 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / Australian Photography / June 2008More bad 3D images and lessons learned..
At the risk of further eyestrain, herewith two more cross-eyed stereograms: http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_brisbane.jpg http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_colacan.jpg They are not very good - but it's all part of the learning experience and it's nice to have a new weapon in the arsenal.. What I learnt here: - the most effective shots have a range of close, mid- and long-distance objects, unlike those two! These shots have a very flat looking background, because there is little in the middle distance tying the foreground to the cityscape. - you can overdo the separation - I find these quite hard to lock onto and hold in 3D mode. They hurt my eyes even more than the usual ones, especially the second! And as before, either you need to shoot via two cameras simultaneously, or be prepared for problems if anything moves (eg that boat..) I'll try again later, and maybe also concentrate on finding scenes that are in portrait mode to try to lessen the eye strain.. For those interested, AC and Jeff R posted better examples here: http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a02e03f2d8528ee3/ I apologise for incorrect attribution... > For those interested, AC and Jeff R posted better examples here: > http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a02e03f2d8528ee3/ It was of course *Troy Piggins* and Jeff R - sorry. * Mark Thomas wrote : > I apologise for incorrect attribution... > >> For those interested, AC and Jeff R posted better examples here: >> http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a02e03f2d8528ee3/ > > It was of course *Troy Piggins* and Jeff R - sorry. No worries mate. Mine weren't /that/ good.  SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. >I apologise for incorrect attribution... > >> For those interested, AC and Jeff R posted better examples here: >> http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a02e03f2d8528ee3/ > It was of course *Troy Piggins* and Jeff R - sorry. whew, I was scratching my head trying to think when I posted any stereogram's :-) and considering my stereopsis prevents me from seeing them, I imagine any I post would be complete shite :-) Signature"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color." Don Hirschberg > whew, I was scratching my head trying to think when I posted any > stereogram's :-) > and considering my stereopsis prevents me from seeing them, I imagine any > I post would be complete shite :-) Maybe you have stereoblindness - the lack of stereopsis. >> whew, I was scratching my head trying to think when I posted any >> stereogram's :-) >> and considering my stereopsis prevents me from seeing them, I imagine any >> I post would be complete shite :-) > > Maybe you have stereoblindness - the lack of stereopsis. My eyes are about 12 degrees out of alignment(not enough to notice if you looked at me) that's not a problem for day to day stuff as the brain has been compensating for over 40 years now and I don't notice any different, but I am totally unable to see any of those magic pictures or stereogram's, never have and never will, its not a problem for me :-) My Ophthalmologist called it stereopsis so I take his word for it :-) Signature"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color." Don Hirschberg >> I apologise for incorrect attribution... >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and considering my stereopsis prevents me from seeing them, I imagine any I > post would be complete shite :-) Heheh! First it was he-who-shall-not-be-mentioned, now it's *me* wrongly attributing stuff to you...! But you'll note that I apologised.. And hey, AC, I can try re-aligning them at 12° to suit your camber problems if you like, but I'll need to know which wheel... (O: >>> I apologise for incorrect attribution... >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > And hey, AC, I can try re-aligning them at 12° to suit your camber > problems if you like, but I'll need to know which wheel... (O: Maybe I'm just so memorable LOL and thanks for correcting yourself and apologizing, otherwise I would have just gotten more and more worried that my memory was failing me :-) Right eye ;-) born with Duane's retraction syndrome (and passed it on to my son:-( )so my right eye can move up, down, left, but not right, the left eye has complete movement, I have EXCELLENT peripheral vision in my right eye though, I can nearly see my right shoulder with my head looking straight ahead :-) SignatureGod made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom? * Mark Thomas wrote : > At the risk of further eyestrain, herewith two more cross-eyed > stereograms: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > They are not very good - but it's all part of the learning > experience and it's nice to have a new weapon in the arsenal. I don't mind them. Think the first is better - that handrail really comes out towards you, and while the bridge and city do look a little flat, but the sky does look beyond that. > What I learnt here: > > - the most effective shots have a range of