Slashdot Mirror


The Matrix Meets The NFL

wirehead_rick writes "Imagine 'The Matrix' style special effects for the replay of sports action. Being able to see a 360-degree stop action view of that receiver's foot on the line in the end zone." USA Today covers some whiz-bang video technology being debuted in the Super Bowl.

155 comments

  1. A league of their own by NewbieSpaz · · Score: 1

    They need to combine this "new" technology with that weird panoramic-style camera that they used in the movie "A League of Their Own". It would create a whole new spin on the instant replay, while being helpful to officials. Now if they would only adopt this for all NFL games, and for other sports as well...

    --
    ------
    Random, useless fact: I type in startx entirely with my left hand.
    1. Re:A league of their own by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      I believe that the technology popularised by the Matrix (and used before that in several commercials) is already patented. A brief search on google failed to confirm this, tho.

      As for the erasing part, that is pretty cool, technically; they'd have to pretty much incorporate all the visual inputs into one 3d interpretation of the scene, and then recreate the scene from the desired viewpoint. I had no idea that 3d visual research was that far advanced. Or can anyone suggest a Q-n-D approach?

      Johan

    2. Re:A league of their own by Apotsy · · Score: 3

      You are correct that the 3D camera technique was popularized by The Matrix, but invented before that movie was made. It was used in commercials such as those for The Gap, and is called virtual camera. VC has their own camera rigs, which are patented, but I believe the people working on The Matrix seem to have built their own rigs, and thus avoided having to pay any royalty fees. (Notice that there is little mention of The Matrix on the virtual camera website.)

    3. Re:A league of their own by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      I had just assumed that it would be done by having multiple cameras -- synchronised during cutting and morphing by a timing track, to produce movement of the virtual camera through time/space ('cause space/time is overused) -- but they seem to have a two film system which can either freeze location (to one of a few predetermined spots) or freeze time at one instant. After time has been frozen once, you then need to wind that film through ALL those cameras before it can be done again.

      It seems that the NFL have developed a significantly better system. Theirs seems to allow unconstrained motion in time/space -- thus you could imagine a shot panning along during [slow] motion of the subject. IIRC, we never saw this in the matrix; there the motion was always completely frozen when the camera moved.

    4. Re:A league of their own by Apotsy · · Score: 1

      It is true that the CBS system is more flexible, but the Matrix system did allow for the scene to continue moving forward in time while the virtual camera moved. In fact, there were a few shots that did this, such as the famous shot with Keanu bending over backwards to dodge bullets in very slow motion, while the camera circles around him twice.

      The real limitation with the Matrix's system was that the camera's movements had to be planned out ahead of time. There were 35mm motion picture cameras at the two endpoints of the virtual camera's planned path of travel, with 35mm still cameras spaced out inbetween. Those still cameras could be timed to fire all at once, or in succession, which would make the scene either frozen or moving during the virtual camera's movements (respectively). But in either case, the movement of the virtual camera was planned out ahead of time, and could not be changed once the shot had been filmed, due to the fact that still cameras were used (which only snapped a single frame at a pre-determined time).

      In the CBS system, all of the cameras involved are video cameras, meaning that they all capture frames continuously throughout the entire time the cameras are running. During playback, the operator can choose any of the vantage points for any particular frame. In other words, the virtual camera can be moved around freely during playback, with no pre-planned restrictions.

      In the RealVideo clip linked from the story, I noticed that there were only a few vantage points, and that these were spaced out fairly far apart. There also seemed to be no morphing/interpolation between the frames. This resulted in a very jerky, stop-motion sort of feel, rather than the smooth, fluid sort of movements seen in The Matrix and various TV commercials. Perhaps they will use more cameras and some interpolation in the actual event to make it look better.

    5. Re:A league of their own by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      Ah, so that's how they do the slow motion they were discussing. I had understood how the CBS system worked, but I couldn't see how the Matrix system did anything but time-freeze (BTW, all these discussions would benefit from asc-ii art, but that is apparently "lame" according to slashdot).

      I seem to recall their test system consisting of 16 cameras, but the real deployment will consist of 33, spaced irregularly. I too noticed the jerkiness, which is why I proposed using morphing in panning the virtual camera. The REAL solution is of course to do [partial] 3-d interpretation which would give you even more possible virtual camera locations.

      Do you know how they will aim the cameras (including coordinating Zooming?) I can visualise a system where a circle is dragged around the field on a computer monitor (it's radius signifies zoom), but this seems hard to use to follow the action. Do they have some sort of automatic target tracking? Or some semi-smart slaving ot a main camera (in which case the focus of the main camera would be used to clue the slaves where to pan along the line-of-sight of the main)?

    6. Re:A league of their own by Apotsy · · Score: 1
      Ah, that's interesting. 33 vantage points would definitely make it look a lot smoother than 16.

      Beats me how they are keeping the cameras aligned. Since they are working with Princeton Video (the company that does the yellow first-down line stuff), I imagine they are using some real-time image recognition software to keep the cameras focused at the same vantage point. I'll bet they are physically moving the cameras only enough to get it roughly aligned, and then zooming and panning the images slightly to do a more fine-grained alignment.

      In any case, it sounds like they spent their money on the cameras' motor control and alignment mechanisms, which is why there currently isn't any interpolation. Adding 3D approximation/interpolation between the frames will likely be the next step.

      I wonder how they are setting up the controls for this. It seems like it would be pretty simple. Broadcasters already have one dial to control the video's movement through time (the jog/shuttle dial), and now they have a second dial to orbit the virtual camera about its vantage point. If it's something easy like that, they might even let John Madden take control of it. ;v)

    7. Re:A league of their own by Apotsy · · Score: 1
      I imagine they are using some real-time image recognition software to keep the cameras focused at the same vantage point

      Uh, what I mean is, they are likely using such software to determine what commands to send to the cameras' control motors. That wasn't too clear.

    8. Re:A league of their own by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      meta: I have no idea why this was posted as AC. T'was me, I swear

      Image recognition?

      good idea. If the vantage points are close enough togeter, you might be able to reuse image stabilation techniques to aim all cameras at the same subject-of-interest. This would be possible because if the cameras are "close enough" software should be able to indentify a figure from one camera in the next camera's field of view. Then this can be used as input to the next camera...

      Mind you, I suspect that they use a combination of the two; special purpose hardware to sense where the master camera is pointing (using both focus, zoom, and the heuristic that most action is on the ground -- allowing you to infer the voxel being targeted by the intersection of the ground with the FoV of the master camera) and image recognition to "register" (to use a medical term) the various images on the PoI.

  2. Before anyone posts anything funny... by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 3

    Before anyone posts anything attempting to be funny by having football players quoting dialogue from the Matrix, remember that every possible parody of the Matrix has already been done, and is no longer funny.
    Thank you

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:Before anyone posts anything funny... by Klaruz · · Score: 1

      Drat, you should have warned me sooner. At least I threw in something from the last boyscout. That's gotta be worth something... Right?

    2. Re:Before anyone posts anything funny... by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 2

      Actually your post was funny. I was thinking of trying to write something along the same line, but knew people would make fun of me, so I just decided to be a spoilsport :)

      --
      Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
  3. Whoa by Klaruz · · Score: 3

    Now we just need to give the players some guns like in the last boy scout. Then have the mics in their gear pick up a player saying 'Whoa.'

    I can see it now, the cameras pan in, millions of pixels are processed, and the result shows the crowd reality, or does it?

    As the crowd sees the instant replay of the player scoring the touchdown you can hear whispers in the crowd saying he is the chosen one.

    1. Re:Whoa by Geeky+Frignit · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can't wait for the XFL

      --
      Tired of sitting at that karma cap? Start a flame war today! See just how low you can go!
  4. ARGH! All style and no content? by Backline · · Score: 1

    So now our sports will look great, but probably suck. I wrote all about how much The Matrix annoyed me at geek-ware.co.uk

    I wonder if the football players will be wearing expensive sunglasses.




    ==============================
    --


    ==============================
    PROUD to be GEEK
  5. Interactive Football by Dark|||Knight · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this technology would let you choose where you wanted the camera pointed/located on the field? That would be truely cool.

    --
    --Dark|||Knight
  6. bleh, all style, and no content now? by Backline · · Score: 1

    I fscked up the url with fancy target attributes, sorry.

    So now our sports will look great, but probably suck. I wrote all about how much The Matrix annoyed me at geek-ware.co.uk

    I wonder if the football players will be wearing expensive sunglasses.




