3d Objects

[litemover]

Here's a simple checklist of things to do to create models that will absolutely show up under any circumstances.

1. Use polys only, no Nurbs, Sub-ds, or anything else.
2. Only use quad faces, no n-gons or triangulated faces.
3. Make sure your object is oriented toward the Z camera
4. Make sure to follow richards instructions on how to name the models exactly.
5. Make sure to output only the selected model not the entire scene.
6. check you scale, if it is in mm, your model may be so small that it will look like a pinhole. If you have been working in very small units, just double check that you aren't making models that are too small.
7. try to use double sided geometry, i.e not planes. Instead of a plane use a very thin cube primitive, this way you are guaranteed not to have any reversed faces.
8. If you need to use planes, turn on your normals and make sure they face the Z axis. Catalyst seems to orient the model towards the Z axis.
If you're still having problem try outputting your model without any shading or bump/displacement.
Z axis on many modeling packages is not height it is depth as in from the cameras point of veiw. Only in architectural and 3dmax is Z up and down. You can change this preference in most packages so that Z isup.

I know that if you follow these steps your model should work. Experiment though in your spare time and try all types of geometry and faces. I'm not saying that they won't work, I just know what will.

Anyone with any in depth 3d questions, feel free to pm me and post here.

Christian

[joshgubler]

I have a very simple arc I'm looking to shoot onto. Here's the setup:

3 projectors tiled (not blended) shooting onto a single arc (120' long w/ 70' radius). The projectors are each centered and squared up with their individual portions of the screen, so you could basically treat it like 3 separate and identical arcs. The "screen" is actually a curtain with fullness, so that will cover a little bit of distortion.

Do I need to create a model for this arc, or will catalyst handle the curved surface through internal settings (i.e. mix settings, etc.)?

Thanks.

[litemover]

Definitely use the curved screen submix. It's very reliable, I would try to get a Triplehead2go on it so that you can just use same layer and it will be guaranteed to stay in sync.

This way you could control the 3 way tile with one long piece or 3 separate pieces if you want. If you don't need to spread one image all the way across, I would still use the internal curved screen control on the submixes that you are needing for and use 2 machines for it, unless of course it is a very small resolution screen...

Alternatively, if you need absolute seamless screen blending with point control for luminosity, you could use a Spider but to me it sounds like Submix curve screen would work just fine in this situation. Even Catalysts Blending is completely and totally awesome, stack right up to a spider with a few small exceptions.

Hope this helps

Kindly,

Christian Choi

[joshgubler]

Thanks Christian,

The triplehead solution is exactly what we have planned. If it was just three separate images then distortion at the edges wouldn't be such a big deal. It's because we want to throw a panoramic image up on our panoramic screen that it has to be relatively clean. I'll play with submix curves. Thanks.

[litemover]

Thanks Christian,

The triplehead solution is exactly what we have planned. If it was just three separate images then distortion at the edges wouldn't be such a big deal. It's because we want to throw a panoramic image up on our panoramic screen that it has to be relatively clean. I'll play with submix curves. Thanks.

u need to make sure that you aren't using old G5 1.8ghz or 2ghz ppc machines that have only 512mb of memory if you go with the tripleheads. You really should have at least a dual 2.5 ppc or macintel with 2gb or higher mem and you need a dual link video card on the machine that you are using the triplehead2go on, also, don't mix and match resolutions, keep the general default settings in the tripleheads and don't futz with them and you'll be right. , Catalyst like the same resolutions out of each of the outputs of the triplehead.

BTW, the blending in Cat is awesome, very reliable and even with HD. You should try blending your submixes so they are seamless.

Hope that helps.
cc
Christian

[samsc]

u need to make sure that you aren't using old G5 1.8ghz or 2ghz ppc machines that have only 512mb of memory if you go with the tripleheads. You really should have at least a dual 2.5 ppc or macintel with 2gb or higher mem and you need a dual link video card on the machine that you are using the triplehead2go on, also, don't mix and match resolutions, keep the general default settings in the tripleheads and don't futz with them and you'll be right. , Catalyst like the same resolutions out of each of the outputs of the triplehead.

BTW, the blending in Cat is awesome, very reliable and even with HD. You should try blending your submixes so they are seamless.

Hope that helps.
cc
Christian

nothing less than intel or quad g5. pci-e
doing the resolutions required 2400x600 or 3072x768 isnt even properly supported on older graphics cards.

[joshgubler]

We've already done a couple of shows using 2 tripleheads, so I'm sure we will be fine here since we're only using one. Are you saying that I need to run my preview monitor at 1024x768 and my triplehead at 3072x768 (I know the machine can handle this as I've run both outputs at 3072x768)? Or can I run my preview monitor higher? We're doing all of the programming through the hud for this show, so it would really help to have as big a preview monitor as possible.

I think edge blending would be cleaner as well, but my designer has done a test shoot and he's convinced that tiling is clean enough. He's afraid of loosing intensity by having to spread each of the projectors over a larger area.

[SourceChild]

I think edge blending would be cleaner...
...my designer has done a test shoot...afraid of loosing intensity by having to spread each of the projectors...

Trust me on this, if you can blend, even a little bit, it will look so much better. With even the slightest overlap of two butted edges, your intensity increases and it is very noticeable.

...3 projectors tiled (not blended) shooting onto a single arc...
...120' long...

Something of a concern, you mention 120'. That would mean a single projected image size of 30'x40'.
I am not sure what projectors you are using but that is a huge image.

I typically use LX-100 10k projectors and the largest size I would ever shoot is 18'x24' and that is in low light. Even if you are using a 20k projector, 30x40 is still huge and will only be about a tenth as bright as a typical screen.

If you're worried about running everything off of a single Catalyst, remember you can use 2 TH2Gs and run 5 projectors and put your HUD on one of the six outputs.

I have some intensity equations if you're interested.

[litemover]

Catalyst Blending works great, even at high Def.

If you need it to look better, work with the projectionist to do a dual blend between the projectors and Catalyst simultaneously, set a blend of around 20 to 35%, leave up the alignment marks then let the projectionist work out the rest of it.

If you are working in an extreme situation with a rediculous amount of souces that need to blended, composited, PIP, pixel adds, etc..., and don't want any hastles, USE A SPYDER and don't cheap out.

You can see everything that a Spyder does here: Vistasystems

For most cases though, Cat edge blending and a combination of projectionist will/knowledge will go a long way so treat your projectionist with class.

CC

[SourceChild]

work with the projectionist to do a dual blend between the projectors and Catalyst simultaneously...

What do you mean by this, "Dual blend between the projectors and Catalyst?"

You can see everything that a Spyder does here: Vistasystems

What are the costs of the different Spyders and are they worth it?