I'm not complaining either. I'm glad you like parallel viewing and
I'll post both types from now on. You prefer parallel viewing, it works
better for you. Good.

Trust me on this though, no one calls it "divergence" viewing, the
common term is "parallel" or just "free viewing" because there are no
optical devices involved. Like I said, very few humans can diverge their
eyes. That is why the old stereoscopes from the 1800's used prismatic
lenses,
that both magnified and bent the images so the eyes could be parallel and
still fuse the images, which were three inches wide, slightly wider than
the 2.5 inch eye separation of most people.

Harold

omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:388407f4@news.povray.org...
> "Ross Litscher" <lit### [at] osuedu> wrote in message
> news:38837bdd@news.povray.org...
> > i don't understand how these are supposed to work. or rather, how I am
> > supposed to look at them.
> >
>
> Crossing your eyes and letting each eye center on the opposite image, your
left
> eye looks at the right image and right eye looks at the left image.
> I prefer the divergence method instead:
http://members.aol.com/wrld0rigin/3D.htm
> and try to explain how to do that there and you could even look through a
paper
> rolled up from both ends into a sort of binocular.  Try that with crossed
eyes!
> :-) Can't be done.
> And to see this particular image and others like it in this way instead
you need
> to rearrange the pair to the opposite sides first.
> Hey, I'm not back to complain, just pointing out the facts...
>
>  8-D
>
> Bob
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message