S'all the rage, at least in media hype terms although admittedly a lot of people will have seen Avatar in 3D and so will be up to speed on the added dimension (!) it provides to visual presentations. 3D laptops and TVs are already well in the pipeline and given the caving world's occasional bouts of pioneering work in the realm of technology it's probably not unreasonable to see more people working towards capturing evocative 3D imagery of the underworld - a lot has been done already by Andy Eavis and others, touring with 3D lectures (the Europeans have done a fair amount, IIRC).

So, I guess the question is: how many people are capturing stuff in 3D, what's the preferred method of viewing, photography, lighting etc.?

Is it really complex or can it be done on a reasonable budget?

Answers will be keenly received....

You need to take two videos at the same time, separated by a small hosizontal distance (just like your eyes) - Panasonic have just brought out a solution for you ...

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/panasonic-blows-it-out-with-3d-blu-ray-deck-hdtvs-channels-and/

Most stunning 3D flick I've seen is Creature From the Black Lagoon, in B&W from the '40s.  Audience with the funny glasses cannot refrain from "Ooooohs" and "Aaahhhhs" right from the opening scene (creation of the universe).

We did 3D still (slide) photography in Belize caves in 1989, but most were underlit and the results disappointing, tho still a great effect.  Too low-tech for today.

I have had some great fun using "woolyanaglyph" software for making 3d still photo's using a tripod mounted horizontal slide bar.

I've done some stills over the past few years with some success. Simply hand held camera, taking two shots and moving the camera a few inches to the left or right to get the two frames. Then realign them on the computer and combine using an anaglyph program. I created anaglyphs suitable for viewing with red/cyan glasses which gave partially coloured images. Some people may have seen them at Hidden Earth around 2-3 years ago.

The hand held, or slide bar techniques only work for static subjects as it is critical that nothing moves between the two shots. I have experimented with a couple of small digital cameras mounted side-by-side too. This worked by just pressing both shutter buttons at the same time with my fingers. The camera with the trigger flash was set with the shutter speed at the flash sync speed. The other camera with a slightly longer shutter speed. I got both cameras picking up all the flashes in about 50% of the shots. This allows capture of 'action' scenes. Moving water or cavers etc.

With video you require two matched cameras, which is rather expensive for most people. You also ideally want twin projectors and polarising glasses for viewing to get full colour 3D. It is impressive when done well. There were a lot of slide shows at the ICS in Texas last Summer, but no video that I saw. To project video you would need to devise a means to perfectly synchronise the two video streams for the entire length of playback.

Lighting in either case is just the same as you would use for normal cave photography or video.

cap 'n chris said:

...Is it really complex or can it be done on a reasonable budget?...

Click to expand...

Not complex, and define "reasonable"!

I would say one of the cheapest ways that i'm familiar with would involve:

2x cave friendly cameras, will require full manual settings, ie Canon Powershot = 2 x ?250 (or you could use a slider bar, but two cameras is always a better solution than one) 
2x cheap laptops, low spec, just enough to run a projector, ie a netbook = 2 x ?200
2x projectors, brighter the better, but if on budget say = 2 x ?350
1x tripod mount to take both cameras and ensure pointing in same direction = bit of time and friendly metal worker...
2x polerizing filters, can be bought off eBay pretty easily = 2 x ?10
Loads of polerising glasses, probably easy to get hold of over internet somewhere, the cardboard ones are cheap and work fine = ?30 (total guess)

Total ~ ?1650 from stratch, but you may have half of this gear already.

The complex bit comes when you try to line up each left and right photo for best viewing, due to the cameras not being spot on parallel. 10mins in Photoshop per shot should get them reasonable, so long as you know what you're doing...

When i've set them up with my Dad we use Picture-to-Exe as the prefered slideshow program, as it outputs a fully independant file that will run on any computer. Also, i wired two USB mice buttons into one to control both laptops with one click.

Chris,
You should talk to Maurice Hewins in the Wessex for info on still 3D photos, he has been taking them for many years and has loads to look at (need a viewer if you can't look at them cross eyed).

Andy Eavis has been making 3D films, using two digital projectors, polarising filters and special glasses. Well worth a look if you get the chance.

I would suggest some improvements for projecting over Rob's suggestions.

You can set up slideshows from Powerpoint to run using two projectors from one computer. So you need one computer capable of driving twin external monitors/projectors. Or one normal laptop and a monitor splitter which runs two projectors as a single wide screen as far as the computer is concerned (this is the set up I saw in Texas at the ICS and their presentation was very slick). With the splitter option, you then create a single wide screen (double width) slideshow in whatever program you prefer and place your pairs of images side by side on each slide. The splitter then sends one half of your double image slide to each projector and it is all kept in sync from a single computer.

Secondly and critically important, you need projectors which do not already polarise the light. So look for DLP projectors and not LCD ones. Otherwise you will not be able to set up the polarising filters on both projectors without one of them not outputting much light!