    ==============================
    --


    ==============================
    PROUD to be GEEK
    1. Re:bleh, all style, and no content now? by Aunt+Mable · · Score: 1
      You sound like the kind of guy who'll put up nekkid pictures of your gf when she dumps you

      URL?

      -- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!

      --

      -- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!

  7. Mmmmm Tennis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If they could marry this technology with digital tv so you control the camera, imagine how much fun you could have watching ladies tennis. Come on panty boys, you're with me on this one aren't ya.

    1. Re:Mmmmm Tennis by rosewood · · Score: 1

      Omg I just got Hard thinking about it! Seriously - I love women's tenis. Lindsay Davenport is my girl. Holeesh!t! Lots of people seem to go loco over Anna cause of a few pics of her being particularily arid in the jungle. Davenport is where its at man. Tenis skirts own - thank you Wimbeldon (sp?) for not changing that rule. Amen.

      Question - what is the difference between 'lights' and 'hard'?

      Answer: You can go to bed with the lights on.

  8. Taking it one more step... by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 2
    ...and dumping the replay footage of highlight plays into a Quicktime VR movie for download from NFL.com could be very, very cool.

    information wants to be expensive...nothing is so valuable as the right information at the right time.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:Taking it one more step... by BLAMM! · · Score: 1
      It'll never happen. Unless it becomes available as a pay-and-pay-and-pay-per-view. This is the NFL and CBS we're talking about. These aren't exactly the most philanthropic organizations in the world. They're not doing it because it can provide the fan with excellent coverage of a beloved past-time. They're doing it to attract more customers so they can squeeze as much dough out of them as possible. If they can get even more suckers to pay for this extra frill, do you think they'll really provide it for free? The almighty is what is at work here.

      I think this is a very cool use of a new technology and I'd love to see it provided just they way you suggest. I'm just too much of a realist(cynic?) to expect it.

      Naeser's Law:

  9. Internet as producer of equipment? by Taurine · · Score: 1

    Check this paragraph from the article:

    Keeping a secret

    EyeVision was developed under utmost secrecy after CBS Sports President Sean McManus gave the go-ahead for $2.5 million in research. In the end
    CBS Sports got input from rocket scientists at Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute and equipment and cameras from Japan and the Internet.

    That just blew my mind! Where is this place on the Internet that produces equipment and cameras? How do I convert it from bits to physical hardware?

  10. This has got to be.. by R-66Y · · Score: 2
    The second-greatest advancement in viewing sports in all of history (the first being, of course, the instant replay). I have thought, for several years, that the only thing keeping officials from calling a completely correct game, looking at plays from each camera angle they have, is that the fans wouldn't enjoy the amount of time that they spent reviewing the play. With this one camera trick (though it's really not any trick at all), referees can now not only see the play, but see the play from almost any angle regardless of where the cameras were positioned. Better yet, it can be seen in one feel swoop with one video. Absolutely wonderful. I hope all stations can adopt this for football. The only disadvantage to this is that it can be easily overused. CBS: Go ahead and show it off on Sunday night, but in the regular season, please only use it when necessary!

    Later,

  11. 360 degree video coverage, eh? by i_know_it · · Score: 1

    how does that help blind referees?

    1. Re:360 degree video coverage, eh? by ardiri · · Score: 1
      how does that help blind referees?

      in many sports already (cricket for example) a third umpire has been in place to make that final decision if the two on the field cannot make up their mind or there is some point of uncertaincy in the decision.

      now, this advancement is cool.. could be a bit of a problem if there are other people in the way of the 33 camera's :)) they never demo'd this thing with a field FULL of players :P i guess the ladies will be very happy.. some close ups of some NFL butts in those rotational shots :)

      i dont think there will be replacement umpires :) however, it may help clarify those "oh bullsh*t" type discussions we have on the couch when there is a penalty that we think is unlawfully cranted :)

    2. Re:360 degree video coverage, eh? by matlhDam · · Score: 1

      Going off on a tangent with your mention of cricket, this would actually be a huge help for the third umpire in cricket - it's not uncommon that a decision will go to the third umpire and there isn't a camera angle that shows all of the things the umpire needs to see to make a decision. It seems that this technology would go a long way towards eliminating that.

    3. Re:360 degree video coverage, eh? by zaugg · · Score: 1
      One problem that the third umpire had at the moment is that he can't use multiple angles at once. If the video feeds were timestamped (or even better synchronised) and they could be viewed concurrently, a lot of run-out decisions would be made easier. (ie one angle shows the bales, while another shows the crease.)

      It would be cool, though, to see a diving Mark Waugh catch in bullet time, although the focal point in cricket moves around faster than in NFL so the robotics would need to be quicker.

      And while we're getting completely tangential, I've sometimes though about the possibilities of having an spatial array of microphones recording, so that a DSP directional mike effect could be extracted later... might have solved the "can't bowl, can't throw" problem sooner.

      Good to see cricket discussion on ./, my two biggest time wasters, together at last :)

      --zaugg

      .sig free for 10 months

    4. Re:360 degree video coverage, eh? by matlhDam · · Score: 1
      I've actually had the synchronised multiple-angle thought myself... can't quite understand why it can't be done, but I'm sure there's a technical reason somewhere.

      The diving Mark Waugh catch would be cool, though. And it is nice to combine /. and cricket for once :)

  12. Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by rlowe69 · · Score: 4

    They don't need Matrix technology! They just need some of that technology from Enemy of the State ....

    you know, where they take the single POV security camera from the lingerie shop and make a 3D model out of it ... now that was coo --

    oh wait, it was also impossible (did it irk anyone else when they saw it?) ... :)

    rLowe

    --
    ----- rL
    1. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by Chrimble · · Score: 1

      I always took that to be a tongue-in-cheek take off of Blade Runner! 8)

      Don't forget that the director was Tony Scott, Ridley's brother...

      C'mon, Enemy of the State wasn't a bad caper movie, as they go...

      --
      Read my online journal: http://chris.carline.org
    2. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by James+Foster · · Score: 1

      I'd prefer to use the term "improbable" in that case. If you could discover the perfect prediction algorithm... why not?!? They did mention in the movie that the computer was only predicting. That kinda stuff isn't impossible to do with computers, since our minds can predict that kinda stuff OK. After all, our minds are just genetic computers. while(alive == TRUE) { // think. }

    3. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by dschuetz · · Score: 2
      I'd prefer to use the term "improbable" in that case

      Okay, that part was improbable, but the part where you saw a satellite with a massive radio reflector dish point towards the earth and get VISUAL images was just too much for me. I mean, sure, technically light is just EM radiation, but I'm pretty sure that a mesh RF dish won't work for collecting a visual image.

    4. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by Apotsy · · Score: 2
      Dude, just because the "massive radio dish" was the most prominent feature, doesn't mean the moviemakers were trying to imply that was what was doing the actual sensing! All satellites look that way -- the dish is always the biggest part (other than perhaps the solar panels). The cameras were there, they were just hard to see: some small little piece down in one corner.

      What, you wanted to see a giant Nikon floating out in space? :v)

    5. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by RovingSlug · · Score: 1

      But it doesn't matter if you have two cameras if you're only looking at a single, two-dimensional picture. Given that, you, a human, can still draw a good estimate of the 3-dimensional structure of the depicted scene.

    6. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by RovingSlug · · Score: 1

      > I'd prefer to use the term "improbable" in that case

      I would prefer the term "not unlikely" in that case. I work with computer vision. Given lighting (shading) and texture (warp and texel distribution) cues, a decent, estimated 3-dimensional model can be built from the image. That estimate can be further improved if some high-level information about the scene (human face, box, ball, etc.) is provided or assumed.

    7. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by KFury · · Score: 2

      I always thought they had access to two security cams, and extrapolated the 3-D architecture based on those. This isn't impossible, or even improbable. they're doing it right now at Berkeley...
      Kevin Fox

    8. Re:Silly Rabbits, they Don't Need This! by beowulfshaeffer · · Score: 1

      Dude, just because the "massive radio dish" was the most prominent feature, doesn't mean the moviemakers were trying to imply that was what was doing the actual sensing! All satellites look that way -- the dish is always the biggest part (other than perhaps the solar panels). The cameras were there, they were just hard to see: some small little piece down in one corner.
      Actually, visual spy sats look like the Hubble telescope. You don't need a massive radio dish to send a signal, but you need one to receive a weak signal.

