I wonder if there are 3D symbols - looking at those you can quickly recognize
hint at 3D. At this moment I think about universal Utah Teapot (used widely
from ToyStory to Pov) and two pov symbols - reflective sphere over checkered
plane and new pov logo. Are there others 3D symbols ? What about:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/data/3Dscanrep/bunny.jpg

ABX

Post a reply to this message

Isometrically projected XYZ axes.
Wireframe view of pretty much anything.
Out-of-phase red and blue image of something.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

The Cornell Box.


news:4eugguo5bko6voldk18rf3a25afktnr7qg@4ax.com...
> I wonder if there are 3D symbols - looking at those you can quickly
recognize
> hint at 3D. At this moment I think about universal Utah Teapot (used
widely
> from ToyStory to Pov) and two pov symbols - reflective sphere over
checkered
> plane and new pov logo. Are there others 3D symbols ? What about:
> http://graphics.stanford.edu/data/3Dscanrep/bunny.jpg
>
> ABX

Post a reply to this message

>I wonder if there are 3D symbols - looking at those you can quickly recognize
>hint at 3D.

  Tall pillars, also seen as the railing supports in "Toy Story".

-- 
Alan
ako### [at] povrayorg
a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote in message
news:3D0### [at] bellsouthnet...
> Out-of-phase red and blue image of something.

Of course ABX is referring to the current dominant use
of the term; to refer specifically to computer graphics
derived from rendering algorithms based on three (or
more) dimensions. Prior to the current use the term was
used, for over 100 years, to refer to stereoscopic imaging.
The representation of depth through two perspectives.
Those of us who are stereoscopy enthusiasts are sometimes
irritated by the arrogant stealing of our term "3D" for a
different application. After all, the 3D movies of the 20's,
through the 1980's, did have any "3D graphics".

Then to have anaglyphic stereoscopy (red/blue) described
as "out-of-phase" is, well... quite an insult. Anaglyphic
stereo is arguably the worst format, but most common
because it is the cheapest to produce, but if it were out
of phase it would be flat and blurry.

To the stereo enthusiast it doesn't make much sense
to call a flat image "3D" just because of the algorithms
used to produce it. The image is just as flat as any
other 2D print, such as a photograph, which is also
"3D" (the real world) in its origin.

Although the appropriation of the term for computer
graphics creates some confusion for stereoscopy,
there is no use in stereo enthusiasts trying to stop the
change in terminology. That would be a waste of time.
Computer graphics are truly 3D in origin and the
depth can be viewed through either stereoscopic
presentation, interaction with the virtual environment,
or animation.

So stereo enthusiast are trying to take back another
term that was taken away: STEREO. Originally the
term stereo was applied almost exclusively to
stereoscopic imaging. That was the case for over
80 years, until "HiFi" was replaced by the term
"stereo" for audio equipment with two speakers,
around the 1950's. Of course that didn't bother
people because stereoscopic photos, movies, and
comic books were "3D" :-)

So long live STEREO and 3D, best experienced
when combined with a good surround sound
system ;-)

Harolddd

Post a reply to this message

"Harold Baize" <bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote :
>
> To the stereo enthusiast it doesn't make much sense
> to call a flat image "3D" just because of the algorithms
> used to produce it. The image is just as flat as any
> other 2D print, such as a photograph, which is also
> "3D" (the real world) in its origin.
>
> Although the appropriation of the term for computer
> graphics creates some confusion for stereoscopy,
> there is no use in stereo enthusiasts trying to stop the
> change in terminology. That would be a waste of time.
> Computer graphics are truly 3D in origin and the
> depth can be viewed through either stereoscopic
> presentation, interaction with the virtual environment,
> or animation.

    I was going to mention that for our purposes, unless it is animated, any
3D symbol is basically the same as a flat symbol.

> So stereo enthusiast are trying to take back another
> term that was taken away: STEREO. Originally the
> term stereo was applied almost exclusively to
> stereoscopic imaging. That was the case for over
> 80 years, until "HiFi" was replaced by the term
> "stereo" for audio equipment with two speakers,
> around the 1950's.

