3D Movie Making: Stereoscopic Digital Cinema from Script to Screen

By Bernard Mendiburu. 2009

377 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The zone of comfort: Predicting visual discomfort with stereo displays (2011, background): “A guideline for S3D cinema has been described by Mendiburu (2009).”
Nonlinear disparity mapping for stereoscopic 3D (2010, methodology): “Correspondingly there exists a complex set of cinematographic guidelines and rules on best practice in 3D movie making [Mendiburu 2009; Neuman 2009], as well as some prior work that allows for manually-driven disparity editing in specific application scenarios [Pritch et al.”
Leveraging stereopsis for saliency analysis (2012, background): “One common source of 3D fatigue is the vergence-accommodation conflict [27].”
Subjective evaluation of stereoscopic image quality (2013, background): “The way in which this disparity information is incorporated into these 3D QA algorithms is not yet based on any perceptual principles (such as disparity masking, which we do not really understand yet).”
CycleISP: Real Image Restoration via Improved Data Synthesis (2020, background): “In movie post-production, color mismatch is corrected by a skilled technician, which is an expensive and highly involved procedure [41].”
Stereoscopic 3D-TV: Visual Comfort (2011, background): “For cinema applications, values of 1% for negative/crossed disparities and 2% for positive/uncrossed disparities (for a total value of about 3%) have been suggested [57].”