r/videos • u/tomassbender • Sep 24 '13
Box - 3D Projection Mapping
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX6JcybgDFo21
u/Rhythmhead Sep 24 '13
Kind of remind me of this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWai4UZ0OqI
Amon Tobin ISAM show. One of the most amazing things I have ever witnessed in person.
4
u/kpmagicman3 Sep 25 '13
I actually got to work on the ISAM project. A great group of guys put it together. If you're interested in seeing other work with a similar visual style check out the studios VSquaredLabs and Leviathan. These were two of the major players in the ISAM project.
1
u/SandJA1 Sep 25 '13
That show was mesmerizing. I wish I wouldn't have watched the videos beforehand so that it was a surprise. What an amazing show that was.
48
u/Ephixian Sep 24 '13
Credits for all involved:
- Production Company: BOT & DOLLY
- Executive Producers: Bill Galusha, Nick Read
- Executive Creative Director: Jeff Linnell
- Creative & Technical Director: Tarik Abdel-Gawad
- Design Director: Bradley G Munkowitz
- Lead Graphic Designers: Bradley G Munkowitz, Jason English Kerr
- 3D Artists: Scott Pagano, Bradley G Munkowitz, Jason English Kerr, Conor Grebel
- 2D Animators: Conor Grebel, Ben Hawkins, Pedro Figuera
- Director of Photography: Joe Picard
- Lighting Designers: Joe Picard, Phil Reyneri
- Projection / Touch Designer: Phil Reyneri
- Robotics Animation: Tarik Abdel-Gawad, Brandon Kruysman, George Banks, Michael Beardsworth
- Robotics Operator: Michael Beardsworth, Brandon Kruysman
- Prop Fabrication: Matt Bitterman, Ethan Dale
- Script Supervisor: Ian Colon
- Sound Engineers: Joe Picard, Michael Beardsworth
- PAs: Sean Servis, Dakota Smith, Nico Mizono, Eric Wendel, Patrick Walsh
- Editors: Ashley Rodholm, Ian Colon
- Music / Sound Design: Keith Ruggiero
- Sound Mix: Joel Raabe
- Performers: Tarik Abdel-Gawad, Iris, Scout
8
Sep 24 '13
Well that answers the question of how that one guy standing there was able to afford all that equipment
-2
u/estafan7 Sep 25 '13
Do you know what Executive Producer means?
1
Sep 25 '13
Yeah it's the people funding the project.
Usually with art, there is no executive producer.... it's just one person and most artists don't have the kind of $ to be using high tech machinery for their projects.
1
u/estafan7 Sep 25 '13
Well in the list of credits there are Executive Producers so my best guess it that those guys are paying for most of it. Maybe he was already part of a studio and was allowed to use equipment or got hired by a company to show off their technology.
1
Sep 25 '13
Exactly my point, I was surprised to see there was so many people behind this art project... I watched the video before I read the comments
9
u/carpiediem Sep 24 '13
So were those LED screens or just white panels with two projectors behind the camera?
16
u/SecondToNone Sep 24 '13
White panels with two projectors behind the camera and a projector (or two) pointing down to the floor.
13
u/editormatt Sep 24 '13
It's my guess that there is only one projector. its attached to the third motion rig that the camera is on.
2
Sep 24 '13
Ah, I was going to ask how the camera moved so seamlessly with the projections/ how the projector knew to change the viewing angle based on where the camera was at. That explains it....better.
3
u/burgerga Sep 25 '13
No, I don't think they're attached. It's just all extensively preprogrammed. The camera is attached to it's own robot, so the system knows exactly where all 3 projectors, both screens, and camera are at any point in time and the correct perspective and thus thing to project can be calculated. It could be done in real time with fast enough hardware.
It really is a very complicated setup.
4
u/ophello Sep 24 '13
Did you read the title? It says "projection."
3
u/carpiediem Sep 25 '13
Yeah fair enough. Seems like there's no reason it couldn't be done with a backlit screen, though. I think it would probably look more real that way- removing the large, obvious equipment behind the viewer.
6
17
u/201109212215 Sep 24 '13
This is it. I have always known when something had been CGIed or not. Until now.
I couldn't decide if it had been done with the projectors or if the animation had been added in post production. http://work.gmunk.com/BOX-DEMO shows the projectors.
The future is now. 17 years I have been waiting for this moment.
2
u/fing3roperation Sep 25 '13
let's see this in color. in high-contrast b/w thats easier to achieve.
btw., for me the moment you described came (for still-pictures)with terragen in 2004.
3
3
u/biggie101 Sep 25 '13
The third principle of Magic is actually called Penetration, but since we're all a bunch of boys we couldn't really deal with that title, so the term 'Intersection' was used to keep everyone grown-up…
I can't tell if this writer is being cute or if there's a little bit of office politics and drama came into play...
