Tomorrow (Wednesday, July 9th) is the last day for advanced (online)
registration for SIGGRAPH 2003.

Siggraph is the world's premiere conference on computer graphics and
interactive techniques.  The fulldome community has organized two events for
this year's conference.  Course #25 entitled "Computer Graphics for
Large-Scale Immersive Theaters" features a morning session in the Reuben H.
Fleet Science Center's 23 meter IMAX Dome theater where leading fulldome
producers will screen their works on a dual-projector ElectricSky II system.
The course's afternoon session at the San Diego Convention Center will
outline the basics of fulldome production.  For more information see:
http://www.siggraph.org/s2003/conference/courses/lantz.html

If you don't want to pay the course fees (registration also entitles you to
attend all courses, panels, papers, Electronic Theater, etc.) which are $850
for members, $1,000 for non-members and $500 for students, then you can
still attend the "Siggraph 2003 Fulldome Video Showcase" on Sunday evening,
July 27th at 9pm at the Fleet.  We're editing together an hour of our best
material for screening during the art reception.  You'll still need a
SIGGRAPH badge to get in, but the Exhibits Plus registration is only $75.
For more information see:
http://www.siggraph.org/s2003/conference/art/events.html

We would like to recognize the following people and organizations that are
participating in this year's events:

American Museum of Natural History
   Carter Emmart

Audio Visual Imagineering

Clark Planetarium
   Mike Murray
   Aaron McEuen

Drexel University
   Ted Artz
   Max Callahan
   Christopher Redmann

DVS Digital Video, Inc.

Elumens Corp.

Evans & Sutherland
   Kevin Scott

Home Run Pictures
   Tom Casey

Houston Museum of Nature and Science
   Carolyn Sumners
   Tony Butterfield

JVC Professional Company

Reuben H. Fleet Science Center

Sky Skan
   Steve Savage
   Jack White
   David Miller

Spitz, Inc.
   Ed Lantz, Organizer
   Brad Thompson
   Garland Stern
   Mike Bruno
   Mark Jarvis
   Derrick Wilkerson

LodeStar held the world's first fulldome animation festival and competition
to large and wide-eyed crowds Saturday night.  The winners:

First Place:  Aaron Romero, University of New Mexico, "SnowGlobe" (directed
by Sheryl Hurley)
Second Place: Dan Spence, Northern Kentucky University, "A Child's First
Flight"
Third Place: Kiernan Holland, Los Alamos, "LavaCoaster"

A big thanks for all the entries (and interest that didn't result in
submission.)  The event had a great vibe while wowing audiences and putting
some much needed revenue into the coffers.  We'll definitely be hosting the
second annual DomeFest next July as part of the DigiFest SouthWest Festival.
New names all round-for the animation festival and the film festival-as the
programs grow and refine.  Next year, we hope to screen more fulldome
entries and make the program exclusive to the new medium.  (We screened 40
minutes of local productions and festival submissions as well as 40 minutes
of framed material this year.)  We also hope to have bigger prizes.  So
start generating your visions and putting your team together.

Thanks to Sky-Skan for the never-ending support in making the Festival
possible.

Bueno,
d

David Beining
Director
LodeStar Astronomy Center
1801 Mountain Road, NW
Albuquerque, NM 87104

505.841.5985 (vox)
505.841.5999 (fax)
505.362.2614 (cel)

dbeining@... <mailto:dbeining@...>
www.lodestar.unm.edu <http://www.lodestar.unm.edu>

thought I'd pass this along in case it applies to anyone here (the
conference is focussing on digital technology and museum and interactive
exhibitions)

_______________________________________

Christine Shupla
Planetarium Director
Arizona Science Center
(602) 716-2078
shuplac@...

Apologies for any duplication -- please forward as appropriate.


         ichim03 -- the International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meeting
                         exploring
         Cultural Institutions and Digital Technology

                 September 8-12, 2003
                 Ecole du Louvre, Paris, France
                  http://www.archimuse.com/ichim03/


The Program: September 10-12, 2003
------------------------------------------------------------
See http://www.archimuse.com/ichim03/ for an overview.

The ichim03 program includes a full range of papers, presentations
and  panel discussions. Five major themes will be explored,
presented, analyzed and discussed by one hundred speakers:

1. The political, economic, legal and technical frameworks for
cultural institutions and digital publishing in a digital age;
2. Management and technological strategies for digitization of
cultural heritage;
3. Dissemination, exploitation and enrichment of digital assets;
4. Museum and interactive exhibitions;
5. Digital art and the creation of a digital culture today.


Pre-Conference Workshops: September 8-9, 2003
--------------------------------------------------
See http://www.archimuse.com/ichim03/workshops/ for a full list.

Experienced professionals offer in-depth training in an exceptional
range pre-conference workshops September 8-9, 2003. Take this
opportunity to learn a new skill, or deepen your understanding of an
area you are working in.


Registration
------------
You can register for ichim03 and pay in either US$ or Euros.

* To register in US$ see http://www.archimuse.com/ichim03/register/

* To Register in Euros see http://www.ichim.org/


About ichim03
-------------
The International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meeting (ICHIM) is,
traditionally, the best international forum in which to examine the
relationship between technology and Cultural Heritage. ICHIM has been
held every two years since 1991, alternating between North America
and Europe.

We're meeting at the Ecole du Louvre, Paris, France, following
successful meetings at  Le Louvre in Paris (97), and Washington D.C.
(99) and  the  Politecnico di Milano (01).  We expect at least 500
specialists, from museums, cultural organizations, universities,
research institutes, technology companies and organizations to join
us this fall in Paris.


Organization
-------------
ichim03 is organized by Archives & Museum Informatics and Archives &
Museum Informatics, Europe, in association with the Ecole du Louvre,
Paris, France.


Proceedings
-------------
Published proceedings for this and all past ICHIM meetings are
available. Order your copy at http://www.archimuse.com/pub.order.html


We hope to see you in Paris!


--
________
ichim2003                               Ecole du Louvre, Paris, France
Archives & Museum Informatics           September 8-12, 2003
158 Lee Ave, Toronto
Ontario, M43 2P3 Canada                 http://www.archimuse.com/ichim03/
                                         ichim03@...
________

I've been wondering how many folks on this list are working with cultural
heritage materials. Here are a few questions if you are:

- Are you creating non-astronomical content for your dome theaters?
- What, if any, types of cultural heritage materials are you focusing on
(ie UNESCO World Heritage sites)?
- Are you developing or presenting 3D datasets of cultural heritage sites?
- Are you capturing or presenting live footage of cultural heritage sites?
- What formats are you using for live capture and production?

I'm currently working on a project that is addressing all of these issues,
and am curious how many other dome developers out there are working on the
same problems. We're currently identifying existing materials that can be
re-purposed for dome use as well as developing various methods of live
capture, and would love to hear about any other projects that are focusing
along these same lines.

Thanks,
david mcconville

http://www.elumenati.com

p: 828.236.9777
f: 828.236.9779

I thought these two posts I sent to the Dome-L group may be of
interest here... it was initiated by the announcement of Kodak
discontinuing slide projectors and a sudden awareness that video
projection is in everyone's future...

***

I wanted to applaud Mark for his post on the positive aspects and
potential for the fulldome video era... change is always hard to
accept, especially when money is part of the transition.  Having used
computer tools for our productions here at Home Run Pictures has
taught us that change is part of the process... I look at all the
computers and software we've used over the years... it's hard to toss
out that old machine that I spent hours in front of and I usually
avoid doing it until the dusty corner it sits in is needed for
something else.

But getting back to what Mark was saying... I agree that the new
fulldome video medium needs to really be seen as a step forward in
potential for planetariums.  Nothing has ever been as exciting as
seeing a fulldome panorama (I'm talking slides here) transport myself
as an audience member to some distant site... the only thing that was
better was when the dome's particular star projector put up the night
sky.  There is something exhilarating about the "you are there" feel
that only a dome can create by immersing you in a scene.

All that's going to change is the projector.

