[photo-3d] Re: 2D to 3D film

[Tony Alderson <aifxtony@xxxxxxx>]

Ron Labbe wrote (digest 318, in apparent response to my post on DDD):

>On the thread of 2D to 3D conversion for film: it's got to be a compromise
situation, with fair at best stereo effects (in my opinion). The main
problem I see (besides isolating every element and assigning their place
in
volumetric space, which can change from frame to frame) is that the
second
point of view can see "around" something, which means what ever is
behind
that object MUST BE CREATED for the given parallax deviation. I can't
imagine a software doing this effieciently. It often take me days, maybe
a
week, to do a single image<

I couldn't have put it better...about three weeks ago! But Ron, and the
rest of you, you should go see a demo of Dynamic Digital Depth's
technology before you dismiss them. They appear to be accomplishing some
very interesting stuff.

Now, I'm not saying this is the Holy Grail, maybe I got conned in a
three card Monte game, but talking to Phil Harmann, he really seems to
understand and have dealt with the problems of stereo conversion. It's
like this; I learned to drive in a '28 Chevy Coupe, so I know a little
bit about the details of driving in the 'twenties. If you haven't driven
anything older than 1982, don't try to buffalo me (BTW, I'm 46).

Now, I have a great deal of respect for Ron and his conversions, but
I've done a few conversions myself, and I'm just saying I was impressed.
You all should pay attention to this company. If they can really deliver
commercially on their promise, they are going to make a big impact on
stereoscopy. Their compatible broadcast format is evey bit as
interesting as their conversion capabilities. Not to mention their
selection plug-in (probably available for Photoshop one of these days)

You owe yourself a look.

Tony Alderson