P3D Re From Euclid To Wheatstone and further on

[Peter Homer <P.J.Homer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Muyzers wrote


>In a previous message, Abram Klooswyk stated:
><<
>Some people still maintain that stereo drawings  were made before
>Wheatstone, they have a hard time in explaining why no stereo drawings
>with four scratches or a couple of dots survive from those times.
>...
>>>
>
>I'm one of those people. I might not be able to explain why no stereo
>drawings  have survived from times before Wheatstone, I believe stereo
>drawings  were made before his time.

 I think one of the important points about Wheastone is that he published a
paper on his work and by his time photography was developing and took up
stereo.
 If he or anyonelse had done it earlier it would have probably remained
very obscure.(and actual it is obscure as far as the majority are
concerned)


>Still, Abram Klooswyk continues:
><<
>In a talk on similar pictures a few years ago, I have argued that,
>when this computer output is called "3D", the perspective drawings
>and paintings from the Renaissance on *also* should be called "3D".
>>>
>
>Don't give people any ideas there! It wouldn't surprise me to read a
>publication about Leonardo's 3D drawings - no offense Leo.

I have mentioned this before but there is just a slim chance that Leonardo
may have produced some 3D drawings in our sense of the word IE stereo.
Because he seems to have built or at least illustrated a stereo version of
the camera obscura but I know of no evidence of any surviving drawings from
it or even that he ever used it to make any. Even if he did there is
nothing to indicate he would have viewed them that way as he did not invent
a stereoscope and need not have mastered free viewing.          P.J.Homer





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