And taking a clue from what has happened in the computer industry, by
the time side projectors are no longer available or desired, video
solutions will be well within reach.  Eventually the larger market
domes who are currently purchasing the more expensive systems will
all have a system... at that point, the manufacturers will have to
either find new markets to hock their wares or create something less
expensive for the smaller domes, so they can continue sales.  In our
setup, the first cuts of Maya software we purchased cost $45k and
only ran on expensive SGI's... now the cost is $2k and it runs on my
wife's laptop.

Before I started my animation business, I was working in the AV
world... stacks of slide projectors controlled by computer programs
creating great visual imagery... it was the only way to do it at the
time and the change to the video world was tough, but was worth it in
the long run.  I'm always been excited about what we can do with
fulldome video and we are still just in the beginnings of this new
era.

***

I wanted to respond to Mark's comment...

>Which brings up the point that what really is dying as a medium is the
>"show kit".

Currently, what is being pushed in the fulldome video realm is for
the most part, full length shows.  The SkyVision library is the only
large source of independent clips at the present time that I am aware
of.  And that approach seems to be the alternative to
buying/licensing a complete show for anyone wanting to build their
own show.  But I have spoken to various people and have had some
interest about an alternative to the way things are right now and
maybe it could be called a "fulldome kit" approach.  Presently, the
idea of "hit play" and sit back and watch a movie on the dome is
really limiting potential story telling... 20 minutes of fulldome
production is still quite a task to do... and do well.

The approach would involve the creation of mini fulldome sequences on
various subjects.  The sequences might be, say, 5 minutes in length
or so, self contained with audio possibly.  A planetarium would
purchase these and build a show around it using whatever other
projection tools they have available.  This allows for local
customization, creative variation and would save on costs.

We did just such a show for Carolyn Sumners in Houston on the
Titanic.  We created about 5-6 minutes of fulldome video on the
Titanic... the rest of the show involved Digistar, slides and
whatever else she has available as tools.  The show was extremely
successful.  We took the same scenes, this time as standard framed
video (a pretty simple format conversion) and it was used in Detroit
for a similar show using the tools Todd Slisher and his facility have
available to fill out the complete show.  We are also talking with
several other facilities who want to do the same type of show.

All in all, we need to look at fulldome video as another tool in
whatever setting a facility has... down the road, I hope that
fulldome video projection is seen this way and not as something which
becomes the sole way of presenting planetarium material.


***


................................................................................\
...
H o m e   R u n   P i c t u r e s

Tom Casey
President and Creative Director
100 First Avenue, Suite 450
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
412-391-8200
412-391-1772 -fax
mailto:tom@...
http://www.hrpictures.com
................................................................................\
...

I'll follow Tom's lead and re-post what I sent to DOME-L last night.
Except I'll edit out a few of my "egregious errors."

===

I feel remiss in not addressing the fulldome video issues earlier.
Now I've gotten around to it in spades, given how long this email has
become.  Portions of what I've written below have appeared on the
fulldome mailing list (mentioned in my earlier message).  And it's
woefully unedited, but I need to go home, so please forgive any
egregious errors.

Two links on my Museum home page address the fulldome standards
issue.  One is a talk I gave in October 2000, and another is a
conversation which took place at the Western Alliance conference two
years later.  Both can be found under the "Planetarium Community"
links on my web page:
       http://research.amnh.org/users/wyatt/

In my opinion, we desperately need to address standards soon!  IPS is
the first step, coordinating carefully with the vendors, IMNSHO.

In the meantime, let me follow up on some specific issues that were raised...

A couple of days ago, Chuck Greenwood suggested:
>>We need to make certain that video technology is put into as many
>>planetariums as possible.  We need to make certain that as many
>>vendors as possible can ship their shows to as many planetariums as
>>possible.  [...]  We need to ask our vendors to find a way to agree
>>on some standards, or at the least come up with some method of
>>converting show formats.  I realize that some systems build the
>>images at show time, while others are pre-rendered and simply play
>>back at show time.

Mark Petersen addressed Chuck's concerns in part:
>Fortunately, in one way -- it's already done!  The standard exists,
>and even more surprisingly, every system out there today is already
>using it.  It's called the "dome master", sometimes referred to as
>the "dome original".

I wish I were as confident as Mark that much of anything were
"already done."  Although the dome master exists, it's merely a de
facto standard.  We as a community have not agreed on file formats to
support (although compressed Targas seem to be gaining ground) or
even on an aspect ratio for the dome original.  Furthermore,
different projection systems are coming online now (witness Denver)
and in the near future that will use radically different projectors
with correspondingly different color spaces.  In other words, the
layout of the images might look the same on my dome as on yours, but
the colors and overall appearance could be significantly different.

And distributing playback shows is not as simple as the dome
originals, I'm afraid...

For example, one of the greatest challenges we're facing in
distributing "Passport" is audio. Once again, the Hayden
Planetarium's uniqueness creates some challenges. We have significant
spatialization capabilities in our theater, with something like two
dozen speaker clusters distributed around the dome (this is *not* my
specialty, so don't quote me on any of this). How do we take this and
mix it to 5.1 or 7.1? To theaters with different tilts and speaker
configurations? Standard Dolby is defined with all speakers in the
same plane, so how does that translate into a dome? And many audio
folks aren't thrilled with Dolby anyway? Can we convince Lucas to
define Dome-THX? :)  Audio has been marginalized (and underutilized)
in planetariums since Day One, as far as I can tell. And with a
plethora of variations out there, even in new theaters, this will be
a significant issue in defining standards.

In other words, it's not just dome masters and file formats. Even if
we ignore the all skies and special-effects projectors, Pandora's box
is opening... Fulldome standards will be pushing the planetarium
field in directions it's never gone before.

Note that the topic of real-time shows hasn't even been addressed.
The problem with playback systems, especially at higher and higher
resolutions, is that you have to a) store and b) play back all those
pixels; with a real-time system, your starfield, 3-D data, etc., are
rendered on the fly.  Furthermore, with playback media you're limited
to a "movie theater" style of presentation that, again IMNSHO, has a
place in the planetarium realm but is no substitute for the
historical strength of live planetarium programming.

The state of real-time fulldome video should give everybody pause.
Allow me to recap what I know...

The Hayden uses a set of tools and software developed (essentially)
in-house to do our real-time display.  Evans & Sutherland has built a
real-time system based on their Digistar legacy.  Sky-Skan has
previewed their Digital Sky at several conferences and a few theaters
have discarded their central star projectors for digital stars.
Minolta's MediaGlobe runs software to replicate traditional
planetarium functions and to integrate media pieces into small domes.
Spitz has worked with Starry Night to produce a domed version of the
popular desktop software.  The Denver Museum of Nature and Science
opened less than a month ago with a whole ensemble of in-house
software.  And SGI is working with Beijing to create another slew of
domed renderers.

What a mess!  To the best of my knowledge, none of these systems
plays well (if at all) with the others, and exchanging a real-time
fulldome program between systems has never happened.  A session at
last year's IPS (proposed and chaired by my colleague Carter Emmart)
produced a few warm fuzzies but yielded no further results.

Guess what?  The vendors (however much I respect and appreciate their
efforts to keep us on the cutting edge) have no vested interest in
addressing this issue, particularly this early in the game.  If we as
a community want to exchange our programs freely (or collaborate on
shows or hold simultaneous multi-dome events across the globe), we
users must drive the process!  And we must take the wheel soon,
before the challenges facing our real-time systems careen out of
control.

(The first step should be taken by those who purchase a fulldome
system.  Ask about compatibility.  Make sure the vendor knows that
you want to run programs created by other institutions and you want
to know what support for interoperability they intend to provide.
It's a fair question!)

Chuck had also written:
>>Many planetarians enjoy making their own creations, and the new
>>video technology should not end that practice.

I agree.  The advantage of real-time systems is that they can
integrate more easily into the tailor-made programs that have long
provided planetariums' bread and butter.  Facilities have grown to
serve the needs of a wide variety of audiences, and while a playback
program can be a significant part of an ensemble of offerings, live
programs often fit the bill better.  A 21st-century planetarium
should allow for the creation of community-based and
educationally-targeted media.

