|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
"I am very curious how this Kodak footage will compare to the footage from the six and ten camera Go Pro rigs. If we are shooting with more Go Pros, at 1440 60p per camera, that should mean each slice of the VR image should be higher resolution than the overall image from this Kodak, correct?"
Correct. "OTOH, we have all experienced the sub-par resolution and softness of the YouTube VR encoder. From what I have seen, almost anything shot on any resolution comes out on YouTube looking like crap. So I am wondering if renting the 6 camera and 10 camera Go Pro rigs at $2,700.00 per week and $3,600.00 per week is worth it, at this point in time, if our client's primary audience will view it on YouTube mainly?" I have not seen a GoPro multi-camera rig VR on YouTube that looked much different than my Kodak ones in terms of resolution (I use my videos in comparison, as I know mine have the best resolution possible). "If we shot with the Kodak, we would use the Kodak software to stitch the footage as you have, correct?" Correct. "What about editing it and adding in the "blinks"? Do you end up with a 4k H264 QT or what is the end output from the stitching software?" The output file is a 3840x1920 MP4 (H264) video at 60 Mbps. It is the required resolution for YouTube VR (no doughnut holes). You can also merge together all the stitched clips losslessly to produce a multi-clip MP4 H264 3840x1920 video file (60 Mbps) "Can that file then be edited in FCP X and or Adobe CC Premier?" It is a standard H264 MP4 video file. You just have to be sure to retain the 3840x1920 aspect ratio. You can download my original (Kodak-software produced) video file from Vimeo to test it out. There is no special plug-in needed. It is a standard file - you can grade it or whatever. "Which plug-ins would be necessary at that point with FCP X or Premiere? The Dashwood plug-in or ?? Just trying to see what the actual workflow would be from footage from this Kodak for a professional project?" I don't use FCP X or Premiere. I have used Resolve, Vegas Pro, PowerDirector, TMPENgc. "I take it the stitching is pretty simple? Is it render heavy?" It is simple to use, but sophisticated underneath. It is slow to render. "Sorry for so many questions, but when I look at your Vimeo clip, I can see that quality is decent, whereas the quality in the YouTube VR clip looks terrible. That leads me to believe that when viewed through a decent VR headset, the quality would look decent, pretty close to the Vimeo clip as far as sharpness, colors and dynamic range? Thanks for any suggestions or light you can shed on this. Client wants VR and we are planning on renting the Go Pro Professional 6 and 10 camera rigs to shoot but for travel, simplicity and ease of use, the Kodak is appealing. I just can't determine of the quality would be good enough for a paying client or if we should just forget the Kodak and rent the much more expensive and complex rigs. I know for our client, their main concern for the VR is social media, Facebook, YouTube, etc. I don't know if they will want to monetize the VR content or merely use it to build a buzz about the show." If you can find a GoPro rig-produced VR video on YouTube that you think looks much better point us to it. Also if there is some test I can run with the Kodak rig, I may be able to do that. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
The only things I can find that look better THAN YouTube would be the GoPro "Trees" video when viewed on Facebook through the Go Pro/Facbook VR engine. It looks clearer than YouTube, although it is still soft and looks somewhat low resolution still. Also, the quality of the Google Stories "Help" piece, when viewed through the Google Stories app on my iPhone 5S is exceptional, it looks crystal clear. If you haven't already, download the app and watch "Help", you'll be impressed. That piece was shot on a six camera RED Dragon rig on a cable cam on a green screen stage so it is all composited. I have yet to find any VR on YouTube that looks any better than your material, that's what is depressing about it, I don't want to spend tens of thousands of dollars in rentals and fly halfway across the world to shoot VR that looks like bad VHS on YouTube. Must investigate different social media options with the client (studio who obviously has lots of connections with the large social media companies) to see if this project can somehow be exhibited in a format that looks better than YouTube VR.
Might be fun to buy one of these Kodak systems just to compare with the Go Pro ten camera system though. The material we will be shooting, some of it is BTS on the filming of a television show and some of it is scripted with talent on the show's sets so it should be a good test of what it possible with VR at this point. The pieces on set are designed for full 360 although some lights/grip from their grid will be visible up at the top as the set was built for normal shooting. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
My experience in VR still photography suggests that a 10-camera GoPro rig will have much more parallax error than the Kodak360. In theory, that predicts that the Kodak will be able to successfully stitch subjects that are much closer to the camera array.