      --
      Shave the Whales!
  13. Soccer World Cup by mindriot · · Score: 4

    At the Soccer World Cup in 1998, here in Germany they used a virtual soccer field, freezing all players in their current position and then allowing rotation and zoom in the virtual model, making it possible to determine, for example, an off-side position and see the game situation from a player's point of view, for example before a free kick. The system was pretty accurate, and apparently working automatically plus maybe some manual corrections of the players' postures. OK, that Matrix style thingy may look cooler, but I think this virtual field was much more flexible and practical... it should have used real textures only...

    1. Re:Soccer World Cup by My_AC_Account · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but who cares? That was for soccer, the most boring sport in the world.


      --

      --

      --
      Can you guess who I am?

    2. Re:Soccer World Cup by plumby · · Score: 1

      That's just the US soccer league. It's quite exciting in the rest of the world.

  14. Virtual Advertising... by berniecase · · Score: 1

    As long as they aren't superimposing a Pringles logo on the football or anything else when they're showing the replay, I'll be happy.

    Oh, wait, I hope I didn't just give them an idea. Oh boy.

    --Bernie

  15. White rabbits? by moz25 · · Score: 1

    So do we also get special features where we can 'follow the white rabbit'? ;-)

    Moz.

  16. Security System by jjr · · Score: 2

    This thing was created for Sport but imagine this would make a kick ass Security Camera System. Now I can see people stealing my stuff in 360 rotation. I also see this as a great system for thing like televised surgeies. I can see the doctor from all the angles. Great teaching tool.

    1. Re:Security System by Chainsaw76 · · Score: 1

      My Understanding is several Vegas Casinos already have this technology. On TLC or the Discovery Channel I saw a report about vegas Casino Security and IIRC they showed this exact technology. Chainsaw

      -Jason

  17. been around for months by palo0019 · · Score: 1

    pfft, I've had this for at least a half a year now. I've been known to spend lots of time creating my own 'bullet-time football' replays in NFL2k1, just to annoy my friends. :)

  18. Cool, but... by Eg0r · · Score: 4
    Just wondering,

    Okay, so for a smooth rotation, the object is at the center of the cameras, all having the same lense settings.

    If not at the center, then you have to compensate for the error with matched zooms so that you don't have, as the viewer, the weird impression of a comet like elliptical motion (not even as they only cover 270 degrees).

    Even if you compensate for the distance with a zoom, what about the fields of view? how do you morph your different frozen camera views into one smooth video sequence, when all your field of views are different?

    My (wild) guess is that you'll see quite a lot of these instant replays at the center of the field...

    Ubercool nontheless... I wonder how much processing power you need to render your animation... and how automated the whole thing really is. 33 cameras, say 3 second animation @ 60 frames/s, 800x600 that's 247Mb uncompressed @ 24bit/pixel and 32 different morphs to compute with say 5 images each... I wonder how many anchor points you use in such a morph. Anyway, sounds highly //isable to me, so 32 processors on a nifty board or a beowulf?

    ---

    --
    "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
    1. Re:Cool, but... by BrianHV · · Score: 1
      I wonder how much processing power you need to render your animation...

      I'm guessing that they're not going to be using computers to do this. They'll just have a video signal from all 33 cameras available, and instead of switching between them with buttons like in normal linear editing, they use a dial.

    2. Re:Cool, but... by Eg0r · · Score: 2
      What you really need is a tracking signal attached to each player so that you can pin-point any of them automagically with a very small error margin.

      The best lense setting on each camera may be obtained by minimising the differences between frames from close cameras.
      For a real 360 loop, that'll probably give you a global error minimum too, with camera 1 getting minimised with camera N.
      I'm not too sure about the morphing, but it seems feasable with RBFs or something similar when you already have close images.

      The point is, they already have at least 50% of the installation, I wonder how much it would cost to have proper morphing instead of crappy frame switching...

      Do you think I could ask for a million or 2 to implement it? You just gotta love these Ph.D. in blablabla thingies attached to your business card ;-)

      ---

      --
      "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
    3. Re:Cool, but... by LloydB · · Score: 1
      Near the end of the article there's a brief mention of adding and removing individual objects from the scene. So EyeVision very likely works by reconciling all the 2D views into a 3D model, which is then re-rendered from a new viewpoint.

      This goes by the name of "image-based modeling and rendering," and one of the the pioneers of the field developed the technique that was used for the notorious bullet-time shot. Another group demonstrated their realtime IBMR-from-video process at Siggraph 2000.

    4. Re:Cool, but... by Eg0r · · Score: 1
      Hey, thanks for that! the team's website seems to be here...

      Pretty cool stuff! I always wanted to play with something along these lines, but never got round to actually try it (blame slashdot for it ;)

      ---

      --
      "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
    5. Re:Cool, but... by MindStalker · · Score: 2

      Your you live video and some quick replays yes, but they did mention that it also had the ability to erase unimportant people for replays, that takes modeling

    6. Re:Cool, but... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      I meant "For your live video..." not "Your you live video.." -grin-

    7. Re:Cool, but... by dschuetz · · Score: 2
      A nerd is someone whose life revolved around computers and technology. A geek is someone whose life revolves around computers and technology, and likes it

      Good...but try this one:

      "A geek knows he's a geek and revels in it. A nerd is a geek who thinks he's normal."

    8. Re:Cool, but... by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      "My (wild) guess is that you'll see quite a lot of these instant replays at the center of the field..."

      Unfortunately, most of the things you would want to see a replay of don't happen in the center of the field. Fumbles are about it. What I think would be the best use of this technology is looking for feet in or out of bounds. That puts the object all the way on one side of the field.

      Anyway, I can't wait to see what they do on Sunday.

      -B

    9. Re:Cool, but... by gregbaker · · Score: 2
      If not at the center, then you have to compensate for the error with matched zooms so that you don't have, as the viewer, the weird impression of a comet like elliptical motion (not even as they only cover 270 degrees).

      I don't think so...

      If the cameras weren't at the same distance, but had the same field of view, the viewer would have the POV of someone quickly running around the sidelines, focussed on a single spot. It might look a little wired, but having a constant field, and getting closer and further would be more like what the eye has to interpret in real life. It would probably be much easier to follow than zooming in and out as you run around the field.

      All you'd need is a bunch of cameras with linked and equal amounts of zoom, pointing at the same spot.

      Greg

    10. Re:Cool, but... by Eg0r · · Score: 1
      Actually no - usually it only assures the person is an arrogant prick.
      Naaaaaaaa, only when you make other people call you doctor, which of course, you're not... I mean not a medical doctor (is there another kind? :).

      ...Like in "Excuse me! I didn't spend 3 years in this useless university to get a useless degree to have people call me mister" :->

      ---

      --
      "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
    11. Re:Cool, but... by vk2tds · · Score: 1

      During the Olympics, all video feeds were sent between venues at 270 MBit/Sec uncompressed. Using this as a baseline for the technology of the Superbowl and multiplying by the 33 cameras, so we are dealing with 8.91 GBit/sec, which is a lot of data in anyones language.

      Of course the argument is that you do not need to store the 8.91 GBit/Sec, but you do, since you want to be able to go back to chose a frame to start many seconds later.

      The computing power required for the storage is amazing. Of course if you compress each frame things become more sensable. Then we come down to about 100-200 KByte/frame, or 2.5 - 5 MBytes/sec which is more realistic in terms of computing power.

      I read that all the cameras are focused and zoomed onto a particular point on the field, but shoot from different angles. There are two ways to get the effects here...

      * Firstly grab the same frame from each of the image streams and play them back in real time in order. This will generate the effect of stopped motion rotate [Frame x from camera 1, then frame x from camera 2, etc]

      * Change frame and camera each time [Frame x from camera 1, frame x+1 from camera 2... etc]. This will create the illusion of the slow motion rotate.

      I do not think you would need to do any morphs to get this to work. It would appear as if the camera was moving rather than many cameras being used. All the zooms are synchronised, but I think the depth of field would vary from shot to shot. This would not matter since it would just add to the effect.

      Another example of this sort of technology is the 2000 film staring Bjork [I cannot remember the name] which used 100 cameras simultaniously to film the action.

      Darryl VK2TDS
      darryl@radio-active.net.au

    12. Re:Cool, but... by Eg0r · · Score: 2
      I was thinking that morphs are needed to make a transition from camera to camera... just switching from one camera to the next seems to me it's going to look a rather jerky motion.

