
How I Created a Matrix Bullet Time-Style Rig With 50 DSLRs - uptown
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/12/19/how-i-created-a-matrix-bullet-time-style-rig-with-50-dslrs/
======
unwind
I wonder if the comments from "The Guy Who Knows" on the article page are
real, or just some very random trolling.

The Guy says:

 _Well... Braging of you success, right? Guys, I work for the company who
ordered this Matrix thingie... Martin Legeer designed this and built this
first version. What this article doesn't say is that it DIDN'T WORK AND WE HAD
TO COMPLETELY REBUILD THE WHOLE MATRIX. The cables were poorly soldered, when
you touched them you got hit by electricity, the place was too small for its
purpose... We had to completely demolish it and build it from scratch, this
time with guys who knew what they were doing. And FYI you are not authorised
to use these pictures Martin, so be as kind and delete this whole article and
stop boasting with something you failed at!!!_

assuming the author of the article intends this to be useful to e.g. get
potential clients, that looks like a comment to be deleted or at least replied
to.

Also interesting that the angry commenter blames the OP for building this in a
too-small space, I got the impression the space was simply part of the deal,
and not chosen by the OP. Weird.

~~~
mseebach
That would at least explain the absence of sample shots from the rig.

~~~
clicks
<http://vimeo.com/55566188>

~~~
mseebach
Those are great, stunning even, but they are not from that rig.

------
jyap
Someone commissions a hugely expensive rig like that to be installed in a
random garage? Bizarre. It must be for porn.

~~~
Geee
No. White background without shadows means the images will be used as product
images on websites. He will most probably produce interactive turntables of
living models for online clothing stores.. Or he is planning his own clothing
store or clothing preview app for iPad, whatever. That's the only way it makes
sense as an investment.

~~~
anigbrowl
Then why install it in your private residence? that's what office space is
for.

~~~
mdonahoe
You can't make porn in a rented space?

~~~
anigbrowl
You can, but you might not want to for reasons of privacy (if one wanted to
record one's own intimate moments, say). On the other, there's no particular
reason to use your own home for the mechanical business of product
photography.

------
teeray
Aww... I would love to see the shots that this thing took.

EDIT: Found some of a similar rig they built in the comments of the same page:
[http://www.petapixel.com/2012/12/17/project-uses-a-bullet-
ti...](http://www.petapixel.com/2012/12/17/project-uses-a-bullet-time-camera-
rig-for-360-degree-light-painting-photos/)

~~~
guelo
It seems that in that rig, without an enclosure, they are limited to shooting
in the dark using light painting lest they capture the background. In this
"shadowless" rig with the overhead lighting and white background they have
more options. He even mentions the possibility of painting the inside which
makes me think they might be thinking of doing a green screen. They do have to
worry about the camera holes which means they'll probably have to shoot with
an upward angle.

------
Jagat
There was this Amazon scam where the scammer impersonates an Amazon user who
bought Canon DSLR, and asks for replacements to be shipped to some other
country.

Exactly two days later, we see a post where 50 Canon DSLRs were used to create
a movie effect. Funny coincidence ;)

------
blhack
He does commercial photography. Here is a link to his website:
<http://www.martinlegeer.us/photo.php>

No, this isn't for porn, it's probably for fashion photography.

And to anybody who thinks this is a "lot" of money for fashion photo...a
common camera for doing fashion photography costs $35,000+. This is a
different niche, but in the same realm of dollar figures.

(If you're curious what a truly "high end" digital camera looks like, google
Hasselblad, Mamiya and Phase One.)

~~~
sytelus
I'm bit naive at cameras and thought best ones were being produced by Nikon or
Cannon so this new brands are enlightning. I was just looking at one of the
Hasselblad:
[http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/2081132/uk_h4d-60_datashe...](http://www.hasselbladusa.com/media/2081132/uk_h4d-60_datasheet_v11.pdf).

This thing has massive 54x40 mm sensor VS current full frames which have
"only" 36x24 mm. That's 2.5 times bigger sensor than full frame! And that's 60
mega pixels. One thing that pops out is ISO which is listed only at 800 (vs
Canikon's 32000) so I assume these cameras are designed for very bright light
studios and to yield minimal amount of noise possible.

~~~
davidjohnstone
Indeed. There's the world of 35mm cameras, which is what full frame digital
SLRs are (think Canon 1D X and 5D III, and Nikon D4 and D800, having a sensor
fo 36x24mm). Many digital SLRs have cropped sensors — the Canon 7D, 60D and
600D have a sensor that is 1.6 times smaller than a full frame (22.2x15.8mm).
More: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-frame_digital_SLR>

The next level of cameras is medium format, which are vastly more expensive
and have much larger sensors. They're generally used for studio work, where
light isn't a problem. They're popular for fashion and product photography.

Then you move up to large format cameras with even larger sensors, although
most of these still use film (but digital backs are available, and tend to
have hundreds of megapixels). Large format cameras are still popular for
landscape photography.

------
daenz
Great writeup, but utterly incomplete without a demo.

------
mashmac2
Interesting to see the future of Bullet Time, too. RED camera recently did a
shot that they can't yet talk about, but the setup pictures of 50+ RED Scarlet
cameras is very cool.

