By partly radiositied I mean only one side of the stereopair used it, the other
is lit with a bright light and has more than default ambient as well.  Both were
darkened somewhat by raising the 'assumed_gamma'.
Oh, and this is a combination crossed and parallel image too so all should be
happy.
The Relativity model (Escher stairs I like to call it) was done by someone else
in Dxf format and I converted it over to Inc with 3DWinOGL (by Thomas Baier).  I
almost never got the thing positioned right, bet you can guess why.  To explain
what I was thinking of by doing the non-radiosity + radiosity renders it occured
to me how well suited stereopairs could be for merging images to cause varied
effects.  The light and dark changes from one to the other make for an
interesting perception.  I've always kind of liked that.  Perhaps a good way to
describe the possibilities is to think of a window thats both lit and unlit or a
object which exists in only one image yet shows up in the resulting 3D picture
seemingly detached somehow.

Bob
--
// omniVERSE
// http://users.aol.com/inversez/

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download '3D escher relativity.jpg' (40 KB)

Preview of image '3D escher relativity.jpg'

Now this one really stands out.  Why three images?  I only got two eyes. :)

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Excellent! The use of radiosity for one eye view and not the
other introduces retinal rivalry, which some think should be
avoided, but I don't, I think it adds a glowing effect.

Harold

omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:388086b1@news.povray.org...
> By partly radiositied I mean only one side of the stereopair used it, the
other
> is lit with a bright light and has more than default ambient as well.
Both were
> darkened somewhat by raising the 'assumed_gamma'....

Post a reply to this message

> Now this one really stands out.  Why three images?  I only got two eyes. :)

He said it's both a cross-eye and a parallel. The left two are viewed one way
and the right two the other.

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

I went and had a look at the actual piece, the windows are different but the stairs
have the exact same layout.

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

Yep, I don't think this model is an exact replica of the Relativity drawing.  I
checked this with the picture I have of it in a book and tried to align it
correctly before realizing I needed to mirror one axis by using 'scale
<-1,1,1>'.  Then I noticed the archway windows were continuing where they end in
the drawing (only supposed to be two in upper left corner).  It was no easy task
to arrange the camera into position anyway, believe me.
Not positive but I think I got the 3ds file at:
http://www.3dcafe.com/asp/architex.asp
called escher.zip

Bob

"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:38814AB2.EDD4AF7B@faricy.net...
> I went and had a look at the actual piece, the windows are different but the
stairs
> have the exact same layout.
>

Post a reply to this message

I tried to see depth in these Escher pictures, but I can't. Not considering
the changes (radiosity) to the middle one: are they something you rendered
with POV? There doesn't seem to be visible the typical POV plasticity about
them. When I look at two different pictures in detail using PS5, I don't see
very much difference in position between the objects that should be in front
and others that should be in the back, as you can observe in clearly 3D
picture sets. I try to understand what is going on here, but I don't...
Help!

--
Regards,
Sander


omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> schreef in berichtnieuws
388086b1@news.povray.org...
> By partly radiositied I mean only one side of the stereopair used it, the
other
> is lit with a bright light and has more than default ambient as well.
Both were
> darkened somewhat by raising the 'assumed_gamma'.
> Oh, and this is a combination crossed and parallel image too so all should
be
> happy.
> The Relativity model (Escher stairs I like to call it) was done by someone
else
> in Dxf format and I converted it over to Inc with 3DWinOGL (by Thomas
Baier).  I
> almost never got the thing positioned right, bet you can guess why.  To
explain
> what I was thinking of by doing the non-radiosity + radiosity renders it
occured
> to me how well suited stereopairs could be for merging images to cause
varied
> effects.  The light and dark changes from one to the other make for an
> interesting perception.  I've always kind of liked that.  Perhaps a good
way to
> describe the possibilities is to think of a window thats both lit and
unlit or a
> object which exists in only one image yet shows up in the resulting 3D
picture
> seemingly detached somehow.
>
> Bob

Post a reply to this message

I might make a POV gallery with this type of layout, if I ever get around to it.