Any experience of this? How does the Kodak system do at various subject distances? "In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, not so much!" Another lesson from the VR stills experience is that you WANT near and far in your compositions. I've shot stills in some amazing places, but, foreground is as important as background. Some terminology: the hole at the top (if present) is at the Zenith. The one at the bottom is at the Nadir. In VR stills we can patch the Nadir, often with an extra shot that was carefully hand-held. Some people like to put their logo there. It's a bit of a trick in either case, since the equirectangular image format is so distorted at the nadir. The right software makes it easy. Does Kodak's offer nadir patching? |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Quote:
The Kodak stitching software results in videos that have no hole in either the Zenith or the Nadir. For example: Be sure to select 4K. So there is no patching tool. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
In your last video I cannot see you standing anywhere, do you hide and watch the camera to be sure no-one runs off with it? It sounds like a silly question but since the camera records all around you, you as a cameraman cannot be standing next to it as you don't want people to look right into your face when they look around, I can't see this working well in more crowded places, the tripod and camera look light enough for someone to steal it when it's recording unattended.
|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Quote:
Most people I think would believe that the camera is being monitored and not just left around. And the rig is large enough (though very light) so taking it would be conspicuous. I have observed people coming up to the rig and inspecting it and then walking away. Another reason not to invest $5,000+ in a VR rig... |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
For the recently posted Campus Tour clip, I am having some trouble viewing correctly.
When I click on the vid, it does open and plays, however, it just play stretched out or flat. I am on an iphone5 with Safari browser if that matters, and I have working YouTube app. I know my phone can view other 360 vids properly, as I can view them in Facebook, YouTube, etc. Any suggestions? |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Quote:
Quote:
If I click on the video (YouTube version) in the embedded frame in this thread it allows me, with my mouse, to scroll around 360 degrees as it plays, viewing with the Edge Browser or with Chrome. If I view the video with the YouTube app on my Samsung Galaxy S7 I can, by moving the phone up, down and around, view the full 360 degrees as the video plays. If I click the goggles icon, I can view the video using my Samsung Gear VR, moving around the scenes with my eyes. Works perfectly. Are you sure you are clicking on the YouTube and not the Vimeo version? Are you viewing the YouTube version with the YouTube app? I do not have an iPhone, but operating system is not relevant if you view using the YouTube app, but I can't check. |
How close can subjects get?
The Campus Tour 360 Video has two close encounters that enable judging how close subjects can get. In both cases the subjects get very close (less than 2-3 feet) right at the stitching area.
At 5:38 in a man walks quickly right by the rig; he passes less than 2-3 feet from the camera at the part where stitching must take place. You can see what happens; there is only a very slight, brief artifact. You have to make sure you are looking at the right part of the scene (he comes from behind the camera and walks by to the camera's left). At 9:45 a group of men come within 2 feet of the cameras and stop and stare and then go on, again at a stitching point. They come from behind the camera and to the left. There is no artifacting at all. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
As far as the viewing issue, I have figured some things out that maybe helpful in regards to viewing issues on an iPhone. I recently purchased an sp360 4K, and can see this issue being a confusing problem for some customers.
I was on your YT link, not the Vimeo. When I click on the red arrow play button inside the video, that is when the video opens and just starts playing flat. So I clicked on the curved arrow in upper right, and it shows some choices. Clicking on the three dots opens a window asking if to open the vid in YT app. Perfect playback. I also happened to click on the title above the video window (YouTube (Short URL). Same as above, opens a small window asking if to open in YT app. Plays fine. So your vid is fine, just a little hassle to auto play on iPhone I guess. I wonder what the difference in the code is between these three choices. And if there is a way to force the YT app to open rather than going through the extra steps. Massive confusion to viewers on iPhone if not, unlike the non-issue of your android (don't have one to test). |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Quote:
And, there is a firmware update from April 28. |
Close Up Tests
There are no problems stitching with little artifacting close subjects using the dual Kodak 360 4K kit and the stitching software. However,
with the Kodak Stitching Software you have a lot of controls over the stitch, but you cannot stitch different parts of the scene differently. Parallax means that very close subjects cannot stitch the same way far subjects do - this is the issue with close subjects. So, when you get the close subject to stitch correctly, the far one is not. If no subjects get very close this is not an issue. This short video illustrates the issue: the first part stitches based on the very close subject; the second on the far subject. The guy up close is right at the stitch line (90 degrees to the two cameras and smack in the middle - the worst case). This is just the Vimeo version (choose 4K), which makes it easy to see (no need to rotate around). Sophisticated stitching programs may be able to correct both the far and near subjects simultaneously - this video shows all the information is there to do so because of the large overlap between the two lenses. |
Re: How close can subjects get?
