No sir.
It is pre-rendered video (or really series of pre-rendered videos) some of them slightly 'tweaked' in semi-real time, most of them not, but not ever by tracking the dancers in real time, which was the whole point of my original post and the follow ups.
Synching the pre-rendered videos with the pre-recorded music is not 'real time rendering' any effects.
An image you 'tweak' on an ipad with your finger(s) to (poorly) SIMULATE real time effects BASED ON MOTION TRACKING is not at all the same thing as real time rendered projections ON DANCERS BASED ON MOTION TRACKING THE DANCERS AND MORPHING THE IMAGE TO THEIR POSITIONS. (apologies for the 'shouting', but you keep missing the point) I'm sorry that's hard for you to understand or admit.

EDIT: For it to be "real time renderings" it would HAVE to track the dancers...which you admit it does not....so I don't get how/why you want to argue a point you already conceded.

@ChaosEngine the realitime comment was for @newtboy

@newtboy I never said they were tracking dancers. Only that it is a r-e-a-l-t-i-m-e animation not a pre-rendered video, which is 100% confirmed by the fact that they are tweaking cameras, friction, gravity and viscosity.

Then why is it SO far off in time and space? if they tracked the dancers, it would effect the projection, but it obviously does not. Maybe they are triggered by sound, as in by the music...sound is not the dancer.

EDIT: OK, I read the link, and it's not rendered in real time at all. It's pre-rendered effects/movies triggered by sound (cued by music) or by "eMotion" which is NOT motion tracking, but is apparently only motion SENSING (it only notices there IS motion, not what and where that motion is) and more often by people using Ipads to 'draw' in 'real time'. That is NOT at all what I was talking about, which is tracking the dancers and rendering based on that tracking, in real time and in 3D. That did not happen here.

The link isn't actually that clear. It states that "Each scene is a Composition. They are trigged via OSC from eMotion or from QLab. This allow us to be perfectly in sync with sound."

So yes, the graphics are rendered in realtime, but I think the actual control is done by hand rather than by automatically tracking the dancers movements.

I could be wrong, but that's the way I read it.

It clearly states in the link that @ChaosEngine provided that they are triggering events live, altering camera angles, frictions, gravity, viscosity, some triggered by sound. ie. Real-time not pre-rendered.

@billpayer...Not to my eye.
All this is pre-rendered, and 20-25 sec and 30-40 sec show me that clearly, just like the rest. The video is not in sync with the dancers in either portion. With the guy 'hand dancing', the blocks fall out in many places his hand never goes (but obviously was supposed to go), the floor projection at 30-40 was closer, but not perfect by any means. None of this is 'real time' that I can see, and is also not in perfect sync in many places.
I think you don't understand what I mean by 'real time', because this is obviously not done in 'real time', it's all 100% pre-rendered.

I see no reason it couldn't be done right now.

Once you have the dancers position the rendering is pretty trivial.

Getting the dancers position with a Kinect is certainly doable... I'm not sure how well the Kinect would cope with multiple people in that lighting environment, but you could certainly rig the dancers with invisible IR emitters and track that.

It's simply a matter of cost.

edit: technical info on how it was actually done
http://vezerapp.hu/blog/project-showcase-pixel/

When will this tech progress enough that they can render the effects in real time, using something like Xbox motion tracking to keep track of the dancers/props and have them actually effect the projections in real time, rather than projecting a pre-rendered 'movie' that they try to keep pace with and their place in? It would erase all the lag created when the dancers are 1/4 second off, or 3 inches out of place. That would go a long way towards creating suspension of disbelief for many, and sharpen up the performance immensely. Then we can have things like the bioluminescent forest done on stage with moving objects...like Avatar in theater form.
I love what they do with it, I just want to see it progress...and fast!

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

"But when people are not only wrong, but so dismissive of those who know a thousand times more than they do, one realizes that such people are simply ineducable: they don't know how to assess evidence or argument; they don't know what real scholarship consists of; and they don't know who the real scholars are; yet they do not hesitate for even an instant before insulting and ridiculing scholars whose shoes they are unfit to tie, often people who have spent decades immersing themselves in the study of a particular subject." -- Trancecoach's inspiring profile quote.