Then, once a local planetarian has created something, the technology
should allow her to share it with others -- and not just others using
her make and model of planetarium hardware, but across wider divides.

>>What will also happen, unless we take steps to avoid it, is that
>>there will be several different mutually incompatible systems, so
>>show sharing is diminished.

If it's not abundantly clear from my previous statements, I'll state
it flat out:  I couldn't agree with you more.

Standardization between planetariums has never worked in the past.
But now, we have an opportunity to define flexible standards that
could allow for significant (and perhaps relatively painless)
exchange of media between theaters.  Let's not allow our historical
inadequacies to cripple us as we move into a new era of planetarium
technology.

(Apologies for the odd subject line, BTW, but I'm listening to
Charles Mingus, wrote the subject as a joke, then decided that I
liked the sound of it.)


Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

In order to not be remiss, and following Tom's and Ryan's leads, I thought
it would be of interest to the Fulldomers to re-post here what I sent to the
Dome-L group previously.

***

Tom's post seems like an opportune time to let everyone know about Spitz's
immersive Space Library.

>Currently, what is being pushed in the fulldome video realm is for
>the most part, full length shows.  The SkyVision library is the only
>large source of independent clips at the present time that I am aware
>of.  And that approach seems to be the alternative to
>buying/licensing a complete show for anyone wanting to build their
>own show.

I would agree that most content suppliers are making full-length shows the
norm in the fulldome video realm, for better or worse.  However, for those
of you (and you are out there) who want to edit your own shows but may not
have the capability of producing high-resolution dome animations,  Spitz
Creative Media's immersive Space Library, which includes more than 55
custom-produced astronomy animations for use with your panoramic or fulldome
video system (over 40 minutes of material and growing), may be for you.

Our Space Library currently includes solar system objects, stars, galaxies,
nebulae and a variety of other celestial phenomena.  These animations are
ideal for adding visual interest to your automated sky shows, or as visual
support for your live "Sky Tonight" presentations.  Users can license the
entire library, or pick the clips that are right for your needs.

All Spitz immersive video content (fulldome shows too) is mastered at
high-resolution (3600x3600 pixels) for highest quality in the
industry-standard "dome master" format, and is fully-compatible with our
complete line of immersive video systems including ElectricSky,
ElectricSkyII and SciDome,  and with all competing fulldome video systems.
If you'd like a Space Library demo DVD, please contact me directly.

Mike Bruno
Media Director
Spitz, Inc.
US Route One
Chadds Ford, PA 19317
tel:  610-459-5200 x73
fax: 610-459-3830
mbruno@...
www.spitzinc.com

Just an observation...

We currently have a flood of people joining the fulldome mailing
list, in large part because I posted an announcement right on the
heels of a discussion of fulldome video technology on DOME-L.  I
recognize many of the new subscribers as long-time planetarians.

When I posted to DOME-L, I re-read the description of the fulldome
mailing list on the home page:
       http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fulldome/

I wrote that trio of sentences almost three years ago, and I noticed
that the word "planetarium" appears in each sentence.  As I read the
description, it felt oddly parochial.  Numerous subscribers to the
list come from fields far removed from the planetarium community, and
the impact of this technology, IMO, lies far beyond the domes already
devoted to teaching astronomy.

So what does this mean?  It seems obvious to me that fulldome video
is integral to the future of planetariums:  it is not the destiny of
*all* planetariums, certainly, but it will dramatically affect the
future course of the planetarium field.  But how integral are
planetariums to the future of fulldome video?  Thusfar, our wacky
little community of "dome-heads" (as David Beining calls us) has
constituted the lion's share of immersive video theaters.  Someday
that will change, but possibly not for several years...  In that
brief space of time, we have an opportunity to influence the
development of the medium for the better (I'm thinking standards
here), and I believe we need to seize that opportunity.

At the same time, we need to think beyond the stars, as it were, and
recognize that not every domed theater will require pitch black
backgrounds or sub-arcminute angular resolution.  I believe quite
strongly in the importance of teaching astronomy and creating
accurate and informative visuals to support such instruction; in
fact, the power of immersive video to convey such concepts is what
won me over to the technology.  That doesn't mean that I can't
recognize its strength as an educational tool in other disciplines or
as an entertainment tool for the right environment.

At this juncture, planetarians need to take a pragmatic look at the
fulldome video tool and decide what we can do to refine it to suit
our needs.  As some of us adopt fulldome video, what can we ask of
the companies fabricating the systems to make it better?  As others
choose not to adopt it, what improvements can be suggested to make
the technology more appealing?  And how can institutions and vendors
work together to make the medium more powerful, more educational, and
more successful?

With any luck, clear-headedness on our part can have a positive
influence on the future of this technology... And on the future of
our own community.

Anyway, I'm thinking of re-writing the description of the group.  :)


Ryan, a.k.a.
Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

Ryan,

I'll be the first to encourage you to expand the group description. While I
can understand the planetaria-centric nature of discussions since most
people with access to domes work in this sector, it limits the potential of
digital dome technology to view it only through quasar-colored spectacles.
I spent many years commercially developing technologies, products, and
production techniques for digital dome environments with Elumens, and the
majority of that time was *not* spent with planetaria. We had clients with
incredibly diverse applications (medical imaging, ride & flight simulation,
trade show marketing, art installations - the list goes on an on), and the
technologies that we developed are remarkably similar to ones that I've
since encountered within the planetarium sector.

Since we were selling small domes (1.5 to 5 meters), we were in the unique
position of having to create affordable, understandable tools that could
create high-resolution dome content to be played back from standard PCs.
And since we were selling display hardware, we had to give the software
away and make sure it ran on cheap computers! Granted, they were all
single-channel, single-lens systems, but the challenge of getting domes
onto desktops made us really appreciate cheap hardware, off-the-shelf
software, and, most importantly, standards.

It's funny how so many dome manufacturers are now arriving at the same
conclusions but are implementing their ideas in slightly different ways.
Multi-camera stitchers, compositing plug-ins, ray-traced spherical
renderers, real-time OpenGL and DirectX spherical correction, high-res
video playback, fisheye HD capture - they're all necessary components of
dome development *in general*, not just in the planetarium world. It would
save a lot of development time if there were more cooperation between
vendors (open source dome libraries, anyone?), and the tools would be much
more robust. After all, how much money is actually made on software? It's
the hardware and services that sell, so they should be doing everything
they can to ensure the best and most widely applicable tools are at
everyone's disposal.

As tools become more useful, affordable, and standardized, developers have
more time and capability to hone their content. As content gets better and
the projection systems get simpler and cheaper, the entire market will
become more viable. This viability will further increase as smaller
theaters across the country start to create their own high-quality content,
expand their application and audience base, and realize diversified revenue
sources through show licensing and theater rental.

Increasingly I'm seeing the desire to diversify digital dome usage, so
expanding the concept of how these environments can be used will only
increase the possibilities. Planetarium by day, synaesthetic music show and
massive gaming environment by night! I can't help but think this
diversification will only increase the demand for the skills of the people
on this list, as well as the demand for hardware by the dome vendors.

I realize there are probably a million subtleties that I'm missing out on
here within planetarium history and culture, but just remember that the
dome-heads are no longer just looking at stars.

david


http://www.elumenati.com

p: 828.236.9777
f: 828.236.9779

Another DOME-L cross-post.  I hesitate to post this, but I think it
conveys one side of a continuing discussion that is taking place in
the planetarium community.  Planetariums (particularly small domes)
face an extraordinary transition in the next decade, and the changes
will evoke strong feelings for some time to come.  This discussion
is, I believe, relevant to a few practical considerations of how the
medium evolves from here.

An undercurrent here is also a difference in approaches to teaching
astronomy.  Inquire separately if you're really interested.

===

Ed Lantz had written:
>The primary factor that will propel video to the forefront is the
>ability to model the entire known universe at all wavelengths in
>digital format and instantly access and navigate these databases.
>This includes all known stars, all planets with surface textures,
>galaxies, background radation - you name it.  These databases can be
>sorted and annotated according to star wavelength, size, age,
>redshift or other property, known planetary systems, known black
>holes, etc.  In addition, digital simulations of astrophysical
>phenomena can be performed as pre-rendered or real-time operations.