      When you have a 100 cameras, things probably get much better... it wouldn't be used otherwise ;-)

      ---

      --
      "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
    13. Re:Cool, but... by WorldMaker · · Score: 1

      Er... maybe you don't understand... you flip enough frames in front of the viewer and the mind fills in the gaps. EVERYTHING WORKS THIS WAY. There is not a single necessary second of processing power needed to change the frames in any way to create the Matrix style effect. Theoretically, those old Black and White directors could have done the same effect. Their problem was the fact that cameras were VERY expensive at the time, so you couldn't fill a room with 100s of the things. No morphing. No computer time. Simple cut, copy and paste. (with actual scissors in the case of something like the Matrix, as Hollywood _STILL_ uses analog tech)

      WorldMaker

  19. Re:Sky Sports by urbanjunkie · · Score: 1
    Yeah, here in the UK, Sky Sports (providers of all things good re football), do this, especially to determine whether the ball crossed the goal line.

    Having said that, they've stopped using it as much as they used to when they first introduced it. Andy Gray has a nice(ish) replay/analysis tool - a LARGE touchscreem "TV", showing the play, with some clever(ish) s/w allowing him to eg highlight an individual player, track him, draw arrows, etc.

    Every time I see him use it though, I want to shout to the manufacturers (FASTER PROCESSOR, or maybe MORE MEMORY), as there's a horrible 1 or 2 second delay between him doing something and the results showing up.

  20. Surely this is trivial... by haroldhunt · · Score: 1

    ...I mean, it's just software, right? CBS doesn't deserve to profit off of this just for putting up the $2.5 million to actually develop the system. ;)

  21. Do any of you... by gadders · · Score: 1

    ... geeks actually know what sport is?

  22. Future plans by Craig+Davison · · Score: 2

    "Plans for EyeVision include erasing players from the video who aren't critical to the play and putting a transparent plane on the goal line to show distinctly whether the ball penetrated the plane and crossed the goal line."

    Ok, that's creepy.

    1. Re:Future plans by bpowell423 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. They're already doing this in news broadcasts, too. Wasn't this on /. a while back? You know, CBS plastering their logo all over the place, replacing an NBC viewscreen with the CBS logo, etc.

    2. Re:Future plans by rosewood · · Score: 1

      Yea - its insane - also newsstations covering protests will edit out placerds etc. I blame the Washington Post - they were the first to edit 'unimportant' items from news media.

  23. The Matrix, or The Gap? by Apotsy · · Score: 1
    It should be pointed out that the "Virtual Camera" technique saw its first prominent use in commercials for The Gap, long before "The Matrix" was produced.

    With that in mind, I believe this technique should no longer be called "bullet time". Instead, it should be called "khaki time".

    1. Re:The Matrix, or The Gap? by Fat+Rat+Bastard · · Score: 1

      I think (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that "bullet time" was developed during the Matrix but first seen in the Gap commercials. Remember, post production for a Movie takes a hell of a lot longer than a 30 second commercial.

      --

      If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
      - Ed the Sock

    2. Re:The Matrix, or The Gap? by Apotsy · · Score: 1
      I understand that movies take a long time to make, but I am fairly certain that the technique in question was developed independently, first used in commercials, and then later used in movies such as "The Matrix".

      I am not sure if the people behind the Matrix used equipment from the "Virtual Camera" people, or if they just rolled their own. Probably the latter, since the virtual camera website makes no metion of "The Matrix".

    3. Re:The Matrix, or The Gap? by Toxxy · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm pretty sure I saw this technique first on a "millertime" commercial, funnily enough. I distinctly recall a bottle being poured into a glass, and watching the wildly scintillating action in 360 degrees.

      --

  24. "Whizz pang video fechnology" has limifafions by gazdean · · Score: 1

    For insfance, can if fix my keypoard?

    Since Fuesday, everyfime I press f, I gef an f.
    And everyfime I press p, i gef a p!!!
    Fyping has pecome an apsolufe nighfmare.

    Oh well,
    I feel a pif peffer for geffing if off my chesf.
    Fhanks for lisfening.

    --
    "You can catch flies till the cows come home, but wasps are a totally different kettle of fish."
    1. Re:"Whizz pang video fechnology" has limifafions by Britney · · Score: 1

      Whaf a fofal fwaf!

      --

      --
      (if you're still looking for the point, it was back there, in the post. </sig>)
  25. Interpolation? by dachshund · · Score: 2

    Are interpolation frames being generated? It's hard to tell from the clips. Otherwise, it's just "stick a bunch of cameras on the field and rotate the views quickly." Neat, but hardly the Matrix.

    1. Re:Interpolation? by cmu_vr_guy · · Score: 1

      Not in the superbowl version - that just shows the views from the cameras themselves. We do this as part of the larger project at CMU, see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~virtualized-reality for details (this is not real-time)

  26. My god! by enneff · · Score: 1

    "In the end CBS Sports got input from rocket scientists at Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute and equipment and cameras from Japan and the Internet."

    Wow, I must've been under a rock. Why didn't someone post on slashdot when they declared the Internet it's own nation?

  27. Re:Infringment. Libel. by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 1

    Well, Dr. Yacoub, why don't you just go and do some more of your genetic tampering so that the polar caps will freeze more and the penguins will have a better habitat?

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
  28. Hrmmm... by James+Foster · · Score: 1

    Anyone else check out that video?? A little jerky and I'm pretty sure I saw the ball actually change its position for a frame or two when the camera was mid-swing... Hopefully thats just due to the poor quality video...

  29. Black Vinyl Hotpants? *shudder* by Root+Down · · Score: 1

    The sunglasses I am not worried about. I just got a vision of the Giants in black vinyl hotpants - and it was not pretty. Root Down ~#

  30. one word... by coreman · · Score: 4

    Cheerleaders!

    1. Re:one word... by majestyk2000 · · Score: 1

      Oh hell yeah!

      Everyone knows that the first 'killer application' using this technology is going to be porno movies on DVD that'll let you move the 'camera angle' to anywhere you want.

      Maybe I ought to patent that!

  31. Two reasons by fish4242 · · Score: 1

    Cool now I will have two reasons to watch the super bowl, the commercials, and the instant replay. This might be tough because I often would go get food, or goto the bathroom during the game in fear of missing a funny commercial.

    --
    "The heresy of one age becomes the orthodoxy of the next" - Helen Keller
  32. This won't be used in the game by w.p.richardson · · Score: 3

    If you are familiar with either of the teams in the Super Bowl, then you know there won't be any "foot on the line" touchdowns. Hell, there won't event be a score. This will be a 4 overtime scoreless tie, eventually decided by a safety. Nice to see that this will be available, as it means that it will sooner or later make it into all games.

    --

    Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!

    1. Re:This won't be used in the game by nobody69 · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought too... But then I realized that they could also show replays of say, Tony Siragusa and Ray Lewis putting the Malacci Crunch on Kerry Collins (or Michael Strahan and Jesse Armstead on Trent Dilfer) and that would be even more Matrix-like. 'Whoa, look at that whiplash!'

      I'd still rather have a Raiders-Vikings match-up that the Stupor Bowl that we'll probably have to endure...

      --
      "Bugger this, I want a better world." - Jenny Sparks
    2. Re:This won't be used in the game by TOTKChief · · Score: 2

      Yeah, the only scoring attempts will be [insert player here] trying to hook up with Britney Spears before she hits the stage at halftime.
      --

    3. Re:This won't be used in the game by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      Hell, there won't event be a score

      Yeah, they said the same thing about the Vikings/Giants game a couple weeks ago, except they were talking about the wrong team.

      Ouch!

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
  33. Soccer Set, Kenny's Kourt... by gfxguy · · Score: 2
    All examples of how this has already been done years ago.

    Soccer Set from Orad brought this to European and other countries several years ago.

    Kenny's Kourt, on TBS and TNT has been doing this since SPRING 1999 with basketball, right here on American television.
    ----------

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  34. Illusion == Reality? by bpowell423 · · Score: 1

    I read a book way back in elementary school (1980's) about somebody in the 21st century who created a computer system to completely simulate sporting events. You could pick and choose players from any era and pit them against one another. Since it's all just "pixels", with enough processing power, it wasn't possible to tell the illusion from the reality. How are away from this are we? Kind of like the matrix, except we're just plugged into our TV's instead of something in the back of our heads. How long before anything you see or hear on TV could just have easily come out of someone's computer as a live camera? We know that CBS has been doing this on a small scale already. Man, you could come up with some pretty good conspiracy theories really quickly with this ammo... I'm sure some /.er will! Cheers!

    1. Re:Illusion == Reality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well.. if we replace all NFL players with pixels, it will certainly reduce the number of murders and rapes in the US. Now if we could only get rid of the NBA and all the crack-smoking, weed-smuggling, drunk-driving primadonnas there, we'd be all set. PS Do you think Ray Lewis will visit Rae Carruth in jail? He's got like 12 years to do so...

