P3D Re: Cyclopean Image

[Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999
>From: Ray Zone <r3dzone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>.................
>The perception of 3-D is a wonderful and (still) mysterious thing.  From
>the two slightly different (xy) or 'flat' left and right eye images the
>brain synthesizes the cyclopean 3-D image loaded with depth information.
>The cyclopean 3-D visual field
>is  a perceptual construct created in the brain and hence, you might say,
>an illusion.  This dynamic is the same whether the 3-D display is a
>stereoscope, a viewmaster, an anaglyph or a hologram.  Stereoscopic
>perception is made in the brain where it is completed as a perceptual
>construct from cerebral processing of parallax difference information
>between the two visual sets.


****  While I completely understand and agree with this discussion, I have
to object to the use of the term cyclopean in connection with the unity
state of stereo perception. 

According to myth, Cyclops was a one eyed creature. Therefore his vision was
2D not stereoscopic binocular vision. Not the same thing at all. Completely
diametrically the opposite. *Cyclopean* used rightly refers to the habitual
flattening of perception (an historical human trait), not the enhanced
property of comprehending depth and structure as a unified perception. The
mythical creature embodies one of the dark sides of the human psyche.

Stereoscopic binocular vision transcends the limits of Cyclop's physical
one-eyed constraint, as stereo imagery transcends 2D imagery.

>From the point of view of a stereo interested person, Cyclops is the *bad
guy*, not the hero. He represents by analogy, the forces of those who use
excuses like, *2D is fine for me, why would anyone else bother with
stereo3D?*...

Yes, there is a central unified perception that we gain from our two eyes,
and we can in a limited way represent that with a single 2D image (centered
spatially between two stereo views), but that's decidedly NOT what the brain
perceives in a stereo image. The term cyclopean could only truly refer to a
flattened somewhat artificial 2D version of our true perception. Perhaps
applicable to current network TV?  ;-)

Larry Berlin

Email: lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.sonic.net/~lberlin/
http://3dzine.simplenet.com/


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

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 3173
***************************