Re: Stereogram on the "Stereo Window"

[P3D Paul Talbot <ptww@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu 19 Jun Larry Berlin wrote, in part:

> Yes, one could choose to describe the movement of the window
> relative to the scene, but recognize that in doing so, the window
> itself relative to the viewer hasn't moved, regardless of
> viewing method. <snip>

> You can alter the actual perceived depth factor for that window, by
> rearranging the chip, especially if moving a full frame chip within
> a 5 perf window! If you try this you will see that the window,
> defined by the mount you choose, remains fixed while the scene
> moves in relation to the window,

Sounds good so far.

> while the window redefines itself for each example by the new
> relationship.

I have no idea what that part means.

Then on Fri 20 Jun Larry wrote, in part:

> ****  I submit that if you pay close attention, there is a perceptible
> enlargement of the window continuously as it recedes into the image
> with any chip adjustment.

I'm confused, Larry.  On Thursday you seem to be saying the
window is fixed and doesn't move, relative to the observer,
when the chips are adjusted.  On Friday you seem to be saying
something quite different.  Did DrT win a convert to his point
of view?

On the experiment I described with the 4P mount and the window
violations, the sides of the window that have no violations still
appear to be at their usual close location; that part of the window
has *not* receded into the scene.  That suggests to me that it is
the visual confusion caused by the violations, not the chip spacing
itself, that is altering the perceived location of the window.

Paul Talbot


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