BTSs are intended for non-technial audience but I agree, missed too many crucial elements

Only assuming, but perhaps a lot of those processes were proprietary

I agree, I love all that technical stuff; but as a graphic designer and aspiring motion graphics artist, without the art, this would not exist, nor be able to exist. The feeling is in actuality, everything embodied into one, and therefore in my opinion the most important. I still love technical stuff though don't get me wrong. Before graphic design and motion graphics interest; I wanted to be a mechanical engineer going into automotive automation :), hence why I love this project probably.

I totally agree with you. I clicked to see this video to find that technical rider. It would be great to find a sheet with that info who can help us to learn and see what we need to do an installation like this. Great video though.

They only used real-life projection for the text and things like that, not the canvas themselves. Here's how they made the video: The robots are holding a plain white canvas and moving them around in sync with the animation. As for rendering it out, they motion-tracked where the camera is. In post, they used information from where the canvas and camera were to render a video where the canvas acted as some sort of window with things moving in terms of where the camera is. Everything is flawless, except for at kzfaq.info/get/bejne/or5mfcaqx82odqM.html where the render failed to follow the canvas and is trying to catch up.

+God, creator of the universe Yeah I was hoping they would shed some more light on that. I think there's a couple of ways it could be acheived, with certain sacrifices. The ideal way would be to show it to one person at a time, who was wearing a motion tracker. The animation software could then change the virtual camera angle in realtime depending on the viewers position. This would be way more impressive than the video because the voluntary movements of your head would be reflected in the 3d shapes, enhancing the illusion. But I'm thinking that lag could be an issue, and only one person at a time. Maybe you could add a second person using 3d style shuttered/polarised glasses, at a cost of processing power and resources. You could also animate it so it worked for a more static viewing angle, then have the audience in a thin line perpendicular to the stage, at the same angle. However you would lose some of the illusion, and it wouldn't be as effective.

the perceived depth is created by mapping on to a moving projection surface, the 3D shape is changing as the screen moves, it's not the viewer that changes the depth perception, you are still looking at a 2D surface as a viewer.

@Marino Canal: I'm not sure if you've understood what I mean, or if I understand what you mean. To clarify: If I and you would both be standing in that room where the video's action takes place, except I would stand a few meters to the left of you, would be both see correct 3D on the surface? If not, then please re-read my comment and/or please clarify yours.

the effect is at its best when the spectator would stand in the exact location for which the projection is designed. However, if you redesign the whole thing to be viewed from a larger distance, this would have two effects: 1/ the 3d effect would be less dramatic, because the further you get, the closest it gets to being just a 3d animation projected on a 2d surface, which everyone is familiar with since the start of the cinema 2/ if you increase the viewing distance, you can also allow several people to be close to the point of view. The person at the perfect spot will have the best experience, and the further you get from the point of view, the shittier it gets. Our brain is pretty good at correcting small perspective issues; for example when you look at your PC monitor at an angle, you still understand that this is a rectangle under perspective projection without problem; So I think they could take this into account to create a animation that is viewable in a larger cone and still looks ok.

The path of the camera was tracked AFTER the physical installation was in place, not as it was being constructed. Sure, if you were in the room and viewed it at an extreme angle, it would distort the panels enough to destroy the illusion, but you wouldn't need your eyes to lock into the exact position of the camera to have an experience comparable to what we see in the final video. This is indeed as impressive as it's made out to be ; )

@@SamGriffinGuitar That's what I thought when reading his comment...WTF is he talking about? You have a relatively wide (ish) area where a live audience could be. Why does that guy assume a projected image is only viewable from an extremely narrow angle directly in front? Maybe he's suggesting it couldn't be viewed by an audience of several thousand?

@@Bhatt_Hole What he is saying is that the perspectives of the objects (the rendering of cubes and spheres) don't hold up if you view from a slightly different angle. You immediately start to see that you are looking at a 2d canvas with a projection

@@rowinvanderschee8043 I'm pretty sure he's just trying to sound highbrow and sophisticated. If the creators really wanted to show it in front of a live audience, they could've just up scaled the whole thing and changed it so that the target POV wasn't moving (which would've costed quite a bit of money and is probably why they didn't). From what I'm reading he's downplaying the presentation due to its budget limitations (it can't be shown to a live audience) and praising it for its demonstration of technological precision, when, personally, I think it should be the other way around.

@@rowinvanderschee8043 It doesn't even need to be a different viewing angle. If you were watching it in person, the simple fact that you have two functioning eyes (assuming you do) would tip you off to the fact that it's a flat surface. It looks 3D in video because it's exactly as 3D as everything else in video is--which is to say, all the signals we use to determine depth other than binocular disparity are telling us it's 3D, but the camera is a single lens so binocular disparity can't come into play.

да

I work as a screen-writer for media and I have always wanted to work with your approach regarding a project I will be happy to let you know about. I am eager to introduce myself and my idea to you, as I think we would be a great fit. Best regards,

I think it's just usual white PVC board, like those that you can buy in Hobby Lobby.

Me too. If you find it, please remember to share.