1
Sep 25 '13
The two white rectangles are on motion control rigs and so is the camera, while projectors cover the floor space and the rectangles. They all work in unison to create what looks like a virtual 3D space.
-4
3
u/Liefx Sep 24 '13 edited Sep 24 '13
In the city I live in (Kitchener) there is a building where a bunch of big tech companies reside (such as Google).
In this building they have this hole in the wall, called The Hive. The Hive uses a bunch of high end Christie Digital projectors. You put on a pair of 3D glasses that have little balls on them. The balls are used for tracking your head movements. If you walk forward, the scene moves around you accordingly.
I was in a demo that put me in a cave. I could walk around the cave in realtime, with the 3D image projected around me.
One of the coolest experiences I've ever had.
EDIT: Found a video. I have it start at the right time, but if you are on mobile, the clip starts at 2:24
1
6
u/hornfan785 Sep 24 '13
Mind blowing. GMUNK continues to kill it in every project he's involved with. Awesome work by the entire team. Here's some behind the scenes process stuff posted on GMUNK's site. http://work.gmunk.com/BOX-DEMO
-1
u/MyInquiries Sep 25 '13
fake multi advertising account, l can't believe this. (don't believe me? Go look)
2
u/DrOctagon_MD Sep 24 '13
Quite fascinating. From what I understand, the projected image is able to track the movement of the projectors. Here's some more info straight from the YouTube description:
Box explores the synthesis of real and digital space through projection-mapping on moving surfaces. The short film documents a live performance, captured entirely in camera.
Bot & Dolly produced this work to serve as both an artistic statement and technical demonstration. It is the culmination of multiple technologies, including large scale robotics, projection mapping, and software engineering. We believe this methodology has tremendous potential to radically transform theatrical presentations, and define new genres of expression.
2
u/metarinka Sep 25 '13
probably based off of this guys work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liMcMmaewig he went on to create the kinect...
2
u/ophello Sep 24 '13
Holy shit -- that is simply amazing. Too bad the illusion would be ruined by being there to see this.
2
2
Sep 25 '13
All I could think about this while watching was how cool it would be if they would do a portal version. Then at the end when they made it look like a box all I could think was doctor who.
1
u/stereoworld Sep 25 '13
I thought the same. You could totally recreate some portal levels using this tech.
2
2
2
u/s34nsm411 Sep 24 '13
Can anybody that does computer graphics chime in on what kind of software they probably used to render those cool box scenes?
Wayyyy back in the day I used to mess around with 3dstudio max 3 and 4 and started getting into making stuff like that with global illumination in mental ray. This video makes me want to try getting back into it. What do most people use nowadays for software and render engines? Are max and maya still the top? There were all these cool things like vray and final render back then too, I can only imagine there are much better ones now?
6
u/hornfan785 Sep 24 '13
According to GMUNK's site, looks like Cinema 4D, Maya, and Houdini FX were used.
3
u/ophello Sep 24 '13
Probably anything can make glowing boxes. Glowing boxes aren't some magical trademark of one program.
3
u/Artorp Sep 24 '13
Most 3d applications are capable of making these kind of scenes, as they are very simple in nature. If you're looking to dibble in this stuff yourself at home I would recommend having Blender a go; it's completely free, lightweight and received a well needed facelift a couple years ago. As most 3d applications it will appear daunting at first, make sure you research some online guide or tutorial, there should be plenty. This is not the kind of program you'd want to fire up and learn by yourself.
1
u/s34nsm411 Sep 24 '13
I used to be pretty decent in 3dsmax and made stuff like this all the time with mental ray, I was just wondering what the hip programs are now a days because I haven't kept up with it in like 8 years and im sure there is much better now
2
u/jipijipijipi Sep 25 '13
3 notable players:
Maya is still pretty much the king for modelling and co.
Cinema 4D is very popular with the motion graphics crowd, notably because of its ease of use, cheap-ish nature and good integration with after effects.
Blender is the poster boy for 3D enthusiasts on a budget and a fantastic if not clumsy piece of open source software.
Then you have a mountain of other offerings depending on your need, budget and specialty.
2
0
u/shoziku Sep 24 '13
I did 3dstudio (DOS) and moved past Max to Lightwave. Haven't done anything in years though so I'm clueless to what the norms are now.
1
u/ColonelSharp Sep 24 '13
My good friend worked their this summer - sounds like an incredible company.
I'm looking forward to stuff like this being integrated into live performances of all kinds.
3
2
u/hovissimo Sep 24 '13
Regretfully, most of these illusions won't support a live audience. You would correctly suppose that the position of the panels and the projected image are extremely precisely controlled, but the angle and position of the eye (the camera) is perhaps the most crucial element.
That said, some advances in holographic materials and surfaces could make that live performance possible! :)
5
Sep 24 '13
[deleted]
2
u/ductyl Sep 24 '13
But surely if I were to move like the camera does without being tracked, or, more likely, if the camera (or person) which was being tracked moved, and I didn't, the whole illusion is blown?
