> 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 -=-

I don't think. The ViewMaster wheels had around 8mm images, much closer 
to the "instamatic" format. If it used normal 35mm film, it would need 
to be cut and assembled on the wheels, with lot of waste.


Alain

Post a reply to this message

On 07/26/2010 07:26 PM, Alain wrote:

>> 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 -=-
>
> I don't think. The ViewMaster wheels had around 8mm images, much closer
> to the "instamatic" format. If it used normal 35mm film, it would need
> to be cut and assembled on the wheels, with lot of waste.
>
>
> Alain

Ok, I just did what I should have done in the first place...  Remember GIYF
Check out:  http://www.vmresource.com/camera/camera.htm (among other places)

My memory was right, it used standard 35mm film.  It put two images across the 35mm
width, which 
is the way I remembered it, but failed to mention.

Also according to this site, the cutting and mounting could be done by the owner, and
it wasn't 
necessary to "send it to the company" as Thomas suggested.

I guess my 73 year old memory isn't as flaky as I thought!   ;-)    (This time,
anyway...)

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message

> On 07/26/2010 07:26 PM, Alain wrote:

>>> 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 -=-
>>
>> I don't think. The ViewMaster wheels had around 8mm images, much closer
>> to the "instamatic" format. If it used normal 35mm film, it would need
>> to be cut and assembled on the wheels, with lot of waste.
>>
>>
>> Alain
>
> Ok, I just did what I should have done in the first place... Remember GIYF
> Check out: http://www.vmresource.com/camera/camera.htm (among other places)
>
> My memory was right, it used standard 35mm film. It put two images
> across the 35mm width, which is the way I remembered it, but failed to
> mention.
>
> Also according to this site, the cutting and mounting could be done by
> the owner, and it wasn't necessary to "send it to the company" as Thomas
> suggested.
>
> I guess my 73 year old memory isn't as flaky as I thought! ;-) (This
> time, anyway...)
>
> -=- Larry -=-

Ingenious setup.

If they had made it in the 70's, they may have used instamatic cartridges.


Alain

Post a reply to this message

"Larry Hudson" <org### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
news:4c4ff447$1@news.povray.org...
> Ok, I just did what I should have done in the first place...  Remember 
> GIYF
> Check out:  http://www.vmresource.com/camera/camera.htm (among other 
> places)
>
> My memory was right, it used standard 35mm film.  It put two images across 
> the 35mm width, which is the way I remembered it, but failed to mention.
>
> Also according to this site, the cutting and mounting could be done by the 
> owner, and it wasn't necessary to "send it to the company" as Thomas 
> suggested.
>
> I guess my 73 year old memory isn't as flaky as I thought!   ;-)    (This 
> time, anyway...)


Excellent!  That explains everything and puts things right again. :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

For those adventurous povvers who only lack some inspiration, may I suggest

http://www.3dphoto.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=30d3fa7722806dc819a4f44c268f0436&topic=3415.0

This gif was produced from two photographs in a straightforward way. Who takes
the challenge to pov the real thing?

Post a reply to this message

Of course, it suffices to enter or click
http://www.3dphoto.net/forum/index.php?topic=3415.0

There, you can click on the double (stereo) image to get a slightly larger view.
You must view it cross-eyed (sorry, but I'm not the poster / photographer ...),
i.e. your right eye must look at the left image and vice versa, as if you were
watching an object right in front of your nose.

Using POV, you can use an arbitrary camera path, the only condition being that
it ends one level below (or above) the one it started with, so that the loop is
closed (actually representing a spiral or helix).

Is that a challenge?

Post a reply to this message

On 11/09/2010 5:34 PM, AS wrote:
> Is that a challenge?

Not for me, I'm too busy but it is not too difficult. There is a sample 
scene that shows how to have an image of the scene, in the scene. 
Although I can't find it at the moment. So I recreated it in a frame 
from an old animation.

The lighting is all to cock as is is a night scene.

http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=Pq8gdVA

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

The Challenge is of course in stereo, therefore it must include a picture which
is in stereo (S3D) itself, imagined as rendered by one of the state-of-the-art
S3D displays.

Alternatively, use a model such as in a toy railway model. Or imagine a stage
play featuring a stage designer presenting a model of that very stage.

The more advanced art is to intermingle the levels in the style of Escher. I can
also imagine a scene that changes slightly in the course of the animation so
that we are suddenly in the next plane, without noticing a threshold.

I think the creator of the little animation linked above (who is otherwise
unknown to me) did a good job in terms of design - look at the right bottom
corner in particular. The technical realization doesn't quite match up, however.

My point in this thread is: S3D gives us yet another dimension of illusion, on
top of animation.

Post a reply to this message

On 09/11/2010 11:09 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 5:34 PM, AS wrote:
>> Is that a challenge?
>
> Not for me, I'm too busy but it is not too difficult. There is a sample
> scene that shows how to have an image of the scene, in the scene.
> Although I can't find it at the moment. So I recreated it in a frame
> from an old animation.
>
...
I think you mean desk.pov in the standard sample images supplied with Povray (in the
"advanced" 
directory).

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message

On 12/09/2010 12:53 AM, Larry Hudson wrote:
> I think you mean desk.pov in the standard sample images supplied with
> Povray (in the "advanced" directory).

Indeed I do, thanks Larry.

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message