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: 3D realism and focus cues
- From: michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)
- Subject: P3D Re: 3D realism and focus cues
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 21:00:40 -0800
> Since the silliness caused you to fail to see the appropriateness, let me
> rephrase: you have made some good points in your posts, but the particular
> statement to which I reacted contained a serious *logical error*, because it
> makes an *unsupported assumption* (if the choice of assumptions is regarded
> as part of the logical process).
>
> Your error was to assume that since a thing looks alright in a particular
> context, the brain will most likely not be perceptive enough to detect
> the inappropriateness in a different context. The bird analogy was one in
I see your point and it's quite valid. I was thinking
in more course terms. I also used the word "acceptable" to indicate
that although de-focusing correction may be better, being focussed
is also acceptable. My only support are all of my realist and
beamsplitter slides which are in total focus. I find them all
totally acceptable. But I admit that "acceptable" is a judgement
call. After seeing something better, they may not be.
> him to think about it - that might lead to a breakthrough. Some of the
> comments posted in response to Phil's post haven't been much more supportive
> than "humph - might not work - better not try". (Yours wasn't that strong.)
>
> Of course you can post whatever you want, but if it's something that might
> tend to *discourage* a person from pursuing an idea, I hope you will be
> extra careful to make sure that the line of reasoning is really valid.
I think I made a valid point, albeit not presented as diplomatically
as perhaps I should have. My apologies for that. I encourage all to
experiment as much as they have energy and time for! Anything short
of outright hype is fine by me.
> You mentioned real-time adjustment of interocular. Larry Berlin has also
> expressed interest in that. Maybe the two of you could cook up some ideas.
Maybe in a few years. The technology, IMO, isn't quite ripe yet other
than for very expensive prototypes. I'm also starting up on another
"want it out by yesterday" project so my time is limited for a while
longer anyway. :-(
>
> John R
>
>
Mike K.
P.S. - On an unrelated related subject, my Sun workstation upgrade with 24"
Monitor happens Tuesday morning, I'll see how and which direction it
curves..... can't wait. I use slightly shrunk stereocards for my
"background" image (easily freeviewed). We'll see how many fit
all at once. :-)
------------------------------
|