--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___     ______________________________
 | \     |_       <dav### [at] faricynet>
 |_/avid |ontaine      <ICQ 55354965>

Post a reply to this message

Yes, I think the shift isn't too great.  The camera being a 'fisheye' with
'angle 160' doesn't help.  Although the shift in position is about the typical
ratio of 1 unit sideways to 30 units object distance mentioned before I also
didn't want it to be too much.  So it should look about like a very large open
area, which it is I guess, not a smaller room-sized area.
Admittedly I saw very little depth in it which is why I shifted the camera even
further than a first trial at it.  Think you could be right and it lacks enough
3D depth nonetheless, the I've always used a 'perspective' camera with something
like 'angle 22.5' (odd number, I know) for them.

Bob

"Sander" <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in message news:38823d3a@news.povray.org...
> I tried to see depth in these Escher pictures, but I can't. Not considering
> the changes (radiosity) to the middle one: are they something you rendered
> with POV? There doesn't seem to be visible the typical POV plasticity about
> them. When I look at two different pictures in detail using PS5, I don't see
> very much difference in position between the objects that should be in front
> and others that should be in the back, as you can observe in clearly 3D
> picture sets. I try to understand what is going on here, but I don't...
> Help!
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sander
>
>
> omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 388086b1@news.povray.org...
> > By partly radiositied I mean only one side of the stereopair used it, the
> other
> > is lit with a bright light and has more than default ambient as well.
> Both were
> > darkened somewhat by raising the 'assumed_gamma'.
> > Oh, and this is a combination crossed and parallel image too so all should
> be
> > happy.
> > The Relativity model (Escher stairs I like to call it) was done by someone
> else
> > in Dxf format and I converted it over to Inc with 3DWinOGL (by Thomas
> Baier).  I
> > almost never got the thing positioned right, bet you can guess why.  To
> explain
> > what I was thinking of by doing the non-radiosity + radiosity renders it
> occured
> > to me how well suited stereopairs could be for merging images to cause
> varied
> > effects.  The light and dark changes from one to the other make for an
> > interesting perception.  I've always kind of liked that.  Perhaps a good
> way to
> > describe the possibilities is to think of a window thats both lit and
> unlit or a
> > object which exists in only one image yet shows up in the resulting 3D
> picture
> > seemingly detached somehow.
> >
> > Bob
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

I should have also stated before that the crossed pair is left/center and the
diverged pair right/center.  Just realized I never even said that.  I lose
points that way, I know, sorry  ;-)

Bob

"Sander" <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in message news:38823d3a@news.povray.org...
> I tried to see depth in these Escher pictures, but I can't. Not considering
> the changes (radiosity) to the middle one: are they something you rendered
> with POV? There doesn't seem to be visible the typical POV plasticity about
> them. When I look at two different pictures in detail using PS5, I don't see
> very much difference in position between the objects that should be in front
> and others that should be in the back, as you can observe in clearly 3D
> picture sets. I try to understand what is going on here, but I don't...
> Help!
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sander
>
>
> omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 388086b1@news.povray.org...
> > By partly radiositied I mean only one side of the stereopair used it, the
> other
> > is lit with a bright light and has more than default ambient as well.
> Both were
> > darkened somewhat by raising the 'assumed_gamma'.
> > Oh, and this is a combination crossed and parallel image too so all should
> be
> > happy.
> > The Relativity model (Escher stairs I like to call it) was done by someone
> else
> > in Dxf format and I converted it over to Inc with 3DWinOGL (by Thomas
> Baier).  I
> > almost never got the thing positioned right, bet you can guess why.  To
> explain
> > what I was thinking of by doing the non-radiosity + radiosity renders it
> occured
> > to me how well suited stereopairs could be for merging images to cause
> varied
> > effects.  The light and dark changes from one to the other make for an
> > interesting perception.  I've always kind of liked that.  Perhaps a good
> way to
> > describe the possibilities is to think of a window thats both lit and
> unlit or a
> > object which exists in only one image yet shows up in the resulting 3D
> picture
> > seemingly detached somehow.
> >
> > Bob
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message