf?), Furthest object (background), focal length, sensor size (if you're cropping tell me!)

(or you can buy IOD calc for you iPhone - shameless plug here :-)

Cheers,

Leonard.

[Dan Hudgins]

If you have to get very close to the subject in 3D you can use two cameras with two 90 degree "endoscope" or snorkel lenses with small objectives.

If you use a small beam splitter along with the endoscope lenses you can get even more close, since the ends of the two endoscope can part way "overlap" do to the splitter.

Likewise with two cameras and two microscope objectives through a very small beam splitter. A microscope objective can through an image to cover the RED ONE sensor if you use enough extension tubes on each camera, and have enough light on the subject. The tubes would be about 400-600mm and the slide end goes to the subject.

You can also mount two small lenses in a single PL adapter and shoot two side by side images on the sensor at the same time at 2K, using the 4.5K mode, if you put a rack and pinion on that you can dolly in and follow focus right up to an inch or so from the lens mount front.

These let you get closer to the subject, if you use a large mirror rig the focal length of the lenses on the cameras would be longer so the 3D effect may not feel as much like the subject is "enlarged" before you when viewed.

[Ben Jones]

Hey guys,

You've all been very helpful about this. To be honest, I'm an intern working on this 3D project, and my knowledge pales in comparison to all of you, and so far you've done a good job of explaining things. My main issue here lies within trying to find other films or projects that have tried to shoot macro stereoscopic shots. I'm sure it has been done, Bugs! 3D is one, but I'm having difficulty finding others. Do you guys have any ideas? Our shoot isn't too far away, and we have some ideas on where we'd like to go with it, but as you all mentioned, 3D is a whole new realm that requires some creative filming techniques. I'm trying to explore all of our possible options. Are there any specific films or companies that have shot 3D in macro, or any leads that you might be able to provide on that front?

Thanks, and hopefully this isn't too dumbed down of a topic for all of you.

Ben

[Ben Jones]

PS: Leonard I will definitely take a look at the IOD calc, even if I don't fully understand it, haha.

[icester]

I've just signed up for these forums in hopes that I might gain a little more information on 3D filming. I apologize in advance if anything is a re-post, but I couldn't find much of what I was looking for in other threads.

I'm an intern working on a project that is going to be shot in 3D, and everyone else on the project is very unfamiliar with the technology. While we have the basics figured out, we are struggling with one shot: an extreme close-up of two insects on a leaf. It would be part of a shot in which we tracked into the close up. We realize that a beam splitter rig is what we need, but in terms of the close-up, how can we prevent any jitters? We're afraid that even a slight breeze will cause the camera to shake when at such a close distance.

The second problem we've run into is the issue of lens choices. In going with a master diopter I'm afraid that it's shallow depth of field would clash with the 3D effect. What are some lens choices for he type of shot we are trying to achieve?

If someone could take the time to explain this in layman's terms, or point me in the right direction, it would be greatly appreciated. And again, I apologize for any re-posts, I'm new to this forum.

Here is my advice:

Camera
Use the fastest shutter and the highest aperture on a samall diameter lens
to get sharp frames.
To compensate for low exposure you need very strong light with IR removed so you do not damage the insects. Also the light need to be soft or you get unwanted specular effects in the beam splitter.

3D rig
the lens need to have from 30 to 55 deg horizontal view angle
because that's how the target viewers like to watch 3D content.
If you use narrower angle the viewers will see distorted perspective or streched depth.

Post edit
in post edit you remove the jitter using a regular plug-in that tracks stationary object on the leaf and that will result in some cropping so plan to use full frame mode when shooting.

Mathew Orman

For state of the art stereoscopic vision systems with: eyestrain free, distortion free and realistic immersion stereoscopic experience contact me
at:
http://www.tyrell-innovations-usa.com/

[Ben Jones]

If you have to get very close to the subject in 3D you can use two cameras with two 90 degree "endoscope" or snorkel lenses with small objectives.

