Re: Anaglyph 3D

[P3D Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 20:12:43 -0500
>From: P3D Marvin Jones writes:
>
>I recently wrote a note to the group commenting on the fact that in
>anaglyph presentations the red lens is traditionally and almost universally
>placed on the left eye, and wondering whether there was any reason other
>than the fact that it was "different" that several people had commented
>that it didn't look "quite right" when the colors are reversed. I seem to
>have run afoul of Dan Symmes, unquestionably one of the world's foremost
>authorities on 3D, who prefers the red/right configuration, responded with
>a personal E-mail questioning both my facts and my character for making
>such a comment. To further discussion, I am reproducing his entire letter,
>intersperced with my replies below:

*******  It appears that Dan feels strongly about using red/right as he
wrote personal letters to myself and Lawrence Kaufman too. In it he
acknowledged that red/left is an arbitrary designation and supported his use
of the red/right by telling of his many successful presentations which used
that method. Despite his success in using red/right, there is no supporting
evidence that any actual difference exists to support either method as
better than the other.

I made the point in my response to him that staying with the arbitrary but
established and widely used red/left could reduce confusion in the audiences
and increase general acceptance for 3D.

>From his extensive listing of his own film and TV related credits, I suspect
that most of the examples of red/right related to either movies or TV is due
in large part to his personal preference. I see it as no more than personal
preference.

He also made a point about the goal of *majority satisfaction*. I cannot
agree that red/right meets that goal because most in the audience who have
any familiarity with anaglyphics (which is a large portion of an audience
these days) will experience a certain irritation and dissatisfaction at the
switch, especially if they still have their glasses from some other show or
purpose. I think *majority satisfaction* is best met by following the
expected standard.

There is a potential advantage to using red/right which relates to
psychological factors by being different from what people expect. As to
whether this psychological difference is an overall advantage for 3D, is
anybody's guess and only a guess. Either method requires you to wear the
glasses long enough to allow the mind to ignore the color based retinal rivalry.

So which is better overall for getting 3D to be more widely accepted, to
make use of both orientations and maintain a level of confusion which can
perhaps be stimulating? Or stick to an established standard of red/left so
that a presentation remains consistent with most of the other anaglyphic uses?

While my first response to this is to stick with a standard, I'm not one to
necessarily stick to a standard, especially where it is really as arbitrary
as which side should be red. I'm open minded enough to think there may be an
advantage to the stimulus of doing things differently, but there is no
*authority* that truly knows the answer to this.



Larry Berlin

Email: lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.sonic.net/~lberlin/
http://3dzine.simplenet.com/


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