  35. Superbowl FX and the Ridiculopathy.com commercial by tenzig_112 · · Score: 1
    The Ridiculopathy.com superbowl spot will air during the second quarter.

    We had to sign on for the air-time last year at this time, and since everyone else was doing it, we didn't want to be left behind. I've had "rais a million dollars" on my Palm's To-Do list for most of a year- and you know how that goes.

    Due to cash constraints, it will be only six seconds long.

    It took us months to concept and complete the spot. The cost to produce it was nearly as expensive as the price of the air-time.

    The Making of The Ridiculopathy.com Superbowl Spot

    download the spot (file will be taken down on Sunday)

  36. Begining of the end? by Chainsaw76 · · Score: 1

    Using this 270 Deg technology, and 3d Photo Software (like Photo 3d, Image 3d, and others) they could be building a database of 3 dimentional players. They mention the can remove a player from the scene, heck they could add a player from this 3d database just as easly. What happens when the broadcaster and the sports team are owned by the same company? Ever watched the Braves on TBS? If they can add/remove players, can they add/remove footbals? Baseballs? Sidlines? Foul Poles? "Ted says make that look like a home run, it wont change the game, but it will sure help ratings" "Ted says remove rocker from the lockerroom video, he's about to say something stupid again."

    -Jason

  37. Still cameras? Bzzt. by SeanCier · · Score: 2

    I find it interesting that the engineers who designed the system referred to the Matrix technology as using still cameras. The technical (as opposed to artistic) breakthrough of those effects in The Matrix was that they used actual movie cameras, so action could continue during the rotation. The Gap ads (and others) preceding the Matrix used still cameras for that effect; that wasn't new.

    An error I could overlook, but the fact that the creators of CBS's version themselves didn't know this basic fact tends to suggest they didn't bother to do their homework...

    -spc

    http://www.parabon.com
  38. Quote about this by TOTKChief · · Score: 3

    Evidently Keanu Reeves heard about this and said, "Yet another shameless use of our ground-breaking technology. I'm sick of all these parodies."

    Told that Trent "Lame Duck" Dilfer and Kerry "Lame Drunk" Collins would be the starting quarterbacks in Super Bowl XXXV, Reeves said, "Whooooa."


    --
    1. Re:Quote about this by nobody69 · · Score: 1

      Told that Trent "Lame Duck" Dilfer and Kerry "Lame Drunk" Collins would be the starting quarterbacks in Super Bowl XXXV, Reeves said, "Whooooa."

      And everyone else said 'Doh!'

      --
      "Bugger this, I want a better world." - Jenny Sparks
  39. What else can they borrow from The Matrix? by Elkman · · Score: 4
    This new camera thing sounds pretty cool, even though every single car company has been using this technique in their commercials for the past two years. But I think they should borrow a few other things from The Matrix:
    • Whenever a player wants to go to the sidelines, he has to get on a Nokia cell phone (product placement!) and call for an exit.
    • All of the players are wearing black leather trenchcoats and carrying lots of weapons.
    • Skylons appear above the stadium and move around whenever the players touch brightly colored stones. (Oh, wait. I'm thinking of the matrix table from "Land of the Lost".)
    • Instead of coaches, players consult The Oracle for advice during the game, and inadvertently knock over a vase during the process.
    • A running back about to be tackled can jump up high in the air, spin around, and roundhouse-kick his opponent and it all looks real.
    • There is no spoon.
    1. Re:What else can they borrow from The Matrix? by signe · · Score: 2

      While I can appreciate the humor, I do have to take exception here...

      This new camera thing sounds pretty cool, even though every single car company has been using this technique in their commercials for the past two years.

      I'm sorry, are you seriously comparing camera technology developed for a live event with camera technology for commercials? Commercials are staged in advance, painstakingly prepared, and touched up again and again. What they use for filming commercials isn't even close to what they're doing here.

      It's so far removed, even if you just consider the fact that this new technology is realtime. And yes, it is realtime. They have to track/zoom the cameras in realtime to be able to play back an instant replay, and the camera tracking and zoom is the really hard part of this, not the stitching together of video streams to make a 270 degree rotation.

      -Todd
      ---

      --
      "The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
    2. Re:What else can they borrow from The Matrix? by ethereal · · Score: 1
      Instead of coaches, players consult The Oracle for advice during the game, and inadvertently knock over a vase during the process.

      "But what's really going to bake your noodle later is: would you still have dropped the ball if I hadn't said that?"

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    3. Re:What else can they borrow from The Matrix? by Elkman · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry, are you seriously comparing camera technology developed for a live event with camera technology for commercials?

      Sorry, wrong choice of words. I meant that the spin-around effect has been overused on car commercials. They probably have it down to an exact science in the studio (or on a good graphics workstation). But yeah, the technique they're going to use in this game sounds interesting, and I want to see what it looks like.

  40. This is not quite the Matrix by leko · · Score: 1

    Although I believe the different methods produce similar results, the NFL stuff is the work of Takeo Kanade, the former director of the CMU Robotics Institute. Check out the page here for information on the research which I assume led to this.

  41. I find it very interesting by jayhawk88 · · Score: 1

    That "The Matrix" is now being used as an adjective. Guess that's when you really know the impact a movie has had on society.

  42. It's gotta be invisible by Fervent · · Score: 2

    It's gotta be invisible to the home viewer, and practically flawless in design, to work. The first down line they use now is a good example. Fox's ugly "shadow puck" for hockey, complete with electronic trails every time the puck was fired, is not.

    --

    - I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.

    1. Re:It's gotta be invisible by Overt+Coward · · Score: 2

      Well, other than the fact that FOX lost the NHL contract (to ABC), they were making the "glow puck" a bit less painful -- e.g., only "glowing" the puck when it was out of camera view (down on the near-side boards, for example). But those "vapor trails" really needed to go...

      --

  43. Re:The NFL meets.... by netmeister · · Score: 1

    They already have this - its the XFL!!!

    http://www.xfl.com

    --
    Where's the beef?
  44. Re:American Primitive Sheep Consumer Pricks!! by netmeister · · Score: 1

    So...tell me, why do almost all athletes in professional European sports leagues have 99% of their bodies covered with sponsor logos?

    --
    Where's the beef?
  45. Fourth Quarter... by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    Giants: 14, Ravens: 11. CBS is now ready to call the superbowl for the Ravens.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  46. Matrix plus the Superbowl = XFL by orichter · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the Matrix plus the Superbowl give you the XFL?

  47. The Matrix meets NFL by spood · · Score: 1

    I'll tell you what really happens when The Matrix meets NFL, and it's a real piece of shit.

    --
    ---- Just another spud server.
  48. What really sucks... by Mignon · · Score: 5
    "What do you need, Coach?"
    "Touchdowns. Lots of touchdowns."

    What really sucks about this is that now I'm tempted to actually watch the game. And it's not like it's some cool half-time stunt - this could happen at any time during the game. There goes my afternoon.

    1. Re:What really sucks... by TOTKChief · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it could happen at any time. Expect it while Britney Spears is "singing" and "dancing" on the stage.
      --

    2. Re:What really sucks... by Fluid+Truth · · Score: 1

      Nah, you don't have to watch the game. Do what I do every year: tape it! You're not worried about spoiling the outcome, are you? Usually, I just fast forward through the game and watch the commercials at my leisure. This year, I'll watch for the occasional special effects instant replay. I suspect they'll make a big deal about it and have some flashy borders around it, so I'll be able to spot it.

      --
      Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
  49. Poorly engineered? by rkent · · Score: 2
    There will be no off-Broadway tryout for the technology. The process will make its debut in front of 130 million viewers.

    See, this right here makes me more than a little skeptical about how well this thing was engineered. If it was 2 years in the making anyway, it seems like the least they could do would be to hook it up a few days in advance and take some rotating retakes of, oh, the groundskeeper replacing sod or something.

    Or at least take accurate measurements of the dimensions of the stadium and set up a demo in an airplane hangar someplace. While it would make for some of the coolest replays ever, I think their efforts towards secrecy and "adventure" are going to make for a barely-functional system that won't live up to its hype.

    also, there was a line in there about how this would "prove conclusively" if certain passes were received and whatnot, but don't you really only need 1 really good angle for that?

    1. Re:Poorly engineered? by dexlargo · · Score: 1

      I believe that they are referring to this being the first production to an audience as they say that they ran: "...a further practice run on a Seattle Seahawks-Giants game in December" Also they didn't just set up the cameras today and are crossing their fingers, it has taken 3 weeks to prepare the site, and I bet that they didn't forget to take some shots of the groundskeeper replacing the sod. I bet they're saving that for halftime.

