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]

Web vs. other presentation media


  • From: P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Web vs. other presentation media
  • Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:15:59 -0400 (EDT)

Dan Shelley wrote:

>2.) I find that 3D images for the web _seem_ to look better if they are
>slightly hyper. In other words, I think you can lose a certain amount of
>the "stereo imformation" when the image is prepared for web
>presentation. Having slightly exagerated 3D seems to help off-set that.

And Adam replies:

>6.  Dan mentions that by exaggerating the effect so that it is slightly 
>hyper it enhances digital images.  When creating them in Photoshop, 
>I previewed them and created the best effect possible (be it 
>hyper or normal or even hypo (although I don't know if there 
>actually are any hypos)) IMHO.
 
Dan is referring to the original photography, not the subsequent
image manipulation.  Since you used a Realist to take those pictures, they
are, by definition, "normal" stereos.  You can not change them to hyper
or hypo through simple image manipulation/presentation (they could be
changed through considerable work, but that's not what you have done.)

Dan is suggesting that stereos with a stronger 3d effect will work better
for the web.  Such images can be obtained with a "normal" stereo camera
(2.5" separation) by getting closer to your subject or maintaining a closer
foreground or they can also be obtained with a twin camera system with 6"
or more lens' separation to record "normal" scenes (hyperstereo).

Note that what works well for the web does not necessarily work well for
other presentation media.  For example, slide projection does not
necessarily need a strong 3d effect, but it can be disappointing if a
scenic is almost flat.  Flatter pictures are better appreciated in a viewer
(both slide and print) where detail and photographic qualities are better
observed and in many cases are more important than the stereo effect.

As a result, stereo photographers that work in different media often pick
different pictures to present, based on how effective each picture is for
the given medium.   As Adam continues to build up his stereo collection, I
am sure he will do the same.

George Themelis


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