    Eh... no. HiFi, or high fidelity, is quite different from stereo in
audio usage. The reason it seems to have suplanted HiFi is that in audio
equipment, it is hardly necessary to mention that it is high fidelity any
more, since almost all of it is.

    In VCRs you will still find that HiFi and stereo are both noted when
present. I have a VCR that is stero and HiFi, and another that is Hi Fi and
not stereo.


> So long live STEREO and 3D, best experienced
> when combined with a good surround sound
> system ;-)

    Whatever happened to quadraphonic?

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt wrote:

>  Whatever happened to quadraphonic?

It got supplanted by 5.1 digital audio ;)

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Bill DeWitt" <bde### [at] cflrrcom> wrote in message
news:3d08fb52$1@news.povray.org...

>     I was going to mention that for our purposes, unless it is animated,
any
> 3D symbol is basically the same as a flat symbol.

In fairness to ABX though, and in spite of my diatribe
about 3D terminology, he is looking for some
common icon that indicates computer graphics based
on three dimensional geometry. Best candidates would
be the sphere on checked plane, or even more universal
the polar co-ordinate arrows. The Stanford rabbit is
more of an icon of capturing the geometry of real objects,
than the general domain of three dimensional graphics.

>     Eh... no. HiFi, or high fidelity, is quite different from stereo in
> audio usage. The reason it seems to have supplanted HiFi is that in audio
> equipment, it is hardly necessary to mention that it is high fidelity any
> more, since almost all of it is.

By "replaced" I just meant that it took over in common usage for
reference to high end audio systems. I know they have
different meanings. There are still purists who prefer a
monophonic high fidelity system over anything "stereo".
Unfortunately, most people today equate the word stereo
with sound, although very little audio today effectively creates a
"solid" sound (stereo means solid or having physical form; 3D).
Stereophonic should be sound that accurately recreates spatial
location, or adequately simulates the effect. Few stereo audio
recordings do that.  Binaural recording are true stereo sound.

>     In VCRs you will still find that HiFi and stereo are both noted when
> present. I have a VCR that is stero and HiFi, and another that is Hi Fi
and
> not stereo.

The irony is that the HiFi on a VCR refers to video quality, not
sound, and the stereo part refers to sound, not vision. A stereoscopy
enthusiast should expect a "stereo TV" to present an image with true
3D depth. Instead it is just sound coming from two speakers (and
usually not mixed correctly to provide stereophonic effect). The
changes in terminology have more to do with marketing than
accurate description of technology.

>     Whatever happened to quadraphonic?

Died from lack of interest and incompatible systems. Now living
in a slightly modified form as "surround sound". More and
more audio CDs are mixed for surround sound, although it
usually doesn't even mention it on the packaging.

HB

Post a reply to this message

Sorry, I was confusing HQ with HiFi here. The HiFi
does refer to audio.

> The irony is that the HiFi on a VCR refers to video quality, not
> sound, and the stereo part refers to sound, not vision.

Post a reply to this message

"Harold Baize" <bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote :
>
> >     In VCRs you will still find that HiFi and stereo are both noted when
> > present. I have a VCR that is stero and HiFi, and another that is Hi Fi
> and
> > not stereo.
>
> The irony is that the HiFi on a VCR refers to video quality, not
> sound, and the stereo part refers to sound, not vision.

    That would be ironic, but I think it's not quite true. HiFi refers to
sound. And stereo to me relates to anything that has two sources that
combine to make a single spatial awareness. Since we have stereo hearing and
sight, it could be video or audio.

> A stereoscopy
> enthusiast should expect a "stereo TV" to present an image with true
> 3D depth. Instead it is just sound coming from two speakers (and
> usually not mixed correctly to provide stereophonic effect).

    I am usually disappointed in the stereophonic effects of most music I
hear. Sometimes they go too far and have sounds sweeping around like angry
bees, and other times they simply place sounds on the left or right and
leave them there. Stereo sound is an artists tool that should be used and
not abused.

Post a reply to this message