  50. Big fscking surprise. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

    -rant
    It makes me sad to be an American when something like this develops. Joe Sixpack doesn't care about this technology when it could be used to cover newsworthy events. Hey, let's take another look at that assassination attempt to see WHO was actually firing. NO WAY, Let's make sure that the reciever made his two steps in bounds before he went out!

    It is depressing when I watch someone's eyes glaze over when a football game is on. People spend entire holidays sitting on their fat asses feeding their faces and watching the same moronic game over and over again all day.

    Why wasn't this developed for use by a news agency? Was it a question of funding? If so, why then does the sports dept. get that amount of funding?

    American football is a children's game being played all to often by overgrown babies.

    -/rant

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:Big fscking surprise. by slim · · Score: 2


      Hey, let's take another look at that assassination attempt to see WHO was actually firing. NO WAY, Let's make sure that the reciever made his two steps in bounds before he went out!


      The thing with sport is that you can tell with some certainty that something worth filming is going to happen within a certain range of space and time.

      If you could do the same with asassinations, then, sure, you could point a few dozen cameras at it and generate bullet-time recreations. Or, you could intervene and prevent it from happening. Let me know when you have this technology.

      Now there are probably newsworthy events that could possibly benefit from this stuff -- but I can't for the life of me think of anything that would give you long enough to set up the equipment *and* is action-oriented enough to warrant the effort.
      --

    2. Re:Big fscking surprise. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

      Assassinations are rarely random. People worth assassinating are in public for short periods of time, usually in a small designated area.

      It wouldn't be terribly difficult to set up as preparation for a press conference.

      While we're at is, why not boxing? Why not hockey? Why not soccer? Why not tennis? Why not gymnastics? Each of those sports could use this technology just as much as, if not more than the NFL. But the mindless drones who are ass locked to the couch on sunday will make it financially possible to pull off.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    3. Re:Big fscking surprise. by ruin · · Score: 1
      It is depressing when I watch someone's eyes glaze over when a football game is on. People spend entire holidays sitting on their fat asses feeding their faces and watching the same moronic game over and over again all day.

      Gee, Sparky, I watch football. I guess that means I'm some kind of fat-assed moron. Do I dare point out that your serve-serving stereotyping, like most stereotyping, is completely inaccurate? Enh, why bother. Suffice to point out that football is a game of complex strategy and incredible feats of endurance. Maybe you just don't know enough about it to be able to appreciate it. *shrug*

      Why wasn't this developed for use by a news agency? Was it a question of funding? If so, why then does the sports dept. get that amount of funding?

      News agencies are too busy trying to figure out how to cram more useless gerbage into their already fatuous programs of rapidly declining relevance. It should be fairly obvious why sport organizations have large amount of money: many people watch sports, and the sports organizations sell their eyeballs for large sums of cash.

      American football is a children's game being played all to often by overgrown babies.

      You say "children's game" as if it is a bad thing. Many of the games I enjoy today are ones that I learned and played as a child. Heck, most children's games are just simplified versions of adults' games; children love to learn, and games present wonderful environments in which to do so. It makes no sense to me that a love for play and for learning should be supressed when a person gets old.


      --

      --
      share and enjoy
    4. Re:Big fscking surprise. by markus+o'farkus · · Score: 1
      two points (although probably for naught as this thread is getting old).

      1) Did it occur to you that maybe this is only a debut, and will LIKELY spread to many other endeavors both sporting and otherwise? Only events this huge can justify this kind of inital investment. But in time this will obviously change. just hold your horses.

      2) You shouldn't make a big deal out of how idiotic you think football is. as your links tell me, you happen to be obsessed by playing computer games over a LAN. Now I think that is fun too, I also like football. now a LOT of people make fun of computer game players, and so just as it is ignorant to say that pc games are stupid and mindless, your comments are equally silly. you just don't happen to like football, that's it. end of story.

      I didn't like bozo jocks in high school either, but I like football. sorry you think I'm a moron.

    5. Re:Big fscking surprise. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

      Did it occur to you that maybe this is only a debut, and will LIKELY spread to many other endeavors both sporting and otherwise?

      Yes, and the fact that it took a football game to roll it out is sad.

      2) You shouldn't make a big deal out of how idiotic you think football is. as your links tell me, you happen to be obsessed by playing computer games over a LAN.

      Enjoy? Yes. Obsessed with? No. On every sunday afternoon I don't have my hindquarters glued to a chair while I game. Many (not all, but many) football heads don't move except to get another beer, and to um, recycle their previous beer.

      I didn't like bozo jocks in high school either, but I like football. sorry you think I'm a moron.

      Whether or not you're one of the morons that I was ranting about depends on whether football is a passtime or an obsession.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    6. Re:Big fscking surprise. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

      Gee, Sparky, I watch football. I guess that means I'm some kind of fat-assed moron.

      If (and that's IF) you are one of those Al Bundy types whose eyes glaze over when that first football game starts on any given sunday and you don't move until the last one is over, yes.

      News agencies are too busy trying to figure out how to cram more useless gerbage into their already fatuous programs of rapidly declining relevance.

      Like the scrolling displays of football scores at the bottom on the screen?

      It should be fairly obvious why sport organizations have large amount of money: many people watch sports, and the sports organizations sell their eyeballs for large sums of cash.

      Because these Al Bundy's won't get their fat asses off of the sofa, or change the channel.

      It makes no sense to me that a love for play and for learning should be supressed when a person gets old.

      I have a couple of little cousins that would love to play candyland with you.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    7. Re:Big fscking surprise. by ruin · · Score: 1
      It makes no sense to me that a love for play and for learning should be supressed when a person gets old.
      I have a couple of little cousins that would love to play candyland with you.

      Oh, I get it. You long ago stopped using your brain for anything other than propping up your wounded ego and mental masturbation. No great tragedy, I suppose.


      --

      --
      share and enjoy
    8. Re:Big fscking surprise. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

      Oh, I get it. You long ago stopped using your brain for anything other than propping up your wounded ego and mental masturbation. No great tragedy, I suppose.

      On sunday when you're inthralled in football, I'll be reading. To do any one thing to the exclusion of all others is idiocy. Why don't football zombies see this?

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  51. Well, we already have this... by glindsey · · Score: 1
    Plans for EyeVision include... putting a transparent plane on the goal line to show distinctly whether the ball penetrated the plane and crossed the goal line.

    Heck, there's already a transparent plane there. And on the line of scrimmage. And on every yard line. And in the bleachers, and in the skyboxes, and piercing through the Goodyear blimp, and threading through the cheerleaders, and passing straight through the centers of both the star quarterback and the couch potato sitting at home...

    Oh, they meant a translucent plane. Well, that's different now.

    </pedant>
  52. Offtopic: My cats by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 1

    Because when I got her at the age of 9 years old, I wasn't that original in naming cats, so she got named Boots because of ehr little white paws.

    now, if you want an interesting answer, ask how my cat Joe Hill got his name.

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:Offtopic: My cats by skadacl · · Score: 1

      So, how did Joe Hill get his name?

      Hehe... Anyways. This seems pretty cool. Hopefully the replays last longer. I can use the bathroom less often if I can just get it all done at one time :)

      I'm just hoping I can get a new H card by Sunday...

  53. Re:Still cameras? Bzzt. by Arkaein · · Score: 1

    Actually, the Matrix used still cameras. Certain scenes used lots of images all taken at once (rotation in zero time), others used images at very small intervals (Neo dodging bullets). Both types used still image cameras with computer generated interpolation frame.

    BTW, the Matrix pioneered the technique, the Gap ads just adopted it before the movie hit the theaters.

  54. Matrix rips off geeks... by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

    It's actually Wing Commander style video...

    The Wing Commander live action movie was the first full-feature film to use this type of special effect. Matrix was filmed much after Wing Commander. Surely geeks would give credit where credit is due, especially to something as geeky as a computer game.

    Arguably, Matrix is a much better movie, but I still heartily enjoyed Wing Commander. Come on guys, give credit where credit is due, instead of pandering to the masses who don't watch anything past the top-ten list.

    Wait, this is slashdot. We are the masses...

    Bork!

  55. Consider the technology in use. by spanked_up · · Score: 1

    For everyone concerned about the detail of trying to keep focus on one single point, I'm betting that one point that wasn't made perfectly clear is this: The cameras and the arms they sit on are probably /theoretically/ calibrated very very tightly to one another.