Quote:
In the first scene, pan left of the topiary "125" in the flowers, tilt down and look at the sidewalk. There are some lines that don't meet. This is a typical stitching error in panorama work. In the third scene, at 5:38 there's a tiny bit of error at his feet at his closest approach. The fourth scene, where the camera is placed in a sort of rosette pattern in the sidewalk, the stitching software appears to have been confused by the pattern. At 6:20, 7:05, and 9:45 there is significant ghosting of passers-by. These kinds of errors are also common in panorama stitching, but these are pronounced. What's confusing about this is that the error at 5:38 is tiny, almost imperceptible, but at 6:20 it is dramatic, at a further distance. So, apparently, there is significant potential for stitching errors out of the Kodak software (scene 4), but, the stitch can also be almost perfect in another scene (scene 3). Do you have tools in the Kodak software to correct stitching errors, or is it a simplified interface with few or no controls? Can the corrections of one stitch be applied to another? For all my detailed nit-picking, I have to say I'm extremely impressed with what you're doing with this camera array and software. In shooting and post of still panos I have had to invest so much learning time, experimenting with multiple solutions both in shooting and stitching, to produce panos without stitching/parallax errors. And that's just a single frame at a time... Hmm. Which may point to the possibility of batching video frames through a "stills" stitcher like PTGui, or the video stitcher from Autopano, which both have full sets of controls... I wonder if the Kodak software can do better... Or if PTGui or Autopano can do better with the Kodak camera files. |
Re: Close Up Tests
Thanks for posting this - I was working on the YT file when you put up this test.
Quote:
To my understanding, there is no stitching method that will correct the parallax "ghosting" seen in this test. I could imagine, merging two different stitches using traveling matte composite methods in AE or something. Having near and far subjects in a scene is quite important in panorama work, IMO. However, there is no single-camera video method that eliminates parallax error in shooting, as we can do in stills. Note that the Ricoh Theta S, on the same principle as the Kodak rig, has smaller parallax error, but at a mostly unacceptable cost of image quality. As small sensors and ultra fish-eye lenses (wider than 180-deg) improve a smaller camera like the Theta may catch up to the current Kodak 360 image quality. My sense is that one must shoot around the parallax limitations of the Kodak array. Near and far may be an important composition concept, but, at the seam areas, one or the other must be low-detail. If a person is close and in the seam area, the background content must have low detail to avoid showing stitching errors. That fourth scene in the YT clip, which you extracted for the short Vimeo stitching test, shows the worst situation possible. Action at the seam. Near is quite near. The need for detail in the middle ground. The quite demanding pattern in the concrete, extending from near to far. I say shoot around these challenges! And, it will be worse with a GoPro array, because the NPP / "nodal" points will be significantly further away, meaning significantly more parallax in the shots. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Now THIS looks fun:
|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
[QUOTE=Noa Put;1914146]Now THIS looks fun:
Yes, that was fun, and even amazing. But if one needs $500,000 to make good use of 360 VR (and I am confident this spectacle cost something like that (the choreographer's fee alone may be that)), it kind of makes the point of what's the use of 360 VR for "most of us". Also I am still unconvinced that the six GoPro cameras improves quality over the two Kodaks, for this same rarified use. I think this is a more useful, and interesting, example of a real world 360 video, which is also technically not bad either (this is not put here to make a political statement - the point is this transports one effectively to areas one has interest in seeing) : |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Quote:
The environments of these children are so important to their stories, the immersive look at environments is very engaging. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Honestly, that Go Pro video suffers BECAUSE of the VR IMHO, the VR doesn't enhance the experience much. It would be much more impressive in a traditional flat, well shot and edited piece that showcased the jumpers and stunts, mostly from a third person POV, not as a first person view from the person doing the jumps, although that is a good cutaway for a few seconds. But there is little feel of the grandiosity of the setting or stunts. And the YouTube terrible and glitchy compression detracts. I have a pretty healthy connection and it was still trailing picture to sound and then would catch up, reminds me of trying to stream video in 2002. It was possible but pretty challenging.
The NY Times piece works better although it still doesn't compel me to watch more than the :30 of the VR experience. To me, both of these pieces still seem like a solution in search of a storytelling challenge. I am sure that others mileage will vary. Still looking for that elusive "must see" VR piece. The best I have seen so far is the Google Stories piece "Help". Through the Google Spotlight Stories app, it looks amazing, even on my small iPhone 5S screen. The motion is crystal clear and fluid and it uses the iPhones accelerometer and compass really well to track the action. If we could get that same quality level experience on streaming, then I think VR would be more successful. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Well, the snow stunt video is much fun to watch for a little while but gets boring very quickly, I just also watched "the displaced" and while you can consider this as a professional attempt at 360vr I much prefer a normal shot documentary, I also didn't watch it completely and just browsed through the video for an impression of the VR, not for the story they where trying to tell while I probably would have watched it completely if shot with regular videocamera's and would have gotten a better understanding of their message. VR will remain just a novelty for me that sometimes is fun to watch but looses my attention real quick.
|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Here is another one where I find 360vr has a purpose
|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Philip Bloom has just started playing with the dual Kodaks. Here is his first attempt:
He stitched in the Kodak program and then upscaled to 8K before uploading to YouTube to minimize compression by YouTube. He says to watch in 4K (not 8K). Maybe he will come up with a novel use (this is not it). |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Stanford Dish Hike in 360 on a Cloudy Day.