But Ronald Kaitchuck needs convincing:
>This will be of limited value to the majority of our introductory
>astronomy students. I especially have doubts about the usefulness of
>this in middle and elementary school. These students represent a
>very large fraction of planetarium visitors.

I think it will be of extraordinary value to introductory astronomy
students!  (So do many of the introductory astronomy instructors I've
spoken to over the last year or so.)  First off, it provides a
context for the vast quantity of information that's presented in an
Astro 101 course, assuming you're teaching more than the phases of
the moon and the night sky motions that a traditional planetarium can
represent.  Secondly, the data represent *real* work done by *real*
astronomers, not just pictures or artwork, but a coherent 3-D
construct that conveys a significant level of understanding about our
universe.  The particular context allows people (students,
scientists, children, adults) to experience the relationships between
different datasets, establishing a visual and conceptual framework on
which to support the acquisition of more detailed information.
Finally, it offers an opportunity to excite people -- not just about
the night sky, but about the discoveries that they read about in the
newspaper and that they fund through NASA and NSF!

As far as middle and elementary school students go, I'd advance
similar arguments in terms of context.  What does it mean when a new
planet is discovered around another star?  How far away are those
stars, anyway? It also excites as many questions as it answers... Why
do constellation lines in 3-D form a pincushion pointing toward the
Sun at the center?  What is the Milky Way band that crosses through
the night sky, and what connection does that have with the Milky Way
"Galaxy" that they hear about?  Just this morning, I presented our
Digital Galaxy atlas to a group of (very sharp) second graders; I
don't know exactly what they took from the experience, but I do know
that they asked questions afterward that were completely relevant to
the content.  (The same students received an introduction to the
night sky using our Zeiss star projector a few days ago, just so you
know.)  I think these tools are exactly what we need to continue
engaging students throughout the difficult 4th-to-8th-grade range.
Why not provide tools to keep 'em interested in science during that
time?

I'll be blunt.  A traditional planetarium can teach 19th-century
astronomy very well. But we're in the 21st Century now, and the
people who come to our theaters want to glimpse the broader horizons
that modern astronomy has revealed to us.  (Many or most also want to
experience a connection to the night sky, and I do not intend what I
say below to denigrate that as a goal.)

At the Hayden Planetarium, we have spent many late nights touring
friends and colleagues through our 3-D atlas of the universe.  We've
offered a course for the general public that introduces the dome and
describes how we developed the database we use.  Recently, we've
debuted a monthly program that tours audiences through a selection of
datasets, based primarily on our digital atlas.  For example, we take
people from the orbits of the planets and the trajectories of the
Voyager spacecraft (the farthest humans have sent physical objects)
to the Oort cloud (the distant reaches of our Sun's influence), past
the exoplanetary systems we have discovered to see the "radiosphere"
bubble sixty light years in diameter (the farthest humans have made
our presence known through radio signals sufficiently strong to be
detected), and out to the scale of the Milky Way Galaxy.  Thus we
cover scales of a few light hours out to hundreds of thousands of
light years.  In those several leaps, each previous step remains
visible long enough to provide a visual and conceptual link to the
ever-increasing scales we're describing.  I don't know how to do this
using traditional planetarium tools.

On the warm and fuzzy end of the spectrum, let me quote a portion of
our advertising copy for the "Virtual Universe" program:  "You'll
tour through charted space -- an experience that will redefine your
sense of 'home.'" We wrote that sentence based in part on the
reactions people have had to experiencing the atlas.  People often
leave an hour-long session under the dome raving about what they've
seen, expressing awe at the scale of the universe, and wondering at
the magnitude of our discoveries.  My colleagues and I would love to
believe that's our impeccable presentation style, but we're convinced
it's the power of showing people real data in a visceral, yet
intellectually satisfying, context.  In an era when global political,
cultural, and economic divisions seem more divisive than ever, can it
be a bad thing to give people a sense of how lonely a planetary
outpost we inhabit?

>How is a middle or high school teacher going to make use of this?
>Besides the planetarium learning curve there is also the lack of
>scientific training. What middle school standards are addressed by
>having a 3D data base of galaxies?

A different kind of standards, ah um.  However, one could ask what
middle school standards are addressed by teaching astronomy, period,
and then where would we be?  Let's face it, astronomy isn't high on
the standards list, and we have to be creative about how it
integrates into schools' curricula.  Fortunately, astronomy lends
itself to significant and valuable linkages to mathematics and other
sciences, so we can use the popularity of astronomy as a hook to
engage students (and the general public).

Here at the American Museum of Natural History, we have been
developing classroom activities centered around the desktop version
of our Virtual Universe, and we address specific standards in math
and science.  The software allows for both mathematical and intuitive
approaches to the data, making for broad applicability in a
(sufficiently motivated) instructor's curriculum.

Just a reminder.  The Digital Universe and Partiview software are
available for free at:
      http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/hp/vo/du/

>Even if the data base is projected with great accuracy it will still
>look like another episode of Star Trek unless there is a substantial
>investment in teacher training. Indiana has over 50 planetariums,
>most are Spitz machines. Most of these go unused. It is not because
>they don't project intergalactic space -- it's because no one is
>trained to us them. And those that have the training do not have the
>time. [...]  We still need fundamental training - of both the
>students and their teachers.

No argument here.  Training instructors to take on this complex
technological and topical challenge will require significant
investment.  But how is understanding our place in the universe *not*
fundamental to teachers or their students?

I would suggest a few menu items as food for thought...  First off,
I've always seen (mostly real-time, interactive) fulldome video as an
opportunity to revitalize the unused domes in schools across the
country (some couple dozen in New York City, perhaps the same number
in Indiana, and so on and so on):  with the possibility of addressing
more universal topics in a domed classroom, perhaps many school
boards would invest in the equipment to re-open them.  Secondly, the
generation of teachers being trained now probably feels more at home
with a computer than with a knob-and-lever planetarium projector, so
perhaps the transition to newer technology will come as a welcome
step to them!  And finally, we have to start sometime, 'cuz those
Spitz warhorses won't last forever.

I recognize Ball State's reputation as a university that trains
excellent teachers (my sister graduated from there), and I don't want
to sound as if I'm taking your warnings too lightly.  I have limited
experience working with teachers, and I know there are some serious
constraints on time, energy, and skills sets, but we're talking about
humanity's place in the Universe here!  It's part of the standards,
it links into numerous other disciplines, and it lends itself to
lucid illustration via a powerful new teaching medium.  Seems like we
need to at least think about how to integrate it into what teachers
learn and subsequently teach.

>We still need a first class star field.

Okay, I'm going to get myself in trouble now.  Why, precisely, do we
*need* a first-class starfield?  (I know some answers to that
question, but...)  I taught for years with a Digistar (1 and 2)
starfields, and while they didn't convey the wonder and subtlety of
the night sky that I grew up with in Arizona, students still "aaah"ed
when the stars came on, and I could still show 'em where the
constellations were, demonstrate how to find the planets, and
introduce basic sky motions.

But with the Digistar, I could also pull back from the Earth's
position and fly around a fulldome image of the orbits of the
planets, quickly and cogently conveying the concept that the solar
system is "flat."  I could fly farther out and reveal constellations
to be mere artifacts of our biased position on the Earth.  I could
even demonstrate that the Milky Way's appearance in the sky results
from our location in one of it's spiral arms.  To my mind, that's a
fair trade off.  But that's because the concepts underlying astronomy
have always excited me more than the sky itself.

Allow me to confess...  When I sat under those aforementioned Arizona
skies as a kid, I didn't look up at the moon and think about why it
was in that particular phase, or even where it would be the next
night.  Instead, I thought to myself, "That's as far as we've
travelled."  I wondered at how far humankind might travel in the
future and marvelled at the concept that we could know so much about
the universe just by studying light.  I looked at the stars and tried
to imagine how far away they were, even the closest billions of times
more distant than the Moon!  I looked at the band of the Milky Way
and tried to see it as a collection of billions of stars.  I asked
questions then that I'd like to convey to an audience now, if not
under desert skies, then under a digital dome where I can try to
answer some of the queries that kept me awake as a kid.  I'm just
happy that technology is finally catching up to my imagination!

