2
$\begingroup$

I am working on an anaglyph (Red/Cyan glasses) 3D animation for work. After doing some brochures in Photoshop I can get the image to really pop off the screen.

However when I try those same techniques in Premiere (copying the file and make one red channel and the other green/cyan, then separating the position of the two copies slightly) I can't get it to pop like the still image in Photoshop.

I then went back to Blender and used the built in Anaglyph and rendered a few frames. It seems like it may pop out a little further than doing it in Premiere, but not by much.

So my question - is there a difference to doing this in post (Adobe Premiere) and actually have Blender render out the channels? I don't see a huge difference between the two (even after playing with the convergence).

Was the Big Bunny movie (3D) rendered in anaglyph 3d or was that done in post?

So what things should I consider to get the depth like they in Big Bunny. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=My9VvshJDL4

Any help would be appreciated.

enter image description here

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ What's your question? Check out the manual on that, it should cover all potential issues: docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/render/workflows/multiview/… $\endgroup$
    – brockmann
    Aug 25, 2017 at 16:05
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe you missed the part that says "So my question is..." Thank you I already read the manual, it doesn't answer my question. $\endgroup$
    – icYou520
    Aug 25, 2017 at 16:33

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Ok after doing many test, it is absolutely better to render it directly from Blender itself. Mainly because you can control the convergence.

If you do it in post (with the method described above) it will fake convergence and instead of giving depth to your objects it will give depth to the entire screen with a slight depth to the objects (when I have time I will post examples).

You can get a much deeper 3D effect if you set your convergence correctly and dividing the interocular distance by 30.

So to recap if you can always render your Anaglyph images directly from Blender instead of faking the effect in post.

EDIT:

For sake of completeness I will post the differences. Keep in mind you will need 3D glasses (red/cyan) to view the below pics.

First is the 2D pic made into 3D from Photoshop (Cheat):

enter image description here

Second pic is Minimum convergence rendered directly out of Blender:

enter image description here

Last pic if Maximum Convergence directly out of Blender.

enter image description here

As you can see (if you had the glasses on) that doing it the cheat way gives you less depth than the minimum convergence. Although it still gives some.

The maximum convergence you can clearly see the chair popping out of the screen. So this is the best route to go for Anaglyph.

Keep in mind the maximum convergence will not always be best for your scene. It would depend on where you consider the middle, front and back of your scene. So don't always use maximum. I was just showing it as a reference.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .