stereo photos (not from Evo 3D)

[Drake588]

So why does the 3d image look sharper and clearer than the 2d images??? Can someone explain?

Also, what makes it so that some objects appear to be farther away (or closer) than other objects? is it because those objects are smaller (or bigger)?

 

[novox77]

So why does the 3d image look sharper and clearer than the 2d images??? Can someone explain?

I think it's because there's a very fixed point in space you have to focus on for this to work, or you lose the 3D effect. So your eyes are focused to the exact degree they need to be. There may even be some compensation for any natural focusing issues (myopia, e.g.). Although I see no workaround for a bad case of astigmatism. Would be interested to hear from anyone with astigmatism if they're able to see these stereo pairs.

Also, what makes it so that some objects appear to be farther away (or closer) than other objects? is it because those objects are smaller (or bigger)?

Objects closer to you shift in perspective a lot more than farther away objects. If you were to overlay the two stereo images so that you can see both at the same time, you'll see double images of the objects in the picture. The double images that are farther apart will appear closer to you. Your brain uses these distance variations to calculate depth. Stereoscopy is simply exploiting our brain's ability to interpret depth due to parallax (perspective difference).

 

[axisofoil]

Would be interested to hear from anyone with astigmatism if they're able to see these stereo pairs.

I have an astigmatism (1-eye only) and can usually see them. There are a few that just don't work for me, but most do.

If it were uncorrected, I'm not sure how well I could do (I can barely walk safely without my contacts in).

 

[jerofld]

I have an astigmatism (1-eye only) and can usually see them. There are a few that just don't work for me, but most do.

If it were uncorrected, I'm not sure how well I could do (I can barely walk safely without my contacts in).

I have an astigmatism in my left eye, but it is slight. I can see the image, but it is difficult to get to that point. I guess all those years in the military and training myself to do the 1000 mile stare made it so my eyes are used to defocusing but not crossing >.<

 

[garrydias]

bizarre oLolOlOloOloLOlolol

 

[heavychevy]

"Oh no, now I've gone crosseyed"


Austin Powers

 

[garrydias]

if a wind hit your eyes when you r crosseyed, you

 

[jroc]

Thanks! This is really the only way I can do it As an additional tip for people who want to try the "parallel viewing" method: To practice, just try to relax and zone out. Don't look at anything, and let your eyes lose focus. It should be natural for them to go parallel, and you should see double. This will just help you understand what it's supposed to feel like. Also realize that this is how you see those magic eye illusions.

here's a pretty neat "magic eye." It's not your traditional style, but I like it because it doesn't look like TeleTubbies vomited all over the screen.

Funny...this way helped me see the first pic in 3D...lol I couldnt get the cross eye dot thing to work to save my life....but this way worked. I'm a few feet away from my monitor too. I just did the zone out method. I see now all I did was just crossed my eyes focusing on the pic instead of the dots.

These reminded me of some optical illusions I saw on Yahoo recently. Also remided me of a trick where if you take your 2 index fingers and point them at each other, if you can focus right there will be a lil sausage finger in between your 2 fingers. It looks best if you look at the underside of your fingers.

 

[yourfriendmat]

Funny...this way helped me see the first pic in 3D...lol I couldnt get the cross eye dot thing to work to save my life....but this way worked. I'm a few feet away from my monitor too. I just did the zone out method. I see now all I did was just crossed my eyes focusing on the pic instead of the dots.

These reminded me of some optical illusions I saw on Yahoo recently. Also remided me of a trick where if you take your 2 index fingers and point them at each other, if you can focus right there will be a lil sausage finger in between your 2 fingers. It looks best if you look at the underside of your fingers.

Yep, that's another way to "practice" doing the parallel 3D method. Point your fingers at each other, look at something far away, and you see the "sausage."

Glad I could help!

 

[SamuraiBigEd]

That's pretty damn awesome. It's as if I took another pic at the center of my slider.

BTW, this is my setup:

Note the colored dots on the slider. In this pic, the sliding mount is in the center. It's 1/4" to the yellow dot, which nets a stereo base of 1/2". Each dot beyond yellow is another half-inch, so you'd be adding a full inch per dot to your stereo base. Red dot gives a total of 2.5" stereo base, which approximates the interocular distance (avg distance between adult human eyes)

A fellow 5D MKII owner I see!