Thanks for reading.


Ryan, a.k.a.
Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

I will be out of town from 22 July through 4 August.  Although I'll
be checking email and moderating subscriptions and posts during that
time, there will be slightly longer lag times between my
opportunities to moderate.

The remainder of this message attempts to answer some questions that
occasionally come my way and to keep everybody on the same electronic
page.  We're up to 190 members now, with our burst of recent
additional subscribers from DOME-L.  And all of them are eagerly
awaiting to read what you have to write, so don't hesitate to chime
in!

To reiterate...  The intended audience for this group is not limited
to users of a particular system or a particular company.  Both
real-time and playback media fall under the purvey of the group,
within the realm of both fulldome and panoramic video technologies.
While philosophical speculation about the effect of this nascent
technology on the planetarium medium also makes sense as a topic of
discussion, the core purpose of this list should not stray to
subjects better addressed on DOME-L or in other forums.

I will moderate the list, approving both subscribers and postings.
You may contact me directly by mailing to

	 fulldome-owner@yahoogroups.com

To send messages to members of this group, simply send email to

	 fulldome@yahoogroups.com

If you do not wish to belong to fulldome, you may unsubscribe at any
time by sending an email to

	 fulldome-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

To tell your friends to subscribe, have them send a blank email to

	 fulldome-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Also, note that many features are available online at the web site
version of the list:

	 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fulldome

Including access to a complete and up-to-date subscriber list and
archives of all postings (even the ones from before you joined).
Plus, you can change account options to have email sent to you in
digested format or only collected online.  You must sign up with your
email address and enter a password in order to access these features.

Also, you can respond to our ongoing poll, if you haven't already, on
the web at:

	 http://groups.yahoo.com/polls/fulldome

You may also visit the Yahoo Groups web site to modify your subscriptions:

	 http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups

Thanks for reading!


Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

Hi all...

Home Run Pictures has completed a new fulldome animation featuring
dinosaurs.  The sequence will be part of a future new show at the
Houston Burke Baker planetarium.  More information and lots of
imagery can be found at...

http://www.hrpictures.com/dinoride/

For anyone attending Siggraph in San Diego next week, we will be
showing some of our sequences at the Fleet for the Immersive Theater
course on Monday... hope to see you there.

Thanks,

Tom



--

................................................................................\
...
H o m e   R u n   P i c t u r e s

Tom Casey
President and Creative Director
100 First Avenue, Suite 450
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
412-391-8200
412-391-1772 -fax
mailto:tom@...
http://www.hrpictures.com
................................................................................\
...

Greetings all--
I've been on this group for a while, but have been too distracted by
SIGGRAPH preparations to contribute much. Our company, Elumens, will be at
SIGGRAPH this year in booth 1713. One of my main jobs is to create animated
content for our dome systems, and I'd be very interested to discuss the
process with any content creators on this list. I've built up a list of
issues over my seven years of doing this job, and I'd love to talk it over
with you guys. Or we can just drink and complain. 8-)

Hope to see you there. Come by the booth or give me call on my mobile phone
(number below). In any case, I'd like you to see what we're doing with
domes. Cheers,

--ek
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eric Knisley 	 p:  +1 919.596.8900 x200
Technical Coordinator  f:   +1 919.596.2430
Elumens Corporation  m: +1 919.218.2118
1301 S. Briggs Ave Suite 100 erick@...
Durham, NC 27703                     www.elumens.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All:

I don't usually plug vendors, but these guys are locals and I thought some of
you might want to check them out.

Prairie Logic
prairielogic.com

They built this full spherical camera rig using an array of CCD cameras.. The
demo was interesting and they are looking for people to impress/contract so they
can move forward with development.  Current resolution is 2K X 2K (spherical),
with no distortion.

Just FYI

Steve Cooper
Science Center of Iowa

Full-dome and Animation Guru's,

Announcing two weeks of training. We are putting together the
schedule now for Lightwave and Digistar Boot Camps. The tentative
schedule(s) are September 29th - October 3 and October 13th -
October 17th, before and after the WAC/DUG conferences.
Registrations will determine what and when we teach during these
times.

Many techniques are covered in our Boot Camps. At times, our
customers have found that the lessons learned can be applied to
other production needs such as 3D animation or slide work. For
example, when you learn how to make animations for the Digistar
environment, you will find that you just learned how to do the same
for your video. Or if you need a custom slide made, you will know
how to prepare a 3D environment so that you can render out your own
slide.

Our price for 5 days of training: $2200 - includes lunches and
lodging and a few other items. Check out www.starlight-prod.com for
more info.

On another note, we have many projector parts for the Kodak Ektapro
7000 series projectors. Some fans, transformers, bodies, circuit
boards, molded plastic parts, etc. We need to move these on so if
anyone would like to make an offer please send it via e-mail to
atmceuen@.... (Shipping not included)

Thank you

Aaron McEuen
President
Starlight Productions L.L.C.

I wanted to give a brief recap of what transpired at the fulldome
video session at SIGGRAPH 2003.  I typed much of the following while
the speakers were speaking, so please forgive any sloppiness in the
prose.  If any of the speakers would like to elaborate on (or revise)
what I described below, please don't hesitate.

To be honest, I don't know what SIGGRAPH allows in terms of
distributing, for example, the PowerPoints shown during the course,
but I'm sure many people on this list would be interested in seeing
them.  I know Ben Shedd made his PowerPoint available from the 2001
course; I'd love to see others' online as well.

Here goes...

Sunday evening, we saw fulldome clips from a wide variety of sources,
shown without comment, back to back.  The short list of presenters:
Michael Fleming, the LodeStar Astronomy Center, Spitz Productions,
the National Space Science Centre (UK), the Space Telescope Science
Institute, Home Run Pictures, Evans & Sutherland (E&S), the Clark
Planetarium, Drexel University and amalgamation house, the Clark
Planetarium, Sky-Skan, and the Rose Center for Earth & Space.  All
the imagery was projected at an effective resolution of 1536x1536 by
a Spitz Electric Sky II using two fisheye projectors (for added
brightness) from the center of the theater.  The showing was
well-attended, with the dome about two-thirds full.

Monday morning, we took a look at the same sequences with commentary
by representatives from the various creators.  Michael Fleming's
homage to Digistar's wireframe legacy began the day.  David Beining
continued with a review of student work underway at LodeStar and the
University of New Mexico (including the first fulldome media created
by 13-year-olds).  Brad Thompson described the production efforts at
Spitz.  Ted Artz from Drexel University "delivered" an
automated-voice reading of a paper outlining what he's learned from
his fulldome video foray.  Kevin Scott from E&S mentioned real-time
systems and upcoming projection technology (with potential
resolutions of 8000x8000 per channel).  Dave Miller introduced a few
playback clips from Sky-Skan, and Steve Savage showed the real-time
Digital Sky, which ended with a brief flight to the Pleiades.
Finally, Carter Emmart described some of the science that goes into
Rose Center productions, with a blow-by-blow of an extended sequence
from "Search for Life."

Ed Lantz started out the afternoon session by reviewing the history
of immersive and fulldome video systems.  He then discussed
brightness and resolution of the real world versus capabilities of
the current fulldome systems, as well as a bit on domes,
cross-reflection, and physical constraints.  Ed also described a bit
about dome formats, including mapping the sphere onto Platonic solids
and cubic mapping.  He continued with a review of hardware, single-
versus multiple-projector modes, and a comparison of various
projection technologies (DLP, LCoS, CRT, laser, and GLV).  Ed
concluded with a description of production techniques and types of
shows.

Some of the questions people asked Ed:
      + stereo domes (Imax has one, but domes don't preserve
polarization, so they have to use shutter glasses)
      + length of shows (20 to 40 minutes)
      + grating light valve projector lifetime (T.B.D.)
      + active dome screen versus projected (L.E.D.s with pitch of 4-5
mm, Ed recently estimated a cost of $8 million for 40-foot dome,
dissipating an energy of 100KW)

Brad Thomson started out by "introducing the canvas," which he
contrasted with the dome master's abstract representation of the
canvas (round frame, 2-D, and small versus immersive, 3-D, and huge).
He discussed field of view issues and tilted domes.  As a general
rule, the Spitz production team starts out a shot with gravity-level
horizon, then changing viewpoint once the audience is engaged by the
scene.  Brad showed several mappings of the same scene (onto polar,
cubic, and cylindrical maps, for example).