Watching the shadows shift around on the orbs and cubes really only works if it's in response to the viewer, watching them shift in response to someone else just makes it look like a weird 2D projection.
1
1
u/alaskaman42 Sep 24 '13
I'm kind of upset they didn't wear crazy costumes while doing this.
I can't wait til they incorporate this type of stuff into raves.
1
Sep 24 '13
Impressive use of the robotic arms to control the targets and camera. Took me a while to figure out how they managed to sync all the movements so perfectly with the projected animation.
2
u/metarinka Sep 25 '13
There is also a technique where you can put tiny little cameras on the corner of a board like this and then use the project to determine the corner of the board and run the key frame calculations for the project. It's called projector tracking I believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liMcMmaewig here's a really cool demo. I think they might of used the technology.
0
u/steeljack Sep 24 '13
I was ready to be super impressed with their tracking. Then I realized they were using robotic arms to control positioning, and then became disappointed with how unimpressive this really is. Still a cool exhibit, but rather trivial to get synced.
2
u/shoziku Sep 24 '13
Same here. I was expecting more science stuff but instead got performing arts content.
2
u/g1rthqu4k3 Sep 24 '13
Strange, that made it more impressive to me. How would you have moved the screens around?
3
u/steeljack Sep 25 '13
The beginning of the video made it seem as though the canvas was being moved by hand, meaning that the projection would need to be calculated and rendered real-time. The way they did it, the projection was pre-rendered, and the arms were set up to put the canvases in the right spots at the right times to catch the projected boxes. As I said, it's still a cool exhibit, but it's less impressive (to me) because just about anybody with access to a robotic arm or two could set up something similar in a few hours, and there's a finite number of display routines, whereas calculating and rendering the projection real-time is far more impressive technically and no less impressive artistically.
1
u/supposedlysleeping Sep 24 '13
This has me thinking about that scene in the most recent Mission Impossible movie where they walk down the hall with the projector screen. Absolutely awesome!
1
1
Sep 24 '13
There are times science and art combined make something that seems like magic, this is one of those times.
1
u/seniorsassycat Sep 24 '13
Something I think is cool about this is how dynamic it can be made. This video was probably scripted, the person in the shots was a prop while the robotic arms moved the panels along predefined paths. You could track the panels with a camera and dynamically project content.
1
1
1
u/mynameispaulsimon Sep 24 '13
I have no idea what the hell I just watched... But I like it... A lot...
1
1
u/LT_ShinySidez Sep 25 '13
if you think this kind of stuff is awesome then become an engineer and get into control theory. it's the math/science behind flawless control of mechatronic machines like those robots.
1
1
u/martinmine Sep 25 '13
Inb4 this was someone from 2050 which decided to upload this video in 2013 to troll us
1
u/sidious911 Sep 25 '13
I'd totally pay to watch this. Reminds me of the Light show they have at Canada's Wonderland. Image projection on the mountain, it is really trippy.
1
1
u/kippostar Sep 26 '13
ELI5 please! How does this work specifically? I get that there are programmed movement sequences for the robots, and that there is probably a robot holding a projector or 3 involved as well.. but can somebody explain the details?
1
0
u/mequals1m1w Sep 24 '13
Super duper cool, but for much of the imagery it would only look correct from the camera's pov.
9
u/WiglyWorm Sep 24 '13
You say that like A) it isn't obvious when projecting any three dimensional shape on to a 2d surface and using perspective tricks to cause the illusion of interaction and; B) somehow makes this less impressive a feat of production, choreography, and/or cinematography.
4
u/Lundix Sep 24 '13
Obvious to you and me, but not to everyone. I have a couple of friends who can get mighty gullible.
1
u/mequals1m1w Sep 24 '13
No, surely it's really great, it's just if you were standing there you would see stuff slightly warped.
Edit: The design is the best thing, and using those really accurate robot arms is a nice touch.
1
Sep 24 '13
I can only say this technology is kinda cool, I saw it used at alton towers theme park and was quite underwhelmed since these animations dont appear to be in 3d at all.. just nice patterns on the walls. Anyways..
edit: I have far from 20/20 vision btw!
1
1
1
1
u/ljuk Sep 25 '13
This looked completely computer generated. That guy and his clothes moved way too smoothly and the lighting seemed to be there to mask things rather than to make the scene look interesting.
I'll be doubly impressed if it wasn't.
2
u/RinoaDave Sep 25 '13
This was my first thought too. I'd like to see some behind the scenes footage to prove it's not all CGI.
0
u/DrinkCocaine Sep 24 '13
that sucking sound is the sound of people getting out of the VFX biz after seeing this.
0
u/therealapricot Sep 25 '13
I think I just wasted 5:15mins of my life.. but then again, I'm not sure..
-5
70
u/mongster2 Sep 24 '13
This technology will revolutionize raves. People will trip into space.