 

[Bob Maxey]

Ah, these are fun. I like this one!

The picture is just a tad bit too small to do any serious manipulations with, but for kicks:

The middle image is the view from "in between" the other two.

Edit: It just came to my attention that crossing your eyes for this series can potentially yield two 3-D images simultaneously. Interesting...

If you remove the center image, yes, Free viewing works like a charm for viewing 3D. Especially on your phone due to image sizes.

By the way, here is your image pair interlaced. Just bond the proper clear lenticular material to the print and there you go, a stereo print. Trade 'em, sell 'em, impress your friends; they make wonderful Christmas Gifts.

 

[ProfeZZor X]

What I'd like to know is why a regular JPEG photo can't be duplicated into two side by side images, with one being slightly offset, then uploaded to the 3DVO for viewing. I've tried this with a couple of images, and the 3DVO just shows it as the same as how I made it, rather than splicing them together for a stereoscopic effect.

Anyone care to answer why it cannot be done that way?

 

[Bob Maxey]

What I'd like to know is why a regular JPEG photo can't be duplicated into two side by side images, with one being slightly offset, then uploaded to the 3DVO for viewing. I've tried this with a couple of images, and the 3DVO just shows it as the same as how I made it, rather than splicing them together for a stereoscopic effect.

Anyone care to answer why it cannot be done that way?

I can answer your query.

Stereo requires that you duplicate what you see with your normal binocular vision. This is done by taking two different views of the scene. We call these pairs of images, "Stereo Pairs." The images are different images of the scene.

Pairs can be created with a dedicated stereo camera like the Evo. Also, you can use any digital camera if you use a slide bar. You can also use the 'Cha-Cha' method in some cases. Ask Mr. Google.

Be aware that nothing can move in your scene or it ruins the image.

Look at any scene with both eyes open. Close your left eye and note the position of objects in the scene. Close the left eye and do the same thing with the right eye open.

Back to your question. It simply cannot be done as you describe. You will not see stereo because none exists.

The Evo displays a special type of image that is interlaced. Take a look at my post #36. The image combines the two images of a stereo pair. Also look at the original pair and note the differences between the left and right image.

You will not be able to see my modified image on your Evo, however. It was created in 30 seconds to demonstrate one option for hard copy stereo printing.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Funny...this way helped me see the first pic in 3D...lol I couldnt get the cross eye dot thing to work to save my life....but this way worked. I'm a few feet away from my monitor too. I just did the zone out method. I see now all I did was just crossed my eyes focusing on the pic instead of the dots.

These reminded me of some optical illusions I saw on Yahoo recently. Also remided me of a trick where if you take your 2 index fingers and point them at each other, if you can focus right there will be a lil sausage finger in between your 2 fingers. It looks best if you look at the underside of your fingers.

Wow . . . I have not seen that version of "Stereo Typing" for a long time. Always loads of fun and great for Stereo Club Title Slides.

 

[Bob Maxey]

So why does the 3d image look sharper and clearer than the 2d images??? Can someone explain?

Also, what makes it so that some objects appear to be farther away (or closer) than other objects? is it because those objects are smaller (or bigger)?

Probably more to do with the image quality than anything else. Hard to say. It could be the color contrast that gives you apparent sharpness. It is quite good for a digital image.

I am reminded of a black and white print of a man working around lab ware. When you look at the image, it appears sharp enough to cut your eyes. Upon closer look, however, the image is quite fuzzy. It has allot to do with the expert that printed the image and absolutely perfect contrast range.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Ah, these are fun. I like this one!

The picture is just a tad bit too small to do any serious manipulations with, but for kicks:

The middle image is the view from "in between" the other two.

Edit: It just came to my attention that crossing your eyes for this series can potentially yield two 3-D images simultaneously. Interesting...

Try switching the pair so the left eye sees the right eye view and the right eye sees the left eye view. You will notice how things in the foreground recede as the background scene components come forward. It is called Pseudo Stereo and it can be quite interesting to fool with.

It is interesting to increase interoccular spacing. Hard to do with the Evo. This will produce a stereo image where most things look like miniatures. You require perhaps twenty or thirty feet separation in many cases.