Brad continued with several recommendations...  "The dome really does
necessitate its own cinematic language."  He also noted that "motion
that looks okay on your monitor can be overwhelming in the theaters"
(apparent motion increase is 4-5 times).  He recommends avoiding hard
cuts, added that "immersive environments demand longer continuous
shot lengths," and made reference to the extended shot presented from
"Search for Life" (approximately two and a half minutes with only one
cut, BTW).

Noting that most scanline type renderers can only render parallel or
perspective views, Brad described the need for either 1) rendering
directly to fisheye format versus 2) rendering multiple perspective
view then stitch together into dome format.  Approach 1 tend to offer
higher quality, immediate feedback, efficiency, smaller storage
requirements, better textures and effects, increased support from
rendering engines (Final Render VRAY Brazil, RayMax, and Virtual
Light are Brad's favorites).  Approach 2 typically involves "the
hemicube solution" and offers universality across rendering engines,
and faster render speed.  Approach 2 is now implemented in QuickTime
VR's version 5.0 and above.  Some dangers with Approach 2 include
seaming dangers from texture effects that rely on camera normal as
well as post glows and lens flares.  Brad also talked about eyepoint
offset and 2-D processing (adjusting and compositing, for example).

For the future, Brad hopes to see "arbitrary/programmable camera
projections available in more off the shelf 2-D and 3-D packages."
He also wants more robust editing solutions and a truly
resolution-independent editor.  Better visualization tools (maybe
QTVR-like dome movie previewing software) and cheaper single-lens
projector or portable dome system would help content creators see
their work more easily in a domed environment.  He also wishes for
generally easier-to-use, less academic interfaces, more invisible
interfaces between software and hardware, and standardization of
theater systems.

Questions for Brad included:
      + 30- versus 60-fps (probably aren't moving the image enough to
require interlaced or 60-fps rendering)
      + concentric seating (trend away from)
      + 180-degree FOV in software (typically not fisheye)
      + real-time 180-degree FOV (eLumens and E&S)

I have to confess that I missed most of Garland Stern's talk.  He
gave a detailed introduction to some of the underlying mathematics of
creating dome projections, and he introduced Spitz's stitching tool,
conGLOMerator (an updated version of which is available at the Spitz
website).

Kevin Scott covered real-time graphics "in a broad sense," noting
that 17 of E&S's 90 systems include the new D3 real-time rendering
engine.  Kevin began by introducing essential concepts and terms
(scene, camera, object, model, real-time versus slow-time, rendering
engines, display systems).  He noted the limitations of real-time
systems in terms of frame buffer, texture memory, and image
complexity.  Contemporary graphics cards support a variety of
functions (bump mapping, texture maps, etc.).  Kevin pointed out that
models can be created on almost any platform, although some formats
may support options that others don't.  Also, models may contain
intrinsic animation or may be animated by the real-time engine, and
some can support video objects (live or from an external source,
although frame size, bit depth, compression, and system bandwidth
determine visual capabilities).

For fulldome video, one requires high resolution (frames range from 1
to 16 megapixels), created with equidistant fisheye projection.  High
bandwidth requires separate video streams for each channel, and for
compressed video, one can count on using 1 GB per 10 minutes of
finished program.  The real-time rendering system doesn't care
whether you're using a single projector or multiple, edge-blended
projectors ("it's all one logical canvas").  Kevin also described
spatializing audio to track objects in virtual space, typically using
Dolby 5.1 in the dome.

Creating scenes require some forethought:  model complexity and
memory limitations are the primary challenges.  Kevin described
locking the frame rate in order to maintain consistency, although one
never knows what will happen in a real-time system (the unpredictable
user and all).  The general process, however, is simple:  add and
remove objects as needed, place and scale and orient objects, adjust
lighting, move camera and/or objects to create motion, and add audio.
"Spend your content development time where it's most useful," Kevin
advised.  He also suggested using pre-rendered video backdrops with
real-time foreground graphics.

Kevin wrapped up with a discussion of interactivity.  He offered the
opinion that people need to see personal feedback in order to make
interactivity valuable and outlined a variety of interactive methods
(team activities, group activities, and individual activities are
different approaches) as well as examples of each.

Questions for Kevin included:
      + bit depth of new laser system (14 bits per channel, plus)
      + hodge-podge of tools (legacy of planetarium field)

David Beining described "Democratizing a Dome" at the LodeStar
Astronomy Center, in the context of LodeStar's roles as an informal
education facility, academic center, and community resource.  Primary
mission is to expand the community's science literacy through
informal education based in astronomy  David also wants to create a
culture of "exploding the frame" and compared it to "termite fishing"
(cf. Jane Goodall).  LodeStar is self-supporting at the 80% level
(serving 110,000 in theaters, 300,000 through exhibits and programs),
with the University providing additional financial support.  He
mentioned the recent upgrade to Sky-Skan's Digital Sky and the
elimination of the Digistar II and central projection pit.  (He also
noted that real-time provides significant production opportunities
for testing visuals before rendering final visuals.)

David went on to describe collaborations with University of New
Mexico "metacenter," from student time to computer cycles:  digital
art courses, research for faculty and staff, and art and art
education programs.  As a community center, LodeStar supports
productions by local pros, community events, and operation to aid
economic development in digital arts.  He added that no one has
received payment for any of their work.  David acknowledged the
influence of Imax professionals Ben Shedd and Michael Stearns.

David emphasized the need for providing dome time for people to
experiment, in order to become comfortable with the environment.
Working with students has included:  making the fulldome projects
optional, encouraging experimentation, touring students through the
theater and seeing shows, reviewing techniques and specification,
receiving direction from instructors and support from LodeStar staff,
providing dome time for previewing, and offering a real-world
connection via showings and festivals.  David also plugged the Flicks
on 66 Festival, which offers a fulldome component.

David outlined the benefits of collaboration:  democratizing the
technology (allowing access to people in order to make it part of the
culture), expanding the audience and mission, building support and
understanding, "maturing the medium" through low-cost and unfettered
experiments, acting "by and for New Mexicans," building community
ownership, and redefining the planetarium.  He described connections
to science, education, and art.  I couldn't quite keep up with his
PowerPoint...

Carter Emmart showed a BBC video of the Rose Center's CAVE
collaboration with the National Center for Supercomputing
Applications (NCSA).

That's about it!


Ryan, a.k.a.
Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

Thanks for the SIGGRAPH recap, Ryan.

The Siggraph Course and Fulldome Video Showcase events were very well
attended and were highly successful in bringing greater visibility to our
new medium.

The Siggraph course notes are available for free download at
extranet.spitzinc.com (or click on Resources at www.spitzinc.com), along
with free download of Glom, Spitz's hemicube stitching and mapping software,
lots of resources, and a new fulldome forum for software support, technical
and production discussions, etc.

Thanks a million to all who supported the Siggraph course and Fulldome Video
Showcase - the producers, speakers, and workers behind the scenes.  Special
thanks to the R.H. Fleet Science Center, including John Young who spent some
late nights helping us install the ESky II system, and to our corporate
sponsors - Spitz, DVS, JVC and Elumens.

We're currently discussing how to make this an annual event at Siggraph,
perhaps using a large inflatable dome in the convention center.  Anyone
interested in helping with this please contact me.

