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.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

Re: anaglyph terminology



Hi Ray, welcome to the list...

Ray Zone wrote:
> Andrew Woods wrote:
> >Standards?  are you kidding?  ;-)
> >
> >The terminology I prefer to use is:
> >1.  pseudo monochrome anaglyph
> >2.  pseudo colour anaglyph     - color if you wish :-)
> >3.  dunno...  I presume you are saying no use of intermediate colours,
> >              just 100% red, 100% blue, 100%blue+100%red or white.
> >   Anyone else know a term for this?
> >
> >Andrew Woods.
> 
> Ray Zone responds:
> 
> Why the use of the term "pseudo," Andrew?  Is it because the anaglyph image
> to the naked eye without the 'anaglyphoscopes' appears to be in colo(u)r?

I use the prefix "pseudo" (yes, I should have put a dash between the pseudo
and the monochrome) because the stereoscopic image as viewed through
the anaglyphic glasses is not really monochrome.  As in pseudo-random
numbers not really being truly random (in actual fact the numbers
are generated by a predictable algorithm).

I guess it's a bit like writing _ "monochrome" anaglyph _ .

> Of course, the apparent color image is rendered into  volumetric black and
> white when seen through the red/blue spectacles as approximately half the
> color information is lost to each eye.  

Well, it's not really black and white that the eyes see.  The left eye
will see a red image and the right eye will see a blue image (unless you
are Dan Symmes in which case you'll see red on the right).
The eyes do perform sort of a colour balance - so the left eye image looks
slightly less red (and similarly the right eye image looks slightly less
blue) - but the images don't look truly black and white.

It isn't the same as looking at a black and white stereopair (eg. through
a keystone viewer).
The anaglyphic colours are still evident to the eyes, which to be honest
looks kinda strange.

> So, in some respect, we are talking
> about an image in two ways: (1) as it appears to the naked eye without the
> 3-D glasses and (2) as it appears with them.

I was actually referring to the latter.

Andrew Woods                       http://info.curtin.edu.au/~iwoodsa


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

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2096
***************************
***************************
 Trouble? Send e-mail to 
 wier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 To unsubscribe select one of the following,
 place it in the BODY of a message and send it to:
 listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   unsubscribe photo-3d
   unsubscribe sell-3d
   unsubscribe mc68hc11
   unsubscribe overland-trails
   unsubscribe icom
 ***************************