If you use a small beam splitter along with the endoscope lenses you can get even more close, since the ends of the two endoscope can part way "overlap" do to the splitter.



Hey Dan,

Thanks for the reply, I'm not quite sure how these snorkel lenses would work with a beam splitter. Do you know of any specific designs that have used this system, and who I might be able to contact to look at them? Even better would be finding someone who actually builds the rigs, and can help us customize one. It seems like every 3D rig has been made to the specifics of certain productions.

Thanks,
Ben

[Leonard Coster]

Hey Ben,

A lot of rigs are custom made - mine are no exception! I didn't design them with snorkel lenses in mind but maybe Dan is suggesting that you can get away with a parallel (ie no beamsplitter) rig by using snorkel lenses.
Depending on the distances, focal length and minimum IOD achievable with the snorkels this might work great and it makes the amount of kit looming over the poor bug a lot smaller !

Lets run a real example to see where you're sitting.
This example assumes you are shooting on 2x red-one cameras with 25mm lenses.
We want to get real close to get the bug into ECU !

If you can keep the range of distances in the shot low that helps - ie the bug and the leaf he or she is on.

Lets say the bug is 25cm away and the most distant thing in frame (back of the leaf say) is 35cm away. This is by no means really close - just an example.

If you're happy to converge behind the bug (in camera or post) this helps a bits also with the BG divergence limit - at say 33cm - then i calculate you can run your IOD at about 25mm or 1 inch.

If you can re-arrange it so the back of the leaf is a little closer - even just 30cm then you can work out to IOD's of 43mm (1 3/4 ").

These examples allow for some (5%) post zoom for lens distortion and other alignments.

There are a lot of factors but in closeup particularly the distances and focal length have a VERY strong effect on the divergence in the image - a few cm change in distance to camera can double or half the IOD.

I guess what I'm saying is be careful and run the numbers before you shoot!
Happy to help if you need to discuss this further.

Cheers,

[Ben Jones]

Leonard,

I think you're right about the snorkel lenses, I'm not really quite sure how those would be useful on a beam splitter rig, what with the mirror and all. Dan, is there some other beam splitter set up you had in mind to work with the snorkel lenses? When I think endoscopy, I think of it's use in medicine, not so much film. That said, wouldn't we be losing image quality? If these snorkel lenses were to work on a beam splitter, mind you we aren't using a parallel system, how would we go about that? I'm not sure I follow when you say that they could "overlap."

http://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/12375/wm/pd1520953.jpg

This is really the look we are going for, except it will be two ladybugs in the shot. It will be in a fairly well controlled and well lit environment. Our main issue is getting this shot with a 3D. We can let alone the 3D effect for a moment, is a beam splitter rig going to get us close enough to a bug for the kind of shot I put above?

Thanks,
Ben

[Charles Angus]

Have you looked into post-3D?

[Ben Jones]

Well we're looking to shoot the project in 3D, that's our main goal. But if we were to film the lady bugs partially in 2D, how much work would it take to put it into 3D in post?

[icester]

Leonard,

I think you're right about the snorkel lenses, I'm not really quite sure how those would be useful on a beam splitter rig, what with the mirror and all. Dan, is there some other beam splitter set up you had in mind to work with the snorkel lenses? When I think endoscopy, I think of it's use in medicine, not so much film. That said, wouldn't we be losing image quality? If these snorkel lenses were to work on a beam splitter, mind you we aren't using a parallel system, how would we go about that? I'm not sure I follow when you say that they could "overlap."

http://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/12375/wm/pd1520953.jpg

This is really the look we are going for, except it will be two ladybugs in the shot. It will be in a fairly well controlled and well lit environment. Our main issue is getting this shot with a 3D. We can let alone the 3D effect for a moment, is a beam splitter rig going to get us close enough to a bug for the kind of shot I put above?

