[photo-3d] Stereo image web presentation (was Re: Depth ranges)

[abram.klooswyk@xxxxxx]

David Kesner wrote:
> Each image is only 400 pixels wide which makes a stereo pair
> 800 wide. I thought this was a good size as most everyone is
> running at least 800x600 screens.

But Paul Talbot said: 
> It is a good idea, IMO, to use less than 800 pixels...
> At a minimum, the browser's up/down scroll bar will
> take up part of the 800 pixel screen width, making
> it impossible to see 100% of both the left and right
> image on the screen at the same time.

I my opinion David's ladybug-porno-triplet is fine on screen 
(display technically that is), but it indeed could be just
a little narrower, the black left and right margins fall off 
(800x600 screen). And I not immediately noticed that it _was_
a triplet, only after seeing the horizontal scroll bar.

The triplet presentation is OK for me, but I mostly fuse 
cross-eyed, I cannot view parallel with 13 cm and more 
separations (at normal distances) and I don't always have a 
screen stereoscope at hand. 
So Paul's suggestion of pages with small L-R images and other 
pages with large R-L images might be better. But on-screen 
resolution will be lower with smaller images (less screen 
pixels for same content).

But I cannot understand why Paul needed the marking L-R-L,
for an image with so much depth, in which pseudoscopy is so
obvious when you look at it that way. Assuming L-R-L is the
standard seem OK.

The too large depth content doesn't much harm in this particular
case, maybe because of the captivating foreground scene, and 
because the background is out of focus. You couldn't get away 
with it in projection I believe (apart from censorship), but in 
stereoscope viewing or on the computer screen it is viewable, 
although such large depth ranges probably should be exceptions 
(of cause some scenes make you forget about stereo technique). 

Abram Klooswyk