On 7/16/2010 3:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> That reminds me of the round cards I had as a kid, and the 3D viewer to use
> them. I loved that. My question is how you view those large sized images?
> You need to scale them down in order to get them both on screen, no doubt?
> and a viewer?
>
> Thomas
>
>

Slightly off-topic, but is there a way to create new discs of your own? 
I've always wanted to be able to do that...

-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message

SharkD <pos### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 7/11/2010 1:02 PM, AS wrote:
> > Therefore, it should get the attention it deserves on these pages as well. In
> > particular, I propose to
>
> You mean "here" in the newsgroups? Wouldn't the wiki be a better place
> for this?
>
> --
> http://isometricland.com

Actually I don't know where to find "the" wiki, but I will find out.
By "these pages" I erroneously referred to the POV-Rays website, by which I am
accessing these newsgroups (http://povray.org/ resp. http://news.povray.org/).

Although I have been povving for years, I am not familiar with the customs here.
Feel free to inform me, TIA.

Of course I would be happy if stereo topics got more attention wherever deemed
adequate. Recently I learned about a very active stereo section in the fractals
scene (e.g. http://www.fractalforums.com/), although photographers seem to be
the vanguard, in quantity and level of discussion. It is time classical
raytracers catch up.

AS

Post a reply to this message

Le 25/07/2010 18:38, AS nous fit lire :
> SharkD <pos### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> On 7/11/2010 1:02 PM, AS wrote:
>>> Therefore, it should get the attention it deserves on these pages as well. In
>>> particular, I propose to
>>
>> You mean "here" in the newsgroups? Wouldn't the wiki be a better place
>> for this?
>>
>> --
>> http://isometricland.com
> 
> Actually I don't know where to find "the" wiki, but I will find out.

http://wiki.povray.org/

obviously.

Post a reply to this message

On 07/24/2010 11:02 PM, SharkD wrote:
> On 7/16/2010 3:34 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> That reminds me of the round cards I had as a kid, and the 3D viewer
>> to use
>> them. I loved that. My question is how you view those large sized images?
>> You need to scale them down in order to get them both on screen, no
>> doubt?
>> and a viewer?
>>
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>
> Slightly off-topic, but is there a way to create new discs of your own?
> I've always wanted to be able to do that...
>

At one time there was a stereo camera available for these View-Master style pictures. 
I'm sure 
it either came with, or had available the device(s) to mount them properly.  Of
course, this was 
a LONG time ago and I'm sure it's no longer manufactured.  Never had one myself but I
remember 
seeing them.  Perhaps you could find one on E-Bay?

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message

"Larry Hudson" <org### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
news:4c4ceab9$1@news.povray.org...

> At one time there was a stereo camera available for these View-Master 
> style pictures.  I'm sure it either came with, or had available the 
> device(s) to mount them properly.  Of course, this was a LONG time ago and 
> I'm sure it's no longer manufactured.  Never had one myself but I remember 
> seeing them.  Perhaps you could find one on E-Bay?
>

View Master.... <sigh> yes, I remember the name now. If I remember 
correctly, there was indeed a camera but you had to send the film (already 
mounted?) to the company for processing. I never owned one though.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/
>
> obviously.

Hi, Forgeron,

I just took a first glance at your website. Although I didn't find stereo
images, I'm sure you are the kind of person to delve at the topic.

The wiki you mentioned is of course known to me, but I don't feel I should post
there. (Shyness is not my problem; I post to other wikis where I'm more of an
expert.) If you or anyone could start the topic there, I would be very pleased.

In the newsgroups, I think a group "stereo" should be founded, analogous to
"animation". "Stereo animation" will come later ...

@ViewMaster fans: Nostalgia is not open to arguments, but for much better a
stereo experience you have your computer. For instructions, go to stereo
photography forums (I don't know any in Dutch, but 3dforum.net in English and
stereoforum.org in German, or read the user help of Stereopteryx). Stereo
raytracing, I feel, still needs more discussion, although I do not claim to know
all existing resources. Many considerations are common to photographed and
computed stereoscopy anyway.

I'm looking forward to the "genuine 3D" resp. 4D era. (BTW: terminology should
be standardized, "3D" being currently used for stereo as well.)

AS

Post a reply to this message

"AS" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I'm looking forward to the "genuine 3D" resp. 4D era.

why would a genuine, 1:1 representation of 3D reality be "4D" (except perhaps
for animation taking time into account)?  It's a common misconception I see with
my co-workers:  they say they'll skip 3D TVs and buy 4D when it comes.  It's
mostly for the humor, I guess, but I'm pretty sure some really believe it's a
label for new tech:  4D, 5D etc exactly like mp3...

Post a reply to this message

"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4c4d92c3cc8a6bf694d674070@news.povray.org...
> why would a genuine, 1:1 representation of 3D reality be "4D" (except 
> perhaps
> for animation taking time into account)?  It's a common misconception I 
> see with
> my co-workers:  they say they'll skip 3D TVs and buy 4D when it comes. 
> It's
> mostly for the humor, I guess, but I'm pretty sure some really believe 
> it's a
> label for new tech:  4D, 5D etc exactly like mp3...

The universe being built up of 11D strings, I wait for the 11D TV set, for 
the total experience :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht
> news:web.4c4d92c3cc8a6bf694d674070@news.povray.org...
> > why would a genuine, 1:1 representation of 3D reality be "4D" (except
> > perhaps
> > for animation taking time into account)?
....
>
> The universe being built up of 11D strings, I wait for the 11D TV set, for
> the total experience :-)
>
> Thomas

Infinite dimensional Hilbert space featuring full correction of any Heisenberg
blur is going to come soon, rumors say. I think Google are on it, or was it
Warner Bros.?

4D = Stereo video, 4th dimension being time. In cases of computed images we
speak of stereo animation, you got it, nemesis. Nothing new in terms of
technology, but artistic creativity is still somewhat lagging behind.

AS (Dr. phil. nat., not so easy to buzz)

Post a reply to this message

On 07/26/2010 12:16 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Larry Hudson"<org### [at] yahoocom>  schreef in bericht
> news:4c4ceab9$1@news.povray.org...
>
>> At one time there was a stereo camera available for these View-Master
>> style pictures.  I'm sure it either came with, or had available the
>> device(s) to mount them properly.  Of course, this was a LONG time ago and
>> I'm sure it's no longer manufactured.  Never had one myself but I remember
>> seeing them.  Perhaps you could find one on E-Bay?
>>
>
> View Master....<sigh>  yes, I remember the name now. If I remember
> correctly, there was indeed a camera but you had to send the film (already
> mounted?) to the company for processing. I never owned one though.
>
> Thomas
>
>

I never had one either, but sending the film to the company for processing is probably
right. 
My thinking that you could mount them yourself is strictly from (faulty) memory and
assumptions 
-- always a bad idea, of course.    :-(

Although I do remember (I think...) it used standard 35mm film.

I used to do all of my own photo processing, including 35mm slides -- the developing
and 
mounting of slides is a pretty straight-forward procedure.  Making prints (both B&W
and color) 
is much more involved, but fun, and I did a lot of that once-upon-a-time.  Most of my
printing 
was from 2-1/4 square negatives rather than 35mm.  But I haven't done any photo
processing for 
many years now...   <sigh>

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message