[http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?87124-Scarlet-
De...](http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?87124-Scarlet-Deal-of-a-
Lifetime)

------
snogglethorpe
I thought this line in the article was pretty funny: "There were potential
programs we could use, but they were written for Linux." ><

~~~
zalew
yeah. really suprising how someone who builds a 50 camera rig can see
installing an OS for free as an obstacle.

> We eventually found a single program for Canon DSLRs, which turned out to be
> a huge waste of money. In the trial version it had a limited options, so we
> did have to buy the full software.

karma.

------
alan_cx
Perhaps my ignorance, which is likely, but isn't this pretty much the exact
same way it was first done? I vaguely remember, at the time The Matrix came
out, some artist showing off a sequence done exactly like this capturing
molten metal sparks from a anvil, or some thing visually similar. Makes me
wonder what the big deal is here 13 odd years later.

~~~
benpink
Here's a very similar thing from nearly 20 years ago. I remember watching this
as a kid and it blew my mind. Distinctly remember the dog:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIpmUi8HI1k>

I'm no expert but it strikes me that the shadowless full-light exposures that
he talks about are the real challenge here and maybe that sets it apart from
other popular examples.

------
chalmerj
All the commentary here and no one has mentioned Google's effort to automate a
similar task: building 360° rotations of children's toys for holiday shopping.
[1]

[1]:
[http://www.google.com/shopping/product/4502510368537277191?p...](http://www.google.com/shopping/product/4502510368537277191?prds=htg:0,zoom:0)

~~~
pbhjpbhj
That's really cool. But if it's a static object then surely you use one camera
and a fixed speed turntable and just shoot a continuous stream of shots.

Which has me thinking, can a DSLR take images quick enough that you'd only
need to have a rig that orbits the camera around the object at high-speed in
order to be quick enough to capture models. The speed needed would be too
great for moving subjects I'm sure.

------
wtracy
I've spent a bunch of time thinking about ways to do something like this on a
budget. The general idea would be to have a bunch of bare camera sensors
directly connected to commodity PCs (maybe with Arduinos interfacing between
them) with each PC driving multiple camera sensors.

The bandwidth requirements are quite ridiculous when you want to take a
hundred photos simultaneously, so I'm not sure how many sensors I could really
drive with one PC.

~~~
j-g-faustus
Not sure what you mean with "bare sensors", a sensor won't do you much good
without shutter, lens, and a way to control the aperture?

To go cheap, I'd replace the DSLRs with webcams. It sacrifices resolution
(obviously), but reduces bandwidth and computation requirements, and lets you
play with the effects until you get a client who can foot the bill for a high-
res version.

~~~
wtracy
You are very right. I really meant "the parts of the camera minus the embedded
system that drives the whole thing", but that wasn't very succinct. :-P The
application I was thinking of was indie movie making, so I would want a decent
resolution up front, and I wouldn't expect a high-paying client to be
forthcoming.

Along this tangent, I talked today to a friend of mine who is convinced that I
would be better off using some of the lower-end consumer point-and-shoot
cameras, or even purchasing old film cameras.

~~~
j-g-faustus
Will you shoot video with the cameras? Or stills?

Partially related: [http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/30317/how-can-i-
fin...](http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/30317/how-can-i-find-a-
camera-for-long-term-time-lapse-use)

That question is about time lapse with a single camera, but it includes some
camera suggestions, including the GoPro action cam and Canon P&S with the CHDK
hack: <http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK>

------
hfsktr
I couldn't find anything in a cursory search of google and nothing in any of
the links currently here explain it.

Why is it 50 cameras for the effect? Each link I've seen has the same (50
cameras). I am just curious if there is a reason that the number is used
instead of say 60 (every 6 degrees) or something like that?

Edit: It would have been great to see it in action but there is a link
elsewhere on the page that had some awesome views of what can be done.

------
001sky
_The last thing I have to say will be a disappointment to many of you: I don’t
have any resulting images to share with you due to the client’s request to not
share any sample photos outside._

\-- Why so top secret? But blog the technique...?

Usually its the other way around. "awesome image, how'd he do that"?

~~~
true_religion
I'd guess that it's a technical feat, but not necessarily a new idea or new
technique. There's no harm in sharing the how in that case.

The client didn't share sample photos ilkely because they want to keep things
quiet about their product/art till launch.

~~~
tonylemesmer
or perhaps because as the commenter posted on PetaPixel, it didn't work...

------
michaelbuckbee
I've seen a rig similar to this used for capturing images to be translated
into 3D objects. No shadows would definitely help with the processing and it
wouldn't matter that you couldn't capture video with it.

------
newman314
BreezeSys makes software that can do this.

<http://breezesys.com/MultiCamera/index.htm>

I wonder if that's the software that the chap tested.

------
linker3000
It irks that a writeup for a technically clever and elegant setup for stunning
visuals sits next to such a mess of irritating, flashing ads.

------
zzygan
Just in case you were wondering what kind of shots this rig can produce....

<http://24x360.com/gallery>

------
podperson
This would be more impressive if you didn't know that the original 'frozen
pan' rigs were jerry-built from film SLRs.

------
dpacmittal
What was the budget to set this thing up?

~~~
rorrr
He's using 600D (which would be my choice as well for that kind of setup).

The cheapest one I can find is $439.

$439 * 50 = $21,950

Then lenses. Not sure which ones he uses. One of the cheapest lenses is
50mm/1.8, and it's a pretty good lens. They cost around $100.

$100 * 50 = $5,000

Then add a could of hundred for wiring and connectors.

Then add a few thousand for building the structure.

All in all, should be under $30K.

~~~
zokier
He seems to be using 20/2.8 lenses, which seem to be at $500 at amazon, so
total would be closer to 50k than 30k.

------
smiddereens
So the exact same way they did for The Matrix?

~~~
GiraffeNecktie
Not exactly exactly but yeah, the same idea.

