Re: bi-ocular devices

[P3D Allan Woods <allanwx@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>My own experience of single lens 3-D microscopes is that the stereo
>becomes less noticeable at high powers perhaps due to the poor DOF
>another consequence presumably of the high angular aperture due to
>extreme close up ...
>...
>                                             P.J.Homer
>
Just to clarify things a bit, the 3-D info IS the depth of field you
want to discard as "poor."  William Carter refers to that as "Z-axis
resolution."

When I look with my own eyes, the world looks NOTHING like a Realist
slide.  I don't see everything in focus regardless of distance, nor
is everything perfectly lined up parallax-wise between my eyes.

3-D perception is a complex illusion, not soleley composed of two
distinct but unnatural images viewed by each eye.

Focus, or DOF is another important element.

Check out early "perspective" paintings...  look "real?"  look "natural?"

Just as what so many on this list refer to as "True" stereo ('Realist')
relies on the importance (to the exclusion of other clues) of two
images, single lens 3-D merely gives emphasis to a different 'clue.'

Flat cartoons rely on relative motion of planes of depth to create the
3-D illusion (another clue) yet things need to be moving in order for
that element to be perceived.

Remember, your brain can tell if something looks "out of focus" because
it is "near" or because it is "far" - 

allanwx@xxxxxxxxxx


------------------------------