RED will be cheap... just buy two.

Even if they could make it completely safe, people would freak out at having a laser pointed at them. In principle laser would be a better option (used in modern day target acquistion in the military). Very low powered Sonar with very limited range would seem to be a safer option. You wouldn't want to go beyond 1 or 2 watts if that was enough to work.

My Sony F828 digital camera used a visible red laser to aid focus and it was safe for eyes. I don't think laser scanning can be done in real time, even with the most expensive systems.

Hey look buddy. I'm still waiting on the flying automatic super cars we were supposed to get in the year 2000.

/sarcasm

Actually i've thought of this idea for a while, and one really awesome application would be to rack focus in post (easily)... aswell as seamlessly composite *anything* sans greenscreen

That would making keying and compositing a dream, It would be photoshop and you can just adjust the image as layers.

I've also been following 3D camera technology for years, and unfortunately not a lot has been produced.

I did watch a google video about some small company trying to work on one, but it only did like 512x512 resolution (or something like that). They are contract based so they don't have much funding.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...d+video+camera

I'm curious about using two cameras. Is/Would it be possible to use two cameras to extract a depth map? Using one as your color and another camera off to the side that gets the distance? I'm curious to know if something (a complex algorithm) like this could be done.

Actually I remember a while ago Disney (is that right? I can't remember) using a technique with two cameras to do some 3D extraction, or something. If anyone remembers this or has a link that would be useful.

Anyway. I too look forward to the day to have a depth recording video camera.

Cory

3d
 

As a kid one of my first experiences with Photography was the ViewMaster. I was not only enthralled looking at 3D Disney characters on the Moon, and images of a Las Vegas that no longer exists, but it was part of what led me to want to be a Photographer.

It seems that Red has it's work cut out for some time in doing what they are right now, but it occurred to me some time ago that with a (Mysterium) sensor this size, there is actually enough room on it for two images of reasonable size for a 3D image. With a dual lens system, the two discrete images could be processed in firmware. Canon has a stereo lens for the XL series, I've not seen one and I'm not really certain how they process the image for stereo - some processes use filters of course, but Canon may use polarization, and/or with separating alternate fields or frames and splitting the output discretely to the left and right eye. Of course this is not exactly the same as having depth in data form as with distance measurements or use with 3D in software, but there are applications where it would be useful as it adds an important element to the image.

Canon planned to make a stereo lens for the XL series, with even a picture in their folder, but if I'm correct the lens was never really made or made available.

They made it. I saw it at NAB in 2000 or 2001 and looked at the images (interlaced, field sequential requiring LCD electronic eyewear). I think they even delivered a few of the lenses at $7,000 each, but it never went into wide production. I seem to recall that had something to do with environmental problems relating to some of the components, but I'm fuzzy on those details. In any event, that technology is now outdated.

Could be, my bad then. Thanks for clearing that up!