Vic wrote:
> ... I've recognized, that not only
> stereo_base (the distance between the eyes of the viewer in the appropriate
> metric)  important, but the direction of the vector between the two eyes!
> This is the base (zero degrees) of the camera rotation around the distance
> vector (the roll of the camera as I know).
> 
> With the "monoscopic" camera model this was not an issue, because this can
> be corrected by trial and error camera placement. With stereoscopy this must
> be the result of precise calculation, otherwise the left and right images
> stress your eyes and brain. This could be the source of most stereography
> problems arised using PovRay.
> 
> Hermann and Harold? What's your opinion about the issue detailed above?
> 

Vic,

You are 100% right.
All vectors of the camera must be transformed as a whole.
It's a good idea to treat the stereoscopic base as a vector too.
See my other post in the new "Stereoscopy" thread for details.

The whole theme is tricky and often very frustrating for beginners.
In my opinion, the reason is: you have to be extremely precise in some
points (e.g alignement, mounting of slides). And then there are other
important points, where you have to be rather intuitive. I mean 
especially the length of the stereo base or (in photography) the 
horizontal alignement of the slides while mounting. There are certain
limits to obey, there are some empirical rules (like the 1:30 rule), 
but to a large extent it's a question of taste.

What is most interesting to me as an artist is, that image composition 
works somewhat different to common (2D) photography or painture.

Hermann

Post a reply to this message