The decade plus old backplate update issue (why I needed to use SCOPs to drive them, not ICE, which Softimage replicated in their stereo rig) I believe was fixed recently, is perhaps why Soft 2015 matches Maya, dunno, I roll my own in each and match, highly recommended.
Graham D Clark, Head of Stereography, Deluxe 3D dba Stereo D phone: why-I-stereo http://www.linkedin.com/in/grahamclark > On Jun 16, 2014, at 7:22 PM, Andre Zazzera <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey guys - we're not really sure what the problem was coming down to. > Unfortunately I've been off-site and this is a high security job (nothing > goes outside the building), so I've been trying to talk my guys through it > over the phone. > > We're using a standard stereo rig, off-axis, with the zero-parallax plane > being set manually. Nothing's moving or animated. The most vexing problem > is that the cameras do different things in Softimage 2013 and 2014 than they > do when we open in 2015 - which blows my mind. I don't think I've ever had > Softimage break something on me from version to version (well, maybe 1 or 2 > other things). What's weirder is that the Maya imports were matching the > Softimage 2015 version. > > We found a workaround, though, to at least get this thing out the door. We > just created a couple single cameras, matched all the film aperture and focal > length settings and all that jazz, and just constrained those cameras to the > original left and rights, treating them as straight parallel cameras, and > then we handled the convergence in Nuke to match the original off-axis > converged renders.. > > It matches alllmost perfectly (off maybe half a pixel due to rendering in a > different position, but otherwise great). > > Thanks for the tips, guys! I'm definitely going to investigate further when > I'm back on-site. > > >> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Ed Manning <[email protected]> wrote: >> convergence? >> >> How are you controlling that? If through a constraint system, maybe >> something to check as well. >> >> Or maybe even more basic -- parallel vs. converged cameras? >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Tim Leydecker <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The usual suspects for trouble in camera transfer between Maya and >>> Softimage, >>> depending on the Crosswalk/*.fbx/or else version used: >>> >>> *Field of View Angle calculation, Horizontal or Vertical? Can also give >>> grief with 3DSMax. >>> >>> *Default XSI Picture Ratio vs. Maya Film Aspect Ratio, Softimage defaults >>> to a 16:9 ratio, Maya to a 3:2. >>> >>> When I create a Stereo rig in both Maya and XSI 2014, they differ in Angle >>> of View, >>> Film Aspect Ratio and a Film Offset in Maya of +/- 0.017 (mm?) vs a Optical >>> Center Shift of >>> +/- -0,0043 inch in XSI. Also note the overall 10:1 scene unit related >>> values... >>> >>> Enough to make my head hurt by itself already. Which is why I generally >>> don´t like Stereo much anyway. >>> >>> I´d check for inch/Millimeter issues in values as well as rounding errors >>> and Film Aperture woes. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> tim >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 13.06.2014 01:32, schrieb Athanasios Pozantzis: >>>> just speculating here... >>>> is there a film shift (tilt shift) or film offset setting in the mix? >>>> that could be off if everything else is spot on >>>> >>>> my 2 cents >>>> >>>> On 12 Jun 2014, at 18:16, Andre Zazzera <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey all, >>>>> >>>>> In an effort to start transitioning over to Maya, *sigh*, we've been >>>>> doing look dev on our current project in Softimage 2013 with the intent >>>>> to render in Maya. We got approval on the stereo from client based on >>>>> our Softimage animation, but now we're having a big discrepancy between >>>>> the stereo renders in Softimage and the stereo in Maya - Maya has a biiig >>>>> shift in the depth of the renders and it looks like a massive difference >>>>> in the camera interaxial. >>>>> >>>>> But we're measuring, and all the distances from camera to camera and >>>>> camera to subject are exactly the same in Maya as they are in Softimage, >>>>> and all the camera settings are the same. >>>>> >>>>> So we opened the scene in Softimage 2015 and exported to Maya from there, >>>>> and then they match each other. Great! But here's the thing - we checked >>>>> and the renders from Softimage 2015 don't match the renders from >>>>> Softimage 2013. So we tried in 2014, and those match the originals from >>>>> 2013. >>>>> >>>>> Did something change between 2014 and 2015 in the way Softimage stereo >>>>> cameras work? >>>>> >>>>> For the moment we're just trying to eyeball the cameras to try and get >>>>> something that matches the approved shot, but something just isn't making >>>>> sense. I don't understand how cameras in the same place in space could >>>>> yield different results. >>>>> >>>>> Do you guys have any insight? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> Andy >