    This would allow the movement, adjustment of focus to be automatic for every camera. To be as broad as possible, there'll probably be a guy with a joystick and Pan/Zoom controls that will automatically compensate for these factors in relation to their locations. He/she just needs to point the focus to the spot on the field he wants it to be. The computers will adjust for the rest.

  56. neato! by Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

    This gives me a reason to watch something other than the entertainment that comes on during breaks in the game.

    --
    P2P Anonymous Distributed Web Search: http://www.yacy.net/
  57. Not exactly The Matrix . . . by micromoog · · Score: 1
    The Matrix wasn't the first application of panned frozen images. This technique has been around quite a while, where an array of cameras take still shots together.

    The Matrix pioneered the use of panned, slow-motion shots, where the cameras take the shot one-after-another, in precisely synchronized order. That's why Keanu's coat was flapping as he rose up in the air, etc.

    Either way, it's badass for football. If they can eventually do this with full-motion cameras, and software that can make little slo-mo pans on the fly, it will be a very impressive feat.

  58. Now I have TWO reasons to watch the SuperBowl by Stalcair · · Score: 1
    The first, of course, is the commercials (specifically cold-piss [American Beer] commercials) *Horrible taste, but great commercials*

    My second reason of course, would be to simply watch for this little knick-knack in use. Hmmmm, 3D huh?... "uhhh, Bob, get a couple of angle shots on those cheerleaders."

    Of course, maybe some day pro athletes will stop being such pathetic pansies, bleeding and crying over this or that (when they are not raping or killing), and protesting their tiny 50 Million dollar salaries. Pathetic... well I guess I am being naive, but who knows... things change.

    Actually, I think this should be implemented for Soccer in England. That way you could get the 3D shots of beetings and stampedes by the fans, now THAT would be entertaining!

    --

    I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.

  59. video snippet of soccer field by Mantorp · · Score: 1

    By the looks of the demo video they've got soccer lines on the field.

  60. Nanotech meets Football by Vanguard(DC) · · Score: 1

    Yet another suggestion:

    with nanotechnology allowing such inventions as "martpants" which keep themselves clean and dry, couldnt the pigskin of a Wilson football be coated with nanotech technology whih when combined with a simple wire along the endzone will tell you when the ball crosses this "transparant" (TRANSLUCENT! DAMNIT) plane?

    ok, im just way too bored to be productive...

    --
    "I think, therefore I get paid."
  61. Here's a more detailed story... by Zppr · · Score: 1

    From CMU's Internal BBoard

    Carnegie Mellon Professor's Unique New vision Technology Will be used to Present Instant Replays in Super Bowl XXXV

    Football fans tuning into this year's Super Bowl will be treated to a unique new view of the action during instant replays. CBS Television will be presenting them using a new technology, co-developed by CBS and Carnegie Mellon University computer vision expert Takeo Kanade.

    "Eye Vision", as CBS calls it, involves shooting multiple video images of a dynamic event, such as a football game, from multiple cameras placed at different angles. The video streams from these cameras are combined by computer and the resulting images reach viewers in a 270-degree format that will make them feel as if they are flying throughthe scenes they see.

    USA Today notes in its Jan. 23 article that viewers and referees "will be able to see rotating . . . stop-action shots from simultaneous angles. The resulting pictures will demonstrate conclusively whether passes were caught and if the ballcarrier was down before the fumble,out-of-bounds or over the goal line."

    The action at Super Bowl XXXV will be captured by more than 30 cameras, each poised some 80 feet above the field at Raymond James Stadium in Tampa, Fla. Each camera, with computer-controlled zoom and focus capabilities, is mounted on a custom-built, robotic pan-tilt head, which can swing the camera in any direction at the command of a computer. These camera heads are controlled in concert so that cameras point, zoom and focus at the same time on the same spot on the field, where some action (touch down or fumble) is occurring.

    The system operates in the following way: One of the camera heads is designated as the master camera. A human cameraman operates a movable pan-tilt tripod, attached to a flat liquid crystal display (LCD) tv screen on which the video from the master camera is constantly displayed. The pan-tilt tripod is equipped with sensors to constantly measure its angle. The master camera head moves by mimicking the motion of the tripod as the cameraman moves it to capture a moving object on the field on his LCD TV screen.

    In the meantime, information collected from the master camera's pan-tilt angles, zoom and focus is fed to a computer, which quickly computes the appropriate control signal for each of the remaining cameras. This causes all of them to converge on the same target and capture its image from a variety of angles.

    Live action on the football field is continuously captured up to 30 times per second by the video cameras. The video of each camera is synchronized and time stamped so that all the views at the most critical and interesting moments can be played back in sequence, as if a viewer had flown around the action.

    Kanade will explain his technology in an interview from Tampa, which will air during the Super Bowl Pre-Game Show. He notes that the "Eye Vision" demonstration that will appear on Super Bowl Sunday is only a small part of this new technology, which he calls "Virtualized Reality" opposed to virtual. reality, and is the product of more than six years of research.

    For Virtualized Reality to achieve its full impact, the set of captured, multiple video images must be processed beyond the play back. The detailed geometrical information about a scene--the shapes of targets and background--is extracted by computer, which enables a person to choose how to view a scene, even from a perspective that was actually not shot by any camera.

    To bring this concept to life, Kanade and his students built a "3D room" equipped with more than 50 video cameras and experimented by filming people involved in a variety of sports activities. He also spun off a company named Zaxel Systems, Inc., for commercialization of the technology. Much of this work can be viewed at the Virtualized Reality Web site: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/project/Virtu alizedR/www/VirtualizedR.html

    In contrast to virtual reality, in which synthetic environments are created, Virtualized Reality, and to a lesser extent, Eye Vision, are based on events taking place in the real world, which are captured and processed by computer manipulation. "Because our models are derived from real images," Kanade says, "the models look much more real than typical virtual worlds."

    Kanade says the output from these multiple cameras shooting a scene together from many angles actually can create totally new views that were not captured by any camera. As this technology develops, he believes it will create a completely new way to view sports and entertainment events. People will be able to customize the perspective from which they watch--e.g. from that of a particular player or the ball.

    Kanade is the director of Carnegie Mellon University's Robotics Institute. He has been a leader in the development of video-based vision systems used in the university's autonomous vehicles and exploration robots. His team has developed a vision-based autonomous helicopter,which ultimately may be able to aid in search and rescue operations, fire fighting and inspection tasks. He is also a pioneer in medical robotics and computer-assisted surgery, working with surgeons and medical professionals to develop smart tools capable of performing medical procedures better than a physician or machine could do alone.

    Kanade earned his undergraduate and graduate degrees in electrical engineering from Kyoto University, Japan. He has been on the Carnegie Mellon faculty since 1980 and director of the Robotics Institute since 1991. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering. Most recently he received a $100,000 award from the NEC Foundation for C&C Promotion for "fundamental and broad contributions to the development of multimedia through the advancement of robotics and computer vision."

  62. Yes, still cameras. by Artifice_Eternity · · Score: 1
    Whatisthematrix.com sez:

    "A series of sophisticated still cameras was placed along the mapped path, each of which would shoot a single still photo. Then the photos were scanned into the computer, which created a strip of still images, similar to animation cels. The computer generated "in-between" drawings of the images much as animators draw frames to move their characters smoothly from one pose to another and the completed series of images could be passed before the viewers' eyes as quickly or slowly as the filmmakers wanted without losing clarity."

  63. You may need to watch The Matrix again by SIGFPE · · Score: 1

    Because unlike the Gap commercials The Matrix doesn't have 'stop-action' shots. Time is slowed down instead. This is a slightly tougher feat which I am yet to see reproduced.
    --

    --
    -- SIGFPE
  64. Better news article by Zppr · · Score: 1
  65. We're there already. by stubob · · Score: 1

    What's your question?

    I had a feeling you were going to say that.

    --
    Planning to be moderated ± 1: Bad Pun.
  66. What they really need to do.... by AltGrendel · · Score: 1

    ...is wire it into the refs. Maybe they can do some accurate calls. I can hear them now...Naw I didn't see it, all I got was static.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

  67. Matrix shot not original by jyang · · Score: 1

    I thought I saw those rotating snapshot in GAP commercials before Matrix was released.

    Some guy with yellow shirt or sth jumped and froze in mid air and the shot rotated 180 degrees, with hip music playing in background.

    --
    --- You make things foolproof, and they'll find you a damn fool.
  68. other tech mentioned in article by Jafa · · Score: 2
    Some other effects they're coming out with sound pretty cool:

    Plans for EyeVision include erasing players from the video who aren't critical to the play and putting a transparent plane on the goal line to show distinctly whether the ball penetrated the plane and crossed the goal line.


