While the divergence of ones eyes isn't any too good for those medium to large
pairs you might come across I just have to say that very large cross-eyed pairs
couldn't be so great for the rigid eye people either.
I have to admit that I always go on the assumption that the images would be
looked at with appropriate gear someday (as in a stereoscope) since I always put
the left/right images into one single image file and that would mean redoing the
file otherwise.
Just thought divergence needed some moral support here.

Bob

"Harold Baize" <bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote in message
news:387a1b33@news.povray.org...
> Alan,
> Actually you don't do the "diverge thing" if you can help it.
> It is a painful side effect of creating a parallel stereo
> pair where the centers of the images are more than 2.5 inches
> apart. When the images are farther apart than the separation of
> your eyes, it forces the eyes to diverge (point away from each
> other). Many people have problems crossing their eyes, but
> cross eyed stereo pairs are often better for computer presentation
> because they don't have to be a specific size, so they can work
> for any monitor size/resolution. Again, the ultimate is a pair of
> LCS glasses, like the ones packaged with the ELSA graphics boards.
> To learn more about stereo on the web, visit my web pages and
> the VRex web site.
>
>     http://www.jps.net/baize/bm3d.htm
>     http://www.3dexpo.com/
>
> Harold
>
> Alan Kong <ako### [at] povrayNO-SPAMorg> wrote in message
> news:tfdj7s4jt9vqr0gtma9lptqlhvs6joccmp@4ax.com...
> >   How does one do the diverge thing? All of the stereograms I've checked
> > out are like the one I posted.
> >
> > --
> > Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
> > http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
> >
> > On Sun, 09 Jan 2000 21:34:20 -0800 "SamuelT." <STB### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> >
> > >Nice. I'm glad you made it to where you have to crossed your eyes, rather
> > >than diverge them, for I don't know if my eyes would have done it the
> other
> > >way. That recursive tetrahedrom really pops out of there!
> >
>
>

Post a reply to this message