Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D
|
|
Notice |
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
|
|
Re: Subject: Twin lenticulars
- From: P3D Lew Clayman/K Szafran <kandlew@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Subject: Twin lenticulars
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 21:55:11 -0400
>I know this is a strange question, but here goes anyway.
>
>If you were to take a side by side or slidebar photo with lenticular cameras
>what would they look like when viewed as a stereo pair? Would you even be
>able to view them this way? Has anyone ever tried it?
I haven't tried it either, but I think I probably will. If I do, I'll let
everyone know how it goes.
I think that the result will be as follows -
With a single lenticular, you get a stereo image because each eye is
presented with a different mono image. Each single lenticule presents one
of many (say, three) images depending upon the viewing angle, which
necessarily varies due to the separation of the eyes. This is also the trick
behind those "moving lenticulars" which present sequential motion-picture
frames as you rotate the card.
If you take two lenticular prints, and free-view them, then each eye
receives a mono image, one selected from print "A" and one from print "B."
If they were shot stereo-style (side-by-side) then you should get a valid
stereo effect, just like free-viewing a pair of mono still prints.
However, to get the standard stero effect you need have the two lenticulars
arranged in parallel so that the "leftmost" image of print "A" and the
"leftmost" of "B" are presented at the same time - you can rotate them,
again in lockstep, and you should continue to get valid stereo pairs as if
dollying through slightly different base points around the subject. The
"rightmost" pair should be "furthest way from" the "leftmost" pair.
If you have the two lenticular prints out of allignment, you will be
presented with two "mismatched" mono images. This will create either hypo
or hyper effects, depending upon whether the angle between prints is acute
or obtuse, rather than parallel.
Of course, I also might be either acute or obtuse. If both, I might be
complementary. I may even be right! It's hard to tell from this perspective...
-Lew
------------------------------
|