Re: Computer Compositing

[T3D Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

john bercovitz  writes:
>Well now that you mention it, I'm not sure.  Here's what Michael
>wrote:
>
>> One friend of mine, B.D., who has been making stereo photographs 
>> since before I was born, supposed that all one needed to do to 
>> turn a flattie into stereo, would be to scan a photograph, 
>> rotate it a degree or two, scan it again and rotate it the other 
>> way a degree or two.  I explained that the result would look 
>> like a perfectly flat photograph that had been curled around a 
>> vertical axis.  Each eye would see exactly the same information, 
>> however, a distortion field would be present that would cause 
>> curvature of the plane.
>
>I interpreted this to mean that he tilted the flattie in the 
>scanner: one direction to get a left view and the other direction 
>to get a right view.  But I may be way off base here.  Only 
>Michael can tell and he ain't talkin'.  8-)

************  You're right and we still don't know the original intention.
He could have meant any of several rotations.

>> Every simulation of keystoning (the result of his original 
>> thought) that I create in the computer results in a rotated but 
>> still flat plane that represents the original photo.
>
>Now that's interesting and I think some of your suggestions as to 
>why this might be are quite likely the reason.  Perhaps, as you 
>say, the amount of keystoning is not noticeable.
>
>John B

************   When I get a few other things taken care of I hope to put a
couple examples of this together (along with examples of the
intrinsic/extrinsic parallax). In my own experiments I used extreme
keystoning hoping to see a dramatic curvature. It wasn't there. I need to
try the same thing in a 3D program. So far I've been using 2D software.

Larry Berlin


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