Single-Source Stereo &Microstereoscopic 3D

2010 June 24Welcome

PLEASE VIEW IN SLIDE SHOW MODETO ACTIVATE AUDIO

22

3D Challenges Pre-Viewer• 2X equipment & signals +• Additional personnel

– convergence per pair– stereographer

• Additional processing– correct, match, format

• Graphics z-axis depth• Distribution resolution• Monitoring challenges

Sony

Pace

33

3D Viewer Challenges• Limited 3DTV penetration

– need for separate coverage?

• Glasses– cost, batteries, maintenance

• Compatibility w/2D viewing– need for 2D glasses

• Perceptual conflicts– stereovisual-vestibular– distance-based

Pace-Fujinon Shadow

Sony 3DTVat CES 2009

“simulatorsickness”

4

Stereoscopic 3D Theory

acquisition presentation

3D =height,width,depth

screen

5

Stereoscopic 3D Theory

acquisition presentation

3D =height,width,depth

screen

actually orthostereoscopy

6

Other Three Dimensions

pupillary distance40-80 mm

(down to 5-year-olds)

screen size ~ 1 inch to 100 feet

viewing distance

vast range of vergence-based distance for same 3D master

7

Vergence-Accommodation Conflictfrom Prof. Martin Banks,Visual Space Perception LabUniversity of California – Berkeley

3.2 meters (10.5 feet) ok to +∞

8

Countering V-A Conflict

In-Three “3D in the Home”http://www.in-three.com/3DintheHomev2.html

9

Countering V-A Conflict

In-Three “3D in the Home”http://www.in-three.com/3DintheHomev2.html

10

Miniaturization

Elan Valley Miniature (tilt-shift technique based on blur)http://www.flickr.com/photos/frosted_peppercorn/481102393

2D

left-eyeview

right-eyeview

Image position relatively easy to change; imagecontent much harder to change

11

Ghosting (Crosstalk)

• Glasses• Display• Synchronization• Viewing Angle• Orientation• Inability to fuse

shot through active-shutter glasses for 3DTV reviewhttp://gizmodo.com/5501900/the-best-3dtv-samsung-un55c7000-vs-panasonic-tc+p50vt20

12

Spatial Resolution

HDMI1.4a: ½H 1080i, ½V 720pphoto ©2010 Inition | Niche | Pacific

13

Anaglyph Challenges• Inexpensive glasses• Any TV • Any color TV distribution• Full resolution

But• Strong ghosting• Poor color rendition• Eye rivalry• Light loss• Display adjustment

TrioScopics

ColorCode 3-D

14

Anaglyph Glasses

Ghosting in Anaglyphic Stereoscopic ImagesAndrew J. Woods & Tegan Rourke

Centre for Marine Science & Technology, Curtin University of Technologyhttp://cmst.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/pubs/2004-08.pdf

15

Range of Displays

16

The Elusive GrailCan there be a 3D system with• no ghosting• no V-A conflict or shrinking• 2D-viewer compatibility• no extra personnel• one lens & camera/position• one signal path/recording• full resolution• inexpensive glasses• for all TVs & distribution?

17

3D History

• 1833 Wheatstone– adjustable distance

• 1849 Brewster– lenticular

• 1851 Holmes– adjustable prismatic lenticular

18

“Binauricular Auduition”

Scientific American, December 31, 1881compared to stereoscope

19

Crosstalk-Free Listening

receivers held to ears

20

A-B Stereo (Spaced Omnis)

• BIG sensation difference

• Unnatural

• Poor mono compatibility distance >>human head width

21

“Ping-Pong” Stereo

• HUGE sensationdifference

TV setAM radio FM radio

early stereo simulcasts

• Completelyunnatural

22

“Single-Source” Stereo

• X-Y, M-S, othercoincidentmic techniques

• stereo microphones– professional &

consumer

ShureNotesIssue #25

23

Narrow-Separation ListeningEmbracingSoundspeaker system

commonWohlerstereo

monitoring

24

Visual Stereoacuity

“Stereoacuity at Distance and Near,” Wong, Woods, & Pelihttp://www.eri.harvard.edu/faculty/peli/posters/optometry/AAO2000_poster.pdf

BinocularVision andStereopsis,Howard & Rogers, 1996

10 arcsecondstereoacuity ~1/6 of a pixelat “optimum” (20/20)viewing angle

25

Limited Stereopsis

reference: Canon XJ22x7.3compact studio lens165 mm wide box

Canon 3D lens, shown on XL1

DXG-321much narrower thanpupillary distance

Sharp 3D module

Hammacher-Schlemmer

26

3ality Demo at 2010 DCS

photo by Mark Formanhttp://screeningroom.com

27

Microstereopsis• Term coined by Mel Siegel, Robotics Institute,

Carnegie Mellon University, and co-authors of papers “Kinder Gentler Stereo,” and “Just Enough Reality: Comfortable 3D Viewing via Microstereopsis” (Proc. SPIE, 1999)

• Intended as a solution to “simulator sickness”• Concept much older (as will be seen)• Not likely to be confused with

microstereoscopy, term used for 3D microscopy

28

Sony Technology Group

single lens per 3D camera position

29

Microstereopsis Acquisition

30

Viewing: CES 2009

2D-viewing compatibility

31

Sony Single-Lens System• No V-A conflict or miniaturization• No ghosting• Full 2D compatibility with 3D display• One lens per camera position• No additional personnelBUT• Two cameras per position• 3DTVs required for 3D

(currently costly active glasses)• HDMI 1.4a spatial-resolution loss

32

Songer PatentUS 3,712,199issued Jan. 23, 1973

33

Songer Patent – Figure 2US 3,712,199issued Jan. 23, 1973

34

Beiser PatentUS 4,290,675issued Sep. 22, 1981

35

D.O.T.S. Implementation

• Digital OpticalTechnology Systems(Netherlands)

• Shown in NY 1979• Broadcast by

Nine TV Sydney

36

Anaglyph vs. MS Anaglyph

• Saturated (forcrosstalk reduction)– light loss– eye rivalry– poor color– display adjustment– residual ghosting

• Unsaturated (because no crosstalk)

(simulated)

37

Microstereoscopic Anaglyph• No V-A conflict or miniaturization• No ghosting• Full 2D compatibility with 3D display• One lens per camera position• No additional personnelAND• One camera per position• Works on any color TV and distribution system• No resolution loss

38

Why Isn’t It Everywhere?• Formerly patent protected• Doesn’t sell new TVs (and other equipment)• Perhaps not as flawless as presented here• Less WOW! than other stereoscopic systems

– Does microstereopsis bear a similar relationship to common stereoscopy as single-source stereo sound bears to ping-pong stereo?

?