    The goal line plane will actually be kinda cool, sort like the 1st down line they have now, but a big wall. They'll probably soon add sound effects of crashing glass sounds when they break through...

    And removing other players sounds neat, but I would think that everyone out there is effecting some part of the play. Although, it could be super-sweet for training videos.

    Jason
  69. Here is some more info by DaKrzyGuy · · Score: 2

    Here is a link to more info on the technical details
    http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~virtualized-reality/

  70. Roll-your-own Matrix by British · · Score: 2

    I wonder if I could buy a bunch of Kensington webcams(which are selling on clearence at Best Buy), a big USB hub, and do my own bullet time stuff at home. Anyone? Anyone?

  71. If I understand this correctly... by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    It actually is an advancement over the tech used in the Matrix. It is pretty cool, too - too bad I am not a huge football fan by any means.

    Essentially, in the Matrix still cameras were used, all fired in sequence, aranged "around" the point of action. This "in action" panning strip was then enhanced/scrubbed with a computer to make it cleaner, and more presentable.

    What is being done in the Superbowl is similar - but replace each still camera with a video camera, and feed the frames in a computer. Now, as the action is going on at the "action point", you have 33 streams, all from different angles, running and capturing frames. Now, think of these strips of frames - if you played all 33 in sync (so that frame 1 of strip A is played at the same time as frame 1 of strip B), and switched "along" the sequence of the 33 cameras, you could get full video along those points, at any angle. Or, you could show various angles (as seen from camera 27). Pan from 1 to 33, while moving the video forward, or reverse, and you have full motion panning, through time, along an arc.

    Then, the CBS engineers go one step further - they have mounted all of these video cameras on robotic pan/tilt/zoom platforms - very precise platforms - all working in concert to all point at the same 3D coordinate in the stadium. I would imagine the software to be quite complex to manage all of that, to manage the calculations, the control, the capture, playback, review, etc. The system to store the video frame streams would have to be pretty huge as well, to do it all in real time, at TV quality, for over 30 streams. I mean, for one stream at 16 bit quality - 30 fps - say 640x480 video - for one second of video that would be 17 MB! Over 30 streams would be half a gig - every second! I would imagine a parallel video RAID-like system for this, to get a few seconds of video. Entirely doable, very custom, I would imagine.

    I am sure these cameras can also be used in "teams" as well, or individually. I think (I could be wrong here) that the motion of the streams would cancel out the need to do real-time interpolation of the images as was done for the Matrix (which was done because the raw strip of images was very jumpy). I might be wrong about that, though (depending on how far apart the cameras are spaced would determine the jumpiness as well)...

    All I can say, if what I am thinking is correct - is wow!

    Worldcom - Generation Duh!

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  72. What 12th man? by Zanguinar · · Score: 1
    "Plans for EyeVision include erasing players from the video who aren't critical to the play and putting a transparent plane on the goal line to show distinctly whether the ball penetrated the plane and crossed the goal line."

    Nice how they just gloss over this detail at the very end. In mere seconds, they can remove a person from the video. This has much more serious implications, if you think about it. What else can they do to a live or seconds-delayed video feed that we won't know about?

    I guess the only way to really be sure you're seeing what actually happened is to be there. That, IMNSHO, is really the most amazing part of that article

  73. I dont care, unless... by dimator · · Score: 2

    see a 360-degree stop action view of that receiver's foot on the line in the end zone.

    I dont care, unless said reciever is Carrie-Anne Moss


    --

    --
    python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
  74. World Cup 98 by smallstepforman · · Score: 2

    The Football World Cup in France 98 (soccer for our American breven) had this technology - some off-side rulings where analysed with this technology, but after the game. What would really be cool is if the processing power existed to do this in real time, with a 3D TV standand in process which allows the viewer to rotate the camera angle anywhere they want.

    Fans of EA Sports titles have enjoyed this replay facility for over 4 years now.

    --
    Revolution = Evolution
  75. Re:Big fscking surprise. - BIG FSCKING MORON by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

    I'm 6'1" and weigh about #220. I'm not fat by any stretch of the imagination. I've been a student of Go Ju Do, Kenpo, Shotokan, Jui Jitsu and Aikido. You couldn't kick my ass if I were asleep.

    Get out of your dream world, moron and realize that there are somethings that are better to get excited about than whacking off at your computer while viewing newsgroup porn, because I know you don't get no chicks with an attitude like that.

    So, you get excited by watching all of those big burly men in tight shiny pants huh? I do alright in the "chicks" department. I'm no Cassanova, but I get my fair share of action.

    At least football promotes all of the basic fundamentals of humanity. Violence, intelligence, strategy, teamwork, and winner takes all.

    Intelligence? Dream on! Just listen to the average football player give an interview. Because they were good at running while holding a ball, or at stopping people who run while holding a ball, they got an easy time in school. They never had to learn anything because the were good at playing a game. For grown men to do irreparable damage to their bodies for a GAME is not intelligent.

    I bet you got your ass beat every day you went to school because you were a whiny bitchy little wimp that couldn't hack it.

    I gave more ass kickings that I got. Sometimes to dimwitted jocks.

    Are you one of those Al Bundy types, who sits on the sofa all day, with one hand down his pants and the other rubbing on his fat belly, while you watch the game, talking about how you "used to play a little high school ball."?

    People like you make me embarrassed to be an American.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  76. Japan and the Internet? by aiken_d · · Score: 2

    From the story:

    CBS Sports got input from rocket scientists at Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute and equipment and cameras from Japan and the Internet
    Japan and the Internet. Wow. It must be cool, then.

    -b

    --
    If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
  77. Re:American Primitive Sheep Consumer Pricks!! by Amanset · · Score: 1

    Because they need some other way of making money than being "franchises" that are practically tax exempt and tend to move city at the drop of a hat if someone offers more cash?

  78. Previews Available? by Vegan+Pagan · · Score: 1

    Are there any previews of this we can download to get an idea of how it'll look?

  79. Strange... by spherex · · Score: 1

    I was unfamiliar with that "basic fact" as well. I also didn't realize that the Gap ads were filmed before the Matrix. I also didn't know that movie cameras were needed to continue action during rotation. And here I just thought they changed the timing so they didn't fire all at once! Wow, I feel dumb beneath your scathing review of CBS.

  80. Re:Still cameras? Bzzt. by SeanCier · · Score: 1

    I stand corrected. Apparently the information source I'd seen was incorrect -- and I *didn't* do my homework to confirm.

    -spc

  81. Re:Big fscking surprise. - BIG FSCKING MORON by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

    I played football in highschool, but it was just a game. It's not an amalgamation of real life events and values. It's a GAME. I was also on my school's chess team. I was also on the track team.

    Martial arts is not a "sport" in the traditional sense of the term.

    I never got beaten up by a football player. So you can hang your pseudo psychoanalysis up, you'll never make a living at it.

    The strategy of the game? Offense. Move the ball that way. Defense. Keep them from moving the ball this way. It's simple. That's why so many simpletons are enthralled by it.

    Then again, you are just a troll. That's why you're anonymous.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  82. Re:WHAT THE FSCK IS YOUR PROBLEM!!!!! by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    I have read all these comments and replies and what is YOUR PROBLEM LK?

    My problem is my annoyance with the football zombies who care about nothing but watching "the game".

    Are you one of those wounded black people who think that because they are a prosperous geek now, that they can knock everything that appears to go against being a geek?

    My race is no more of an issue with this than the fact that I'm right handed.

    Something for black people everywhere to look down upon.

    I'm a republican too. I am looked down upon by dimwits of every color.

    It's people like you that perpetuate the poor human condition of our world.

    Yeah, football is the answer to all of the world's problems huh?

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  83. No, I still think I get... something :) by Eg0r · · Score: 1
    Sure if you have enough of a frame rate, your eye don't register the flickering... like about 12 images per second (did you do these stroboscopic experiments in school?)

    The problem is, how do you go about having a limited number of cameras to do the same effect as in the matrix.
    You can't flick through your images, or if you do, I'd think you'd get a pretty bad result.

    Don't worry, if the transition between images isn't done using some morphing technique, it will be eventually, as it's bound to reduce the number of camera views needed.

    ---

    --
    "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
  84. Samples up by p3d0 · · Score: 1
    They have posted some samples from the actual Superbowl. Here is a particularly good one.

    Don't be expecting The Matrix here--there is no interpolation, so the turning is very jerky--but I think this shows promise.
    --
    Patrick Doyle

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....