Thanks,
Ben

It is simple, just use prism combiner which costs around US$180 instead of US$5000 rig.

Mathew Orman

For state of the art stereoscopic vision systems with: eyestrain free, distortion free and realistic immersion stereoscopic experience contact me
at:
http://www.tyrell-innovations-usa.com/

[icester]

Well we're looking to shoot the project in 3D, that's our main goal. But if we were to film the lady bugs partially in 2D, how much work would it take to put it into 3D in post?

You will waist your money and the content will be classified as Fasle Depth 3D or Pseudeo Stereo. Here is the web site of scam artist who does just that:
http://www.underground3dmovies.com/hd3d.htm

Also if your name will be displayed in credits it will damage your reputation for ever.
If you have not yet discovered or no one told you:
the main advantage of stereoscopic vision is the perception of nature's all specular effects.
With 2D to 3D conversion all those effects will be lost and the content will always have paper textures only.
Phillips WOWvx gone bust because of zero specular effects.
They used 2D plus depth as input signals to their 3D auto-stereoscopic TVs/Monitors.
In Avatar 2D textures ware applied to 3D models which resulted in zero specular effects paper jungle.

Mathew Orman

For state of the art stereoscopic vision systems with: eyestrain free, distortion free and realistic immersion stereoscopic experience contact me
at:
http://www.tyrell-innovations-usa.com/

[Jeff Coatney]

Just a guess, because you'd have to test it to make sure, but I'd bet the best combo for shooting insects would be:

2/3" sensor using mini primes and get deeper focus.

IntraOcular set at 15mm to less than 20mm to shrink the audience to the point that the insect's body doesn't elongate on the z axis and end up diverging from the field of view (think grasshopper or praying mantis facing camera, rear end in line with lens axis).

Over / Under Beam splitter rig on a solid tripod or sand bagged hi hat.

[Leonard Coster]

Hi Ben,

So you ask if a beamsplitter rig will let you get close enough - umm - depends on the focal length really.

I would say that the minimum physical distance you could get - with the leaf almost at the front of the mirror box and measuring back to the sensor plane would be about 400mm on a red-one rig.

Given that a bug is maybe 5mm and you say there are two of them. We don't know how friendly they are so give them some space!
Say 20mm wide. That's a FoV of 2.9 degrees.
On a full frame sensor that requires a focal length of: 480mm.
looks like we need to get closer - this is silly!

On my gear you can take the protective front glass out and you could push the leaf into the mirror box - save about 10cm that way
- does it help..... not really - your FoV goes out to a massive 3.9 degrees.
ie you need a focal length of 360mm.

You can get long focal length lenses but be very careful with you mirror - you will be using a TINY (in big letters !) area of the mirror and imperfections in the glass will make you reflected image quite distorted. Stopping down will help with this.

This is a very tough ask and the more i think about it the more i like Dan's idea of using schnorkel lenses.
They let you get very close to the subject
BUT
the problem is going to be the IOD.

You are going to need really little IOD's like the order of millimeters.

This is telling me that you just may not be able to get that close to such a small subject on such a big camera as the red-one. You may have to look at specialist small cameras and tiny beam splitter rigs to get that shot.

sorry.

I have some spare bits of 50% mirror in small pieces - maybe a couple of inches on a side - if you wanted to tape something up to get the shot i can let you have one.

Even my smallest rig for iconix cams and similiar is going to be too big for what you need here...

[Rick Janiger]

You will waist your money and the content will be classified as Fasle Depth 3D or Pseudeo Stereo. Here is the web site of scam artist who does just that:
http://www.underground3dmovies.com/hd3d.htm

those were true 3D content, some from VHD transfers, some from anaglyph conversions, etc...it's was not 'fake 3d'...and people doing this were the saving grace for 3D content that otherwise wasn't available for 3D enthusiasts. Just waiting to see how the blu-ray 3d-hdtv thing shakes out now.