@Trancecoach - keeping in mind that you hold scientific rigour in the highest regard, judging by your love for the text above - could you please tell me what you think of the paper after my criticism?

You can either claim that i do not have a scientific objection to the paper, or you can admit that the paper is unscientific, and therefore meaningless in the context of a scientific discussion about climate change.

Surely a man of science such as yourself (see above paragraph, very inspiring) wouldn't disagree with me - no uncertainties, highlighting of meaningless data points showing a total lack of statistical understanding, no key or legend for plots rendering them COMPLETELY useless, not listing sources therefore none of it is provable, having sarcastic digs at previous scientific work..... It isn't as though i've nit-picked problems with it, these are problems that render the work meaningless. The author is not making a scientific argument, and this is a scientific debate.

Right?

Would you say, perhaps, that you don't 'know how to assess evidence or argument?' That you 'don't know what real scholarship is, nor who the real scholars are?'

Please. Please read your own profile quote back to yourself and consider it and how it relates to your own approach. I would love you to come out of this with a net gain in understanding, i am not trying to ridicule anyone. Ensure that you are one of the educable.. I have also had to reconsider my own approach in the past, i would say it's a good thing.

The solar flares are very cool. I suggest watching in HD and full screen for maximum awesomeness.

Also from YT description:

The surface of the sun from October 14th to 30th, 2014, showing sunspot AR 2192, the largest sunspot of the last two solar cycles (22 years). During this time sunspot AR 2191 produced six X-class and four M-class solar flares. The animation shows the sun in the ultraviolet 304 ångström wavelength, and plays at a rate of 52.5 minutes per second. It is composed of more than 17,000 images, 72 GB of data produced by the solar dynamics observatory (http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/) + (http://www.helioviewer.org/). This animation has be rendered in 4K, and resized to the Youtube maximum resolution of 3840×2160. The animation has been rotated 180 degrees so that south is 'up'. The audio is the "heartbeat" of the sun, processed from SOHO HMI data by Alexander G. Kosovichev. Image processing and animation by James Tyrwhitt-Drake.

Dude, shut up. You're not going to win this. You're not a psychologist, you have nothing to say you just want to try and find a way to render my posts moot. It's not going to work.

Also is this your first day? Have you read ANY of my other posts?

The truth is, I made a joke you didn't get. That bothers you so you try and turn it into a character defect. Thanks, got it, you don't get jokes because you're not funny.

Actually, you might not understand what the "Uncanny Valley" hypothesis is. It's not simply CG/Humanoid Traits that are not quite realistic. What you're possibly interpreting as "Uncanny Valley" is that the visuals are attempting to appear realistic, but not fooling anyone. There are some elements of the Uncanny Valley here, but possibly not what you were thinking of or what the original poster meant by how it "looks".
The difference between what the Uncanny Valley and this video is that the characters are not meant to be mimicking realism. There are many, many traits here that are cues to an intentionally stylized art direction. The anatomy of the characters is exaggerated, both in the facial forms and body structure. The lighting and materials are certainly drawing from real-world principles, but is far off the mark if you're attempting to portray photo-realistic CG. These are intentional choices by the artists and art directors. It would be a mistake to look at this for how it "fails" to convince you it's real, because it's not meant to.
Where it does enter the Uncanny Valley is in the animation. The immediate loss of inertia displayed by the beheaded horse at the beginning. The animation after the witch jumps onto the horse (is that supposed to be Merigold? They give her less character every time), are physically inaccurate. The best way to describe the Uncanny Valley is to look at things from 20 years hence. In that time, people who may play this game would look at the lighting and rendering as simply early CG, whereas anyone paying attention to the animation, particularly the layman, would see it as "just wrong" because it violates what we subconsciously understand about how the universe works.

Disclaimer: I'm an artist and animator with a lot of experience, and it's not my intention to be offensive, and it's not my intention to say it's not my intention to be offensive while still knowingly being offensive, so I hope that my comment makes a difference.

12 hours to render a single frame? Whew, that makes me feel so much better about my gaming rig's CPU.

Well... there is a lot missing here. But for sure they are really getting the look of skin right. It is amazing how complex skin is to render, not because of texture but of light. We don't notice it at first but when you take away the ability of our skin to pass through and refract light, it immediately starts to look fake and inhuman.