As a matter of interest regarding 3D, you do not need expensive cameras for superb results. My underground camera is an Olympus C5050Z purchased in 2003. I am not using the original (it died) but they can be obtained second hand on ebay for as little as ?70. the original cost was over ?300. I mention all this because Peter and Anne Bosted used C5050z's for their incredible 3D slide shows and still do so as I was fortunate enough to watch them at work. What is needed is perspicacity, trial and error and the systems other posters have mentioned. Trouble with me is I dabble in too many things and whilst taking the shots is straightforward, setting up the software and projection systems would be beyond me in terms of time investment. I suppose however that one could store images in anticipation of a time when one could create shows. I thought a 3D sequence of Meghalayan caves from the Abode of the Clouds expeditions would be a challenge.

It was in fact the Olympus C5050 camera which I bought a couple of off ebay some time ago. They are good little cave cameras. What you need to create a pair of caving cameras for 3D is a model which meets all the usual cave requirements (hotshoe for external flash, manual controls) and which it is possible to mount side by side in such a way that you can get the lenses about the same distance apart as the human eyes.

With the C5050 the lens is offset to one side of the body:


For a simple first test, I mounted my two cameras side by side on a stiff bit of plywood using the tripod screw holes to hold the cameras in place. This actually gives a wider separation than is ideal. The effect of this is that the 3D scene appears miniaturised. Imagine scaling down the camera set-up by a factor which makes the lens separation distance equal the spacing of your eyes. The picture gives the impression of the scene being scaled down by the same amount. So it can look a bit like a miniature model of the scene you photographed. More problematic is that the 3D effect breaks down for objects too close to the cameras, and this scaling down of the scene also means this closest workable distance also scales by the same amount. So you cannot get good close up pictures of cavers or formations. I found anything closer than around 3 metres did not work well.

So with some time to play further I need to find a way to mount one camera upside down so that I can bring the lenses closer together by having the edges of the cameras closest to the lens touching each other. Or mount the two cameras vertically. I'm not sure which would work best. For projectors you really want landscape orientation for the images. So I need to make a more sophisticated camera bracket to hold the two cameras, and a better means of pressing both shutter buttons at once than just my two fingers. That would be even more awkward with one camera upside down! These cameras come with an IR remote control, so it might be possible to rig this up with some sort of optical fibre to the sensor on each camera to create a double camera trigger. All needing time which I have not found yet owing to other projects. 

I have a 400D. The remote shutter release I have for this would operate 2 400Ds as easily as one.

A key attribute to give 3-D photos 'punch' is to have linear feature/s coming close past the camera/s - e.g. SRT rope or handline, rock flakes, etc. Gives the viewer impression their eyeballs are being skewered and really draws eye into the 3-D aspect. This was advice from a professional I know who specialises in commercial 3-D photography - it really does work too!

Why use two cameras? mount your camera on a piece of wood with a slot, take one photo and then just move the camera along the slot a suitable distance and take the second one. Doesn't work with moving (action) shots though.

Les W said:

Why use two cameras? mount your camera on a piece of wood with a slot, take one photo and then just move the camera along the slot a suitable distance and take the second one. Doesn't work with moving (action) shots though.

Click to expand...

Difficult to get the lighting precisely the same in both shots that way - but it certainly works on surface!

The Bosteds use one C5050Z and move it. the trick is knowing how far to move it eg whether you are in macro mode or taking photos of general cave scenery. Their system works - I have seen them using it and the results!Being totally non techical the thing that daunted me was all the hardware set up. A team effort would be one way of doing it and aim for a project. I thought it would be nice if someone did some work in Meghalaya some time.

I actually think it is very easy to take single camera 3D shots underground. You simply need to make sure there are no moving objects in the scene, and that all the flashes are stationary. So with my usual set up of 2 or 3 flashes attached to slave units and a hand held camera, I place the flashes on something solid (i.e. not hand held by anyone) and then stand upright with my feet slightly apart to take the pictures. Hold the camera to point at a fixed focal point in the scene and take pictures as usual. Once you are happy the lighting, focus and exposure are all working to give good pictures, you can take a 3D pair by simply leaning a little to the left to take one picture. Then lean a little to the right to take another. In both pictures ensure the camera is pointing at the same focal point. After taking both images, check them on the preview screen to make sure all flashes fired in both images. That is all you need to do underground.

The amount you lean to the left and right should be enough to move the camera horizontally about the same distance as the separation of your eyes (i.e. not very much). But the 3D effect will work for larger distances too, it just makes the scene look smaller than it was in real life (like you are viewing a miniature model). If in doubt take 3 images. One leaning left. One in the mid point, and one leaning right. Then you can play with a pair of the less or greater separated images afterwards to see which works best for you.

Taking these hand held you may need to slightly rotate one image with respect to the other on the computer afterwards, as it is difficult to keep the camera perfectly level for both images. I add the second image as a semi-transparent layer over the first in a photo editor. Align the second layer so the focal point is aligned in both images. You will see if you need to rotate one image with respect to the other because you get radial patterns if they are not  properly aligned. Simply rotate the transparent layer over the top of the lower layer to minimise these patterns by eye. Then crop the image to how you want it. Finally hide the top layer and save a copy of the image. Then show the top layer and turn off the transparency and save a second copy. That gives you your left and right images aligned for using as a 3D pair. You can project these from separate projectors using polarising glasses for full colour 3D, or make a red/cyan anaglyph using free software to make partial colour prints which work with red/cyan glasses.