Cheers,

Ed Lantz

heya -

my name is derek sweeney kesler and im the planetarium
director/creative content developer at the junior museum in troy, ny -
  incidentally, i also refrain from proper punctuation in my typing.
while being thrust in to such a technologically leveraged, feisty
world with so many pre-existing issues, lineages, and rivalries is
proving quite a singularity, im partial to thinking that the industry
will work its kinks out and standardize methods, practices,
conversions, and platforms to the extent that all of our jobs will
become more interesting by the day. im certain i speak for others
beyond my self..

if anyone could help me with a few numbers, id be more than pleased..
we're currently working on a HD-rez kids edutainment show,
specifically in chemistry, and in sketching the proposal, im having
trouble culling exact figures for the number of domes out there - not
just planetaria - that itll be compatible with.. granted, there are a
dozen or so E&S setups, the same number of skyskans, a handful of
minoltas, and a few spitz, but what about concrete numbers for the
video-ready domes? any leads, ideas, etc, would be greatly
appreciated..

tangentially, ive been playing with some really intriguing ideas
lately that id love to get feedback on, but alas time constraints
render discussion posts somewhat secondary. additionally, were
looking to set up partnerships as far as content, distribution, and
collaboration is concerned, but how i go about continuing that
discussion (other than being entirely direct) is beyond me..

peace,
~d

Derek in Troy,
Welcome to the technologically leveraged, feisty world of domed theaters.
What do you mean by: domes that will be compatible with your production?
Full dome video coverage? Partial dome coverage? Digistar compatible?
We've (Spitz) installed 11 immersive video/ElectricSky theaters so far, and
one is in progress that is scheduled to open early 2004. The sites include a
mixture of dome video coverages, and have broad and varied interests in
content.
Can you be more specific with your question? I think that will allow you
some better feedback.
We've also installed some 1000 domes worldwide. But I think you are
referring to video production in your e-post.

Joyce Towne
Customer Accounts Director
Spitz, Inc.
www.spitzinc.com

On the off chance you were planning to post to the fulldome listserve
(itchy finger twitching over the "send" key for the last three
months), you're out of luck for about a week...

I will be taking off for Amsterdam in about three hours, unable to
access email or receive cell phone calls for six glorious days.  Feel
free to email to your heart's content, but I won't be around to
approve any postings until I get back to New York.  I *might* stop by
an Internet cafe while I'm there, but don't bet on it.

Cheers!


Ryan, a.k.a.
Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

Long time, no emails...  But I thought I'd break the silence with a
link, a bit of reading for an autumn (holi)day.  I've placed a brief
paper online:
      http://research.amnh.org/~wyatt/Community/oss2002proceedings.html

This is my write-up of "The Big Picture: Planetariums, Education, and
Space Science," which I originally presented at last year's NASA OSS
Education Conference in Chicago.  I ended up going on at length about
fulldome video and how it's changing the face of the planetarium
profession.  Please read, comment, quibble, dispute, malign, or
otherwise engage the text.  But please don't hesitate to post.

Coming up next:  a quasi-objective gamma test for fulldome video?

Cheers!


Ryan, a.k.a.
Ryan Wyatt, Science Visualizer
Rose Center for Earth & Space
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street & Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
212.313.7903 vox
212.313.7868 fax

Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:56:33 -0500
From: "Art & Science Collaborations, Inc. (ASCI)" <asci@...>
To: asci@...
Subject: PLEASE JOIN US for a unique shop-talk session...
PLEASE JOIN US for a unique shop-talk session...
"New Venue for Multimedia Art at Planetariums"
Monday, December 1, 3:30 - 4:30
The Graduate Center of the City University of New York
365 Fifth Avenue (at 34th Street), NYC
The Ford Foundation recently funded physicist, James Crutchfield [Santa Fe Institute] and composer/audio engineer, David Dunn [The Art-Science Lab in Santa Fe], to produce an infrastructure that would allow artists to create multimedia projects for a new public venue that promises never imagined aesthetic possibilities! Surround sound, 3-d images floating in space, interactivity, and real-time Internet feed, together build a new type of immersive environment that state-of-the-art digital dome technology offers.
We are inviting artists, museum representatives, designers, technicians, and musicians to join us for an afternoon shop-talk discussion to explore this topic more fully with Crutchfield and Dunn [who have been collaborating for 20 years!]. How is digital dome technology different from CAVE and other immersive technologies? What is the learning-curve for traditional multimedia artists to actualize such projects? What type of presentation flexibility will this platform provide for planetariums? What should science museums know before purchasing such a system? Our guests will also share their thoughts about interactive performance art, and novel funding and exhibition strategies.
At 6:00 that evening, Crutchfield and Dunn will present a free public performance/lecture at the Graduate Center about their "Theatre of Pattern Formation" project, a visual and auditory articulation of Chaos Theory, designed for the Lodestar Astronomy Center planetarium in Santa Fe, NM. For more information visit:
http://atc.unm.edu/research/asl/asl.html
http://artscilab.org/~chaos/topf/ToPF.html
Sponsored by the Science and the Arts program at the Graduate Center of CUNY http://web.gc.cuny.edu/sciart  and
Art & Science Collaborations, Inc. (ASCI) http://www.asci.org
Seating is limited to 50 for the shop talk session, so please RSVP to: Adrienne Klein at aklein@...  or 212-817-7522
The Graduate Center of the City University of New York

Hi all...

With Ryan mentioning the lack of posts to our fulldome group today, I
thought I would repost some information I sent to the Dome-L list
that really relates more to fulldome production... to anyone not
following the Dome-L discussion, the topic relates to creating
landscapes/terrains...

************************************************
We've had great success using Maya for some terrain creation
recently.  We came up with an appropriate scene for a dinosaur
sequence and also a ice age like scene for a mammoth sequence both in
fulldome.  Another scene of a ride down a river canyon also turned
out pretty good using Maya.  There are plenty of tools included in
the software to create the landscape and/or waterscape... and with
some of the available shaders (snow, mountains, etc... free at web
sites) there is quite a large potential.  We have found that simple
painted textures mapped onto displaced geometry is by far the easiest
and most flexible approach and  can be very realistic.  The
displacement can be painted in Maya with sculpting brush tools that
are included or a grayscale altitude file from a DEM or other source
works well also.  Plant life and atmosphere can be created with the
paint effects and fluid effects tools for a complete look.  We are
currently working on a lunar landscape.  Anyone know of real
elevation data available for that?  What we have found so far is
pretty low rez in detail.

The multi camera approach, then stitched, offers the best resolution.
A fisheye approach will also work, but the necessary post process
distortion will create some artifacts at the zenith or dome edges
that may be undesirable depending on the scene content.

Hi again...

As an addendum to the last post, here are sample scenes for some of
our Maya terrain work at the following sites...

http://www.hrpictures.com/canyonride
http://www.hrpictures.com/dinoride
http://www.hrpictures.com/2003/GORGES/GORGES.html
http://www.hrpictures.com/2003/EARTHTHEATER/EARTHTHEATER.html
http://www.hrpictures.com/2001/RAINIER.html
http://www.hrpictures.com/2001/NIAGARA.html


Tom




--

................................................................................\
...
H o m e   R u n   P i c t u r e s

Tom Casey
President and Creative Director
100 First Avenue, Suite 450
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
412-391-8200
412-391-1772 -fax
mailto:tom@...
http://www.hrpictures.com
................................................................................\
...

I don't know if anyone else had a problem reading Dave's post just
now, but here's a text-only version...

===

PLEASE JOIN US for a unique shop-talk session...

"New Venue for Multimedia Art at Planetariums"
Monday, December 1, 3:30 - 4:30
The Graduate Center of the City University of New York
365 Fifth Avenue (at 34th Street), NYC

The Ford Foundation recently funded physicist, James Crutchfield
[Santa Fe Institute] and composer/audio engineer, David Dunn [The
Art-Science Lab in Santa Fe], to produce an infrastructure that would
allow artists to create multimedia projects for a new public venue
that promises never imagined aesthetic possibilities! Surround sound,
3-d images floating in space, interactivity, and real-time Internet
feed, together build a new type of immersive environment that
state-of-the-art digital dome technology offers.

We are inviting artists, museum representatives, designers,
technicians, and musicians to join us for an afternoon shop-talk
discussion to explore this topic more fully with Crutchfield and Dunn
[who have been collaborating for 20 years!]. How is digital dome
technology different from CAVE and other immersive technologies? What
is the learning-curve for traditional multimedia artists to actualize
such projects? What type of presentation flexibility will this
platform provide for planetariums? What should science museums know
before purchasing such a system? Our guests will also share their
thoughts about interactive performance art, and novel funding and
exhibition strategies.