Flat file (view in 4K): 360 VR version (view in 4K): |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Beach in 360:
Vimeo flat file: Select 4K. YouTube for panorama viewing or VR 360: Select 4K. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
From a high urban butte.
Vimeo flat file: Select 4K. YouTube for 360 panorama viewing: Select 4K. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
Great thread. Learning a lot about something I really personally don't care for but I am being forced to learn due to company wanting to add this to our list of services. This whole concept flies in the face of everything that I have spent years learning about composition and lighting and creating a feel based on camera angle and composition. Not to mention that I am used to having tons of lighting and grip equipment just off camera that is now just about impossible! Feels like the art portion is going away. I hope not. Anyway....on to my questions.
Started dabbling with a Ricoh Theta which is seriously consumer level but got our feet wet. Was easy to use at was a single camera solution with 2 lenses on opposite sides and created a 1080P video with essentially 2 spherical images, one on each half of the frame. Was super easy and created well stitched videos.....but at extremely low resolution. We recently moved up to the Kodak SP360 4k dual kit and while the increase in resolution is quite noticeable, it still seems a little soft. Also....the issue with distance parallax is bugging me. If the distant objects are aligned then people or closer object near the stitching point are either doubled or disappear in the seam itself. I do not remember seeing this issue with the Ricoh theta. It is bothering me to no end. Is this normal with most 360 VR??? Or is it specific to the Kodak 360 only? I see the same thing in several of the Kodak samples posted here so I don't think it's just my specific unit. Any input??? Thanks. Hoping to make regular contributions and ask a ton of questions as I get these projects rolling. Thanks again. |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
It's the standard parallax problem with two lenses that are separated. All the multi lens cameras/rigs have this issue. Here is a demonstration:
|
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
I am experiencing this with subjects more than 3 ft away. I caught myself walking out of the shot and there was essentially 2 versions of me that merged at about 12-15 ft away finally. I'll have to do some more testing. I could eliminate some of this by calibrating the stitching in the Kodak software but it made the further horizon objects double. Also.....as people moved closer and further they would split and rejoin. On the seams only of course.
3 ft limit I can handle. 10-15 ft is going to be tougher to keep people out of for corporate shots where we want to see people moving around and working in the VR environment. Thanks, |
Re: 360 VR for Most of Us
As you've noticed when comparing the Ricoh Theta to the Kodak SP360 footage, this will vary between cameras, or should I say, between camera rigs.
First, both rigs have some parallax error that can't be corrected with conventional stitching, and correction using traveling mattes in After Effects or something would be cost/time prohibitive in most cases. That the Theta is better on this than the SP360 has entirely to do with the distance between the so-call No Parallax Point (NPP) aka. Entrance Pupil of the two lenses. The Theta is such a tiny thing, the NPPs can't be spaced more than about .75" / 2cm. The SP360's NPP distance looks to be a little over 3" / 7.5cm (I don't have one of those in front of me to measure). If you want perfect stitches for near and far subjects in the same shot, the distance between the two NPPs must be 0. This is achievable in still spherical photography with multiple exposures, rotating the camera about the lens's NPP. So far as I know, there is no current video camera technology... well, almost none, because if you're willing to sacrifice some image height, (your sphere has no image info looking up and down, it's less than 180-deg high), there is some mirror lens tech that will give you a seamless 360 around. A GoPro camera array will be even worse than the SP360, due to the greater distance between NPPs, and many more seams that show the parallax error. What to do? Choose near or far and stitch for it. Compose to that limitation. Set up so that there is no meaningful near/far content in the seam area. Compose to that limitation. Explore creating multiple stitches, and painfully merging them together in After Effects, with lots of rotoscoping. (I can't imagine doing this, myself) I'm saying shoot around the limitation, until someone comes out with new technology. It's kinda' tough to depend on new tech in this case, though, because although spherical video is young, spherical stills have been with us for 15 years or more, and nobody has come up with a single-shot solution, other than the 0-360 lens and the Ricoh Theta approaches. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:52 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network