 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yep, but that's what I wanted to see, if it could be worked around the
shutter glasses type thing. I mean, gee, why doesn't the mind filter it
across in a way where if it looks left-sided or right-sided shouldn't you
think it actually is? Of course I only tried a few frame rates for this and
the slower rates were just plain ugly, faster and it looked like one merged
image. It just wasn't meant to be.
Bob
Peter Popov <pet### [at] usa net> wrote in message
news:baw5OHqzGN5I5a6aYCh9wcgVUwiz@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 10:18:21 -0600, "omniVERSE" <inv### [at] aolcom>
> wrote:
>
> >I attempted the field rendering of left and right eye images when I first
> >tried out 3D stereopairs in the hopes ones brain would take over and do
the
> >work of shifting sides. Well my brain sure can't anyhow, not counting on
> >intelligence or anything like that, only fundamental senses to figure the
> >view correctly. (if so, whew! since it would mean I'm not especially
stupid
> >then).
> >
> >Bob
>
> That's different. What Lance and myself are talking about works like
> this: you put on a pair of glasses with a single LCD plate in front of
> each eye. These are not displays, they only block light when needed.
> So the computer displays left eye and right eye images full-screen,
> and blocks the appropriate eye's view simultaneously. So your left eye
> only sees the left eye picture and the right eye, accordingly. No eye
> crossing or whatever. The result is a full-screed 3D image or
> animation (like in Descent) without eye strain nor headache. Sure
> looks cool!
>
>
> Peter Popov
> ICQ: 15002700
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have, been doing photographs of scenery for several years now by shifting
the camera a little left or right. Got a few renders to do that with too on
one of my web pages. I first saw it in the Photography magazine and I was
instantly amazed. It's terrible on the eyes though if the images are large
or close, which means detail is usually lost because of being smaller or
further away.
Time and again I've almost gotten a stereoscope or lenses to make one, just
nothing like seeing straight fullcolor 3D without an apparatus, no
comparsion I think.
Bob
Sander <san### [at] the-internet> wrote in message
news:3839b307@news.povray.org...
> Have any of you tried to place two images (a stereo pair) next to one
> another and view them just like that: the left eye looks at the left and
the
> right at the right image. The brain fuses them and you have your perfect
3D
> view! All in true color!
> Pictures not spaced much more than about 6 or 7 cm.
> Or: reverse the pair and squinting at them: same result though it's more
of
> a strain to the eyes.
> All this is easier for older people with presbyopia.
> Sander
> --
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> http://www.amtechnical.com/jeff/rose.html
>
> Simon de Vet <sde### [at] istarca> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 38386D60.E9A800A3@istar.ca...
> > 1) Make a tube with your hand.
> > 2) Close one eye.
> > 3) Look through the tube at your rendered image. You should not be able
> > to see any of your screen or the surrounding room.
> >
> > Voila! The image seems to pop out into amazing 3-d glory!
> >
> > I imagine this works since we usually depend on two eyes to judge depth.
> > With one eye closed we depend on other kinds of visual clues. By
> > blocking out everything but the image, the only visula clues we have
> > left come from the pic itself.
> >
> > This is really amazing. Try it!
> >
> > The only disadvantage is that to block out the screen border you have to
> > block out most of the image as well...
> >
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Have you seen those 3D IMAX movies with the polarized projectors and
polarized glasses?
--
David http://thunder.prohosting.com/~davidf (ICQ 55354965)
"The paper holds their folded faces to the floor" -Pink Floyd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Popov <pet### [at] usanet> wrote ...
>
> I tried Descent once with the Cybermax glasses (was it Cybermax?).
> Darn, it really looked like my monitor was 100 meters deep. I hardly
> resisted the temptation to go behind it and see where those robots
> were coming from :)
With one of the Descent games (I think it was Descent 1), if you choose the
correct 3-d option, it would put two images side-by-side on the monitor, and
if you then looked at it cross-eyed, it would look 3d. No glasses needed,
but talk about a headache!
Regarding the original post: if you play those 3d first-person games with
one eye blocked, you can see quite a bit of 'fake' depth.
-Nathan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
YUP! :)))
Sooooo cool!!!
There is an IMAX cinema offering this in Brisbane.
--
Lance.
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
David Fontaine <lfo### [at] isdnet> wrote in message
news:383A063B.47CDE078@isd.net...
> Have you seen those 3D IMAX movies with the polarized projectors and
> polarized glasses?
>
> --
> David http://thunder.prohosting.com/~davidf (ICQ 55354965)
> "The paper holds their folded faces to the floor" -Pink Floyd
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sander wrote:
>
> Have any of you tried to place two images (a stereo pair) next to one
> another and view them just like that: the left eye looks at the left and the
> right at the right image. The brain fuses them and you have your perfect 3D
> view! All in true color!
I have.. I could never get it to work properly, though.
Those of you with repetitive desktops (say, Mac-users using large
patterns) may find that if you allow your eyes to cross and defocus a
little until the pattern resolves again, it'll seem to sink into the
screen while windows and icons float above it (albeit as blurred double
images, but it's still a cool effect).
Okay, that had nothing to do with POV-Ray, but I thought I'd share. ^^
--
Xplo Eristotle
http://start.at/xplosion/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Popov wrote:
> I tried Descent once with the Cybermax glasses (was it Cybermax?).
Yes, it was CyberMax(x). I tried it at a show in Boston. Amazing.
Evem lowly MS's Ultimate Flight (or how it is named) was amazing.
Flying a curve and looking to the left over the wing, I was tempted
to puke....
> Darn, it really looked like my monitor was 100 meters deep. I hardly
> resisted the temptation to go behind it and see where those robots
> were coming from :)
I don't need glasses for that. If they shoot at me, I always evade
to one side or the other ;-)
Markus
--
Der deutsche Schlager ist aus dem Klofenster gesprungen....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <383A3898.F1B64BD3@unforgettable.com>, Xplo Eristotle
<inq### [at] unforgettablecom> wrote:
> Those of you with repetitive desktops (say, Mac-users using large
> patterns) may find that if you allow your eyes to cross and defocus a
> little until the pattern resolves again, it'll seem to sink into the
> screen while windows and icons float above it (albeit as blurred double
> images, but it's still a cool effect).
Yeah, I have noticed this before, especially when I am extremely bored
and tired.
Actually, right now I have an image covering my desktop, Macs have had
that capability built into the OS since Mac OS 8(or was it System
7.6?). So we aren't restricted to tileable patterns any more.
That gives me an idea, have the desktop image alternate between the two
views and use the LCD glasses, that should be an interesting effect.
Even better if the window and icon positions are adjusted so they
appear to have depth. Might actually make it easier to use.
--
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I thought the CyberMaxx was never released? Or was it just the Mac
version?
The original Marathon(a Mac first-person shooter game) was supposed to
have support for it, but nobody ever got to use it...
--
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> I thought the CyberMaxx was never released? Or was it just the Mac
> version?
No, it was a PC version. I can remember some ads for the Cybermax,
but never have seen a real thing, except for the show. It was the
company that developed it.
Markus
--
Der deutsche Schlager ist aus dem Klofenster gesprungen....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