At 6:00 that evening, Crutchfield and Dunn will present a free public
performance/lecture at the Graduate Center about their "Theatre of
Pattern Formation" project, a visual and auditory articulation of
Chaos Theory, designed for the Lodestar Astronomy Center planetarium
in Santa Fe, NM. For more information visit:
http://atc.unm.edu/research/asl/asl.html
http://artscilab.org/~chaos/topf/ToPF.html

Sponsored by the Science and the Arts program at the Graduate Center
of CUNY http://web.gc.cuny.edu/sciart  and Art & Science
Collaborations, Inc. (ASCI) http://www.asci.org

Seating is limited to 50 for the shop talk session, so please RSVP
to: Adrienne Klein at aklein@...  or 212-817-7522

The Graduate Center of the City University of New York

Some in this group may be interested in a "written from scratch", OpenGl based,
interactive dome application.

The goals were mostly:
1. Verify that I understood what was involved
2. See how hard it was to get correct
3. Evaluate the performance
4. Do testing i various dome environment to test resolution, distortion, etc.

A report can be found here
    http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~pbourke/projection/dome/

Dave, thanks for posting the SFI talk @ CUNY.  I, too, encourage anyone to
attend if possible.  Crutchfield and Dunn are some of my favorite
collaborators and if you've seen the Ned Kahn/Jim Crutchfield "Turbulent
Landscape" exhibit (Exploratorium) you'll have an idea of what we're working
toward in the dome.  (My buddy Ned Kahn, BTW, just won a well-earned Genius
Award from the MacCarthur Foundation.)

One clarification: While LodeStar's partnerships are spanning several
continents, science disciplines and socio-economic/cultural boundaries,
we're still in Albuquerque, not Santa Fe as the post listed...

Also, I'll be presenting on the LodeStar programs and visions for fulldome
production, education and experiences at ECSITE late this month.  It's in
collaboration with the man most responsible for exploding the frame of
fulldome, Sky-Skan's Steve Savage.  www.ecsite.net

Bueno,
d

David Beining
Director
LodeStar Astronomy Center
1801 Mountain Road, NW
Albuquerque, NM 87104

505.841.5985 (vox)
505.841.5999 (fax)
505.362.2614 (cel)

dbeining@...
www.lodestar.unm.edu

I saw this on dome-l and thought he'd get better, more appropriate responses
from this listserver.

Christine Shupla
Planetarium Director
Arizona Science Center
(602) 716-2078
shuplac@...

===

There has been a lot of discussion on how to convince the powers to be that you
need to upgrade your planetarium. Here is a new wrinkle, try uncertainty.

We had a major problem with slide projectors and to make a long story short, I
was the only one able to sort through my 36 years of wiring to correct the
problem.  I told them that when I leave in 3 years they can hire me on as a
consultant at $75/hr to resolve their problems. I do like the regular Spitz star
field, but figuring half a loaf is better than none, I told them about the
digital planetarium and how all the projectors would be eliminated and
everything contained in one unit at half the price of a regular star projector. 
Guess what, they bought the idea and are looking into funding!

Now I would like to get the opinions of those who have worked with digital
planetariums and what you like and dislike about your Digistar3 or SciDome.  How
easy are they to do live sky shows, convert regular shows to digital, manual
tactile controls, and automation systems.

Jeffrey L. Smith, Director
State Museum of Pa. Planetarium
300 North St.
Harrisburg, Pa 17120
Phone 717-783-9914
Fax  7127-772-5072
E-Mail  jeffrsmith@...

Just a heads up for those who wanted to see the process for "render
to texture" in 3D Studio Max version 5. This is the tutorial for
baking a texture into a model for real-time uses on D3. I presented
this at DUG and WAC, though this is a little bit more in depth.
Feedback is appreciated.

http://www.xgastudios.com/render/index.html

Enjoy

Matt

The Adler Planetarium & Astronomy Museum, Chicago, IL, is seeking a
3D Modeler/ Animator (a full-time, non-exempt position) for the
Digital Design Group in the Education Department. We are looking for
someone with a strong background in 3D Max and Character Studio.
Work involves creation of both pre-rendered and real-time art
assests. Please visit link below for more info.

http://www.adlerplanetarium.org/employment/index.shtml

Heads-up for DomeFest(tm) 2004, the world's only festival dedicated to the
art and practice of fulldome media.  The second annual event will screen at
LodeStar on June 12.  Again this year, DomeFest(tm) is presented in
association with the DigiFest Southwest Film Festival (world's only digital
film-making festival) with great support from Sky-Skan, Inc.

Look for festival details next week at www.domefest.com
<http://www.domefest.com>  or www.lodestar.unm.edu/domefest2004
<http://www.lodestar.unm.edu/domefest2004>  In the meantime, let me
introduce significant changes we're making from last year's event:

1. The festival will be open to all types of production.  Akin to
SIGGRAPH's Electronic Theater, the juried program will screen the best and
most innovative creations for the dome.  That means we're welcoming outtakes
from professional productions ('real shows'), educational shorts,
experimental production pieces, mini-docs on tools/techniques, art projects,
etc. We won't declare winners, just jury the works to determine the best
stuff out there.  (Last year's program was more about independent works and
awards.  This year, we want to festival to help advance the medium by
compiling 40-minutes of what fulldome is and can be as the medium matures.
A big thank you to Ed Lantz of Spitz for helping me revise/improve the
festival.)

2. We intend to travel the festival.  We want to take DomeFest to as
many theaters (and conferences) as possible to show the world the state and
potential of this exciting medium.  Several major theaters in the US and
aboard have already expressed great desire to screen the festival.  Through
a combination of fund development, festival sponsorships, and theater
gate-split/lease agreements, we will secure the hard drives to store and
ship the material to theaters who can run the 40-minute program as a show
(day-time B show, evening entertainment show, whatever.)  We're gambling
that we can earn/rise enough through screenings here and in your theaters to
make the festival self-sustaining and continually growing.

3.  The jury will include prestigious judges from major production
houses (we already have Pixar & Disney on board), members of the fulldome
community, and digital artists.  We're shooting for making this festival as
high profile and professional as possible.

4. Submissions will be required in 'dome original' format, both
preliminary submissions and final pieces.  If you don't have a stitching
program, Spitz has generously declared its Glom program as freeware.  See
www.spitzinc.com <http://www.spitzinc.com>  for more.  Also, Sky-Skan will
generously provide a no-cost copy of its SkyStitcher(tm) software to all
finalists.  LodeStar will provide any technical support you might need (and
we can muster) in creating dome originals.

5. We hoping all content will be provided in high definition TGAs and
24-bit, 5.1/dts sound.  Not necessary, but we're striving to keep production
values and presentation qualities as high as possible.  Look for more news
on this front soon...

Some things remaining the same:

We still can't pay you.  We're hoping you'll see the value of sharing your
domework without compensation: maturing the medium through juried program,
showing the world how cool this medium is (OK, maybe I hope to be a bit
mercenary vis-à-vis 70mm), and establishing your
self/theater/organization/company as one of the world's finest producers.
As I see it, the more we can expose and demonstrate this medium, the better
off all the current and coming theaters (as well as content producers) will
be.

Submissions will be limited to 3:30 with an additional :30 for credits (i.e.
4:00 TRT.)

Preliminary submissions will be due at the end of April (low rez avi/mov or
as playable DVD).

The best/most interesting 40-minutes, as determined by the jury, will be
presented.

Please look for the web site next week.  I'd greatly appreciate any
thoughts, comments or suggestions you have for DomeFest(tm) 2004.  Also, if
you already know you want to join the growing list of those wanting to
submit, I'd love to have a heads-up.

Bueno,
david

David Beining
Director
LodeStar Astronomy Center
1801 Mountain Road, NW
Albuquerque, NM 87104

505.841.5985 (vox)
505.841.5999 (fax)
505.362.2614 (cel)

dbeining@... <mailto:dbeining@...>
www.lodestar.unm.edu <http://www.lodestar.unm.edu>