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.
|
|
P3D Re: Re: P3D Re: Re: P3D Re: Re: A stupid (?) twin camera idea
- From: michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)
- Subject: P3D Re: Re: P3D Re: Re: P3D Re: Re: A stupid (?) twin camera idea
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 14:04:09 -0800
> Another way to say it is that the fields of view are only the same at that
> one distance. Imagine drawing two diverging lines in front of each lens
> representing the left & right boundaries of the field of view. These lines
> will diverge more quickly for the shorter lens, and the two sets of lines
> will only intersect at one distance...
I think the original question asked was whether magnification correction
by using different focal lengths would be useful to correct the inch or so
difference in locations of the two cameras. I think (hope) the answer is
yes -- although 28mm vs 50mm is much too extreme. It'd be more like 28mm
vs 28.3mm or some such. Perspective distortion by being an inch off won't
be corrected, but some correction of image size may be correctable and
useful. Or so it seems.
If I tilt my face to the left and look toward the right, I'm putting my
right eye closer to where I'm looking than where my left eye is. But
my eyes seem to still work okay even with the perspective difference
distortion between the eyes. So within limits, perspective distortion
seems not to be fatal. :-)
Mike K.
------------------------------
|