On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:50:08 +0100, "JC (Exether)" <no### [at] spamfr> wrote:

>Well I'll try moving my head very fast while alternatively blinking my 
>eyes, that should do the trick.   :-)

But be careful that nobody watches you doin this, otherwise you could
get one of these stylish jackets with infinite arms...;-)
-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:50:08 +0100, "JC (Exether)" <no### [at] spamfr> wrote:

>My question is : where can I find such glasses ??

In Germany you can get them in stores where you can buy optical
glasses. But be sure to buy anaglyphic glasses and not those
'pulfrich' ones with colored or colorless darkened glasses...
-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

Nice subject for stereoscopic anaglyph.
How did you make it? All my POV work is
for making stereo pairs. I don't usually produce
anaglyphs, but when I do I use to renders and
convert them to anaglyph in Paint Shop Pro.
Check out my 3D photos of the Burning Man festival.
  http://3dculture.com/bm3d

A few suggestions:

1. It is generally preferred to put objects behind the screen,
so things are not cut off by the edge (frame) of the image.
In stereoscopic photography this is called the "stereo window"
and when objects are cut off by the window it is called a
"window violation".

2. When making a red/blue anaglyph most people combine the
blue and green color channels (thus red/cyan). The resulting anaglyph
covers all the colors of the monitor phosphors and has a more pleasing
gray scale balance, not purple looking.

Keep up the fine 3D work :-)
Harolddd

"Erhard Ducke" <duc### [at] gentlemansclubde> wrote in message
news:600irv0o35v6olusg2srj8kl6768o35q38@4ax.com...
> Hi!
> I re-rendered the above picture as a anaglyphic 3D which you can watch
> with your red-and-green 3D glasses. The followup message contains the
> same one as a red-and-blue version (139 KB JPG).
> Hope you will enjoy the perspective...
> -- 
> Erhard Ducke
>
>

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:48:26 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
wrote:

>Check out my 3D photos of the Burning Man festival.
>  http://3dculture.com/bm3d

Done!
Very nice work, what cam do you use? I can see it on some pictures but
the resolution is too low...
Perspective seems to be a bit exxagerated so the lenses have more
distance than (my) eyes to give a greater effect?!
About 25 years ago I made many stereoscopic photos by simply taking
two shots with a horizontal distance similar to the eye distance (with
the disadvantage that only unmoving objects can be taken). From this
time I have no difficulties watching your parallel view pictures. Most
people I know cannot see the effect without training.
Finding the solution for these
original-and-falsification-riddle-pictures (don't know how they are
called in English) is very easy using this special kind of view ;-)

-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:48:26 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
wrote:

>Nice subject for stereoscopic anaglyph.
>How did you make it?

Quick and dirty: For the right view I colored light and fog blue and
for the left one red (after appropriate translation of the cam), the I
added the two pictures in my photo editor choosing the 'exclusion'
method for combining the layers...
If you are interested:
Look for 'Cubic Space Division' thread in the povray animation group,
I posted a divx avi file there. If you turn on the repeat or loop
function of your media player you can make a infinite journey through
the 'cubic space' ... 

-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

"Erhard Ducke" <duc### [at] gentlemansclubde> wrote
> Perspective seems to be a bit exxagerated so the lenses have more
> distance than (my) eyes to give a greater effect?!

The camera I use most is a FED Stereo, they were made in
Ukraine in the late 1980's. Not very reliable, but it has autoexposure.
The FED has a normal 62mm (65mm?) stereo separation.
On some shots I use a pair of twinned (synchronized) Pentax ZX-Ms,
the stereo base on those is a 6 inch minimum. The shots of the
man burning have a 10 inch stereo base.


> From this
> time I have no difficulties watching your parallel view pictures. Most
> people I know cannot see the effect without training.
> Finding the solution for these
> original-and-falsification-riddle-pictures (don't know how they are
> called in English) is very easy using this special kind of view ;-)

Here in the USA we call those "Magic Eye" or "Hidden Image"
stereograms. Originally they were called Random Dot Stereograms (RDS).
They are a good way to learn to "free view" (no glasses or viewer used).
I find it easier to use the cross eye method, but most people don't


Cheers,
Harolddd

Post a reply to this message

Erhard,

You should try this free program for working with
stereo images:

http://www3.zero.ad.jp/esuto/

Makes it very easy to make anaglyphs.

Harolddd

"Erhard Ducke" <duc### [at] gentlemansclubde> wrote in message
news:5m2lrvs4jhkmlovdro9cmburubk5iburdi@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:48:26 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
> wrote:
>
> >Nice subject for stereoscopic anaglyph.
> >How did you make it?
>
> Quick and dirty: For the right view I colored light and fog blue and
> for the left one red (after appropriate translation of the cam), the I
> added the two pictures in my photo editor choosing the 'exclusion'
> method for combining the layers...
> If you are interested:
> Look for 'Cubic Space Division' thread in the povray animation group,
> I posted a divx avi file there. If you turn on the repeat or loop
> function of your media player you can make a infinite journey through
> the 'cubic space' ...
>
> -- 
> Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:32:23 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
wrote:

>Here in the USA we call those "Magic Eye" or "Hidden Image"
>stereograms. Originally they were called Random Dot Stereograms (RDS).
>They are a good way to learn to "free view" (no glasses or viewer used).
>I find it easier to use the cross eye method, but most people don't

No, I mean those pictures that are often printed  in magazines. Mostly
they consist of two separate pictures, e.g. classical paintings. One
is the original and on the other one there are some parts of the
original modified. When you watch the two pictures you have to search
for the modified places, when you look 'parallel' to them like you do
with stereoscopic photos you see the difference much  faster...
-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

Ohhhh.... those. Yeah. free viewing them makes it easy!

"Erhard Ducke" <duc### [at] gentlemansclubde> wrote in message
news:np7lrv4c262qcanltih9hid9f1hne87vg9@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:32:23 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
> wrote:
>
> >Here in the USA we call those "Magic Eye" or "Hidden Image"
> >stereograms. Originally they were called Random Dot Stereograms (RDS).
> >They are a good way to learn to "free view" (no glasses or viewer used).
> >I find it easier to use the cross eye method, but most people don't
>
> No, I mean those pictures that are often printed  in magazines. Mostly
> they consist of two separate pictures, e.g. classical paintings. One
> is the original and on the other one there are some parts of the
> original modified. When you watch the two pictures you have to search
> for the modified places, when you look 'parallel' to them like you do
> with stereoscopic photos you see the difference much  faster...
> -- 
> Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:40:47 -0800, "Harold" <bai### [at] 3dculturecom>
wrote:

>Ohhhh.... those. Yeah. free viewing them makes it easy!


And...how are they named in English?
-- 
Erhard Ducke

Post a reply to this message