2D to 3D Conversion -- Your Opinion Counts!

[mediachimp]

98368
Good day to all,
I am in the process of converting many of my 2D videos into Anaglyhphic 3D and I'd like to ask your opinions as to which color combinations (red/cyan, green/magenta, yellow/blue, etc..) render the best picture quality and 3D presentation.
I'm presently using red/cyan as my selection but I've read an article that states that some of the other combinations are better.
Would surely appreciate any input that you may want to contribute!
Cheers,
Fred

[Cornucopia]

Ok, I'll bite this time...

<soapbox>
2D to 3D conversion. There's only 3 ways to do this - Manually, Automated and Manual with Automation assist.

For stills, it's possible to do this manually, or even to do manual with automation assist (there are a few good sectioning / object segmentation & differentiation apps out there).
For video/movies, doing it manually ALONE on a feature length title would take you a few YEARS just for one title. It's ludicrous to think you're going to be doing this for MULTIPLE titles. Hollywood studios do manual or manual+auto-assist with an army of rotoscopers & 3d artists ("pixel pushers") and it takes them 6-18 months.

That leaves Automated (whether for stills or video). Automated 2D to 3D conversion SUCKS!!!
Even the best JVC or Grass Valley hardware automated conversion is mediocre and obvious at best. Consumer-level conversions are worse.

Personally, I find it an insult to the stereo3D industry that people (maybe even yourself) try to pass stuff like this off as 3D to people who might not know clearly the differences. It promotes bad impressions and subsequently more bad blood. CUT IT OUT!

Note also that in every instance, true, 2-camera stereo3d ALWAYS is better than 2D-to-3D conversions. Why accept 2nd best? </soapbox>

Your other bit about which Anaglyph is best leaves me wondering further whether you really understand stereo3D in particular and video quality in general.

WRT video quality of stereo3D, Anaglyph is the LOWEST rung on the ladder. Yes, it has full luma resolution, but with such lowered chroma information and with such large retinal rivalry, it's not worth it for even medium term usage. It's only helpful for when you don't have other stereo3D options (and nowadays, there are PLENTY of options, some very cheap).

Which kind of Anaglyph is best? 6 of one, 2 x 3s of another, and 1/2 dozen of the other. Really.
All use color complements, so all have minor chromatic overlap (with subsequent ghosting), all use imperfect filtering (with additional ghosting), all have luma rivalry based on the color values (regardless of what any one promoter will tell you). Take your pick. Personally, I see no reason to resort to a less common version, so I always suggest the main one - Red+Cyan.

You can do some optimization & pre-adjustment of the colors so that the "combined" image has less rivalry (and "beating") but then the colors look off (this is what's known as "Optimized-Color Anaglyph"). If you go for midway between the 2 and use "1/2-Color Anaglyph", it might look a little better. I say, for Anaglyph, why bother? Just make regular anaglyph and be done with it.

Scott