close, mid- and > long-distance objects, unlike those two! These shots have a > very flat looking background, because there is little in the > middle distance tying the foreground to the cityscape. Agreed. I learnt that too. > - you can overdo the separation - I find these quite hard to > lock onto and hold in 3D mode. They hurt my eyes even more > than the usual ones, especially the second! I didn't have a problem with them. What separation did you have? > And as before, either you need to shoot via two cameras > simultaneously, or be prepared for problems if anything moves > (eg that boat..) Unless it's part of the main subject, I think that sort of thing is forgiven. As one of those transmission tower shots showed (not sure if it was yours of Jeff's), moving clouds seem to cause a distorted 3D effect. Need to take the 2 shots really soon after each other. > I'll try again later, and maybe also concentrate on finding > scenes that are in portrait mode to try to lessen the eye > strain.. Thanks for sharing them Mark :) > For those interested, AC and Jeff R posted better examples > here: > http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a02e03f2d8528ee3/ This guy has some awesome ones. Some are cross-eyes, some are those red/blue anaglyphs. http://www.flickr.com/photos/balliolman/ such as this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/balliolman/2535311325/in/photostream/ SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. >> - you can overdo the separation - I find these quite hard to >> lock onto and hold in 3D mode. They hurt my eyes even more >> than the usual ones, especially the second! > > I didn't have a problem with them. What separation did you have? Ermm.. about 12" I think.. (O: I just sorta moved a bit sideways.. It was intentional, as I wanted to know what would happen.. Perhaps I should go even further to see when it all comes 'unstuck', and how.. >> And as before, either you need to shoot via two cameras >> simultaneously, or be prepared for problems if anything moves [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is forgiven. As one of those transmission tower shots showed > (not sure if it was yours of Jeff's) Mine.. http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/weird3d.jpg I find that displaced or missing objects seem to 'glow' (not the right word but it's hard to describe) - is that normal or is my vision (brain?) weirder than I thought? > such as this: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/balliolman/2535311325/in/photostream/ Just had time to check that one - yes!! That is exactly the sort of scene this technique cries out for, imo. Got other things to do today, but I shall keep my eyes open.. > At the risk of further eyestrain, herewith two more cross-eyed > stereograms: > > http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_brisbane.jpg > http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_colacan.jpg Nice ones. Work well. As someone (who?) observed a little while ago - now we've got the technique down pat, we really aught'a find some - subject matter. :-) (Other than fences and handrails coming up close to us.) I'll set you a challenge Mark (and Brett and anyone else). *Without* using a dedicated stereo camera, (cheating), take and post a shot of a kid throwing a ball towards the camera. Ball must in flight, close(ish) to the camera(s). No fair faking it in ps. No strings allowed. No prize - just glory. -------- BTW, folks - over a month now and no mail to my PO box from you-know-who. I think I may have offended him. :-( -- Jeff R. >> http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_brisbane.jpg >> http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/stereo_colacan.jpg > > Nice ones. > Work well. Thanks. But don't patronise me!! (O: > As someone (who?) observed a little while ago - now we've got the > technique down pat, we really aught'a find some - subject matter. > > :-) Got me there... > I'll set you a challenge Mark (and Brett and anyone else). > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > No prize - just glory. Wait a minute... are we still talking stereograms? If so, that is quite a challenge! I'm mulling over it already... > BTW, folks - over a month now and no mail to my PO box from you-know-who. > I think I may have offended him. :-( Gee, there's a surprise. He's also got a valid address for me, but nothing will ever arrive. (O: Actually, I think it's getting close to his longest disappearance - he musta been really embarrassed... But then, that ridiculous 'panorama' of beachhouses was still up last time I looked.. Strange that he hasn't pulled it. > Wait a minute... are we still talking stereograms? If so, that is quite a > challenge! I'm mulling over it already... Well - yeahhh... (Not much challenge in a single portrait) Mind you - I can't see me doing this in the forseeable - I'm so busy doing my stepped-out panos... uhh, I mean looking up new ISPs since getting booted.... uhhhh.... Oh crap. I'll dust off the pair of Niks and find a ball.... > Actually, I think it's getting close to his longest disappearance - he > musta been really embarrassed... [gulp] I'd better start saving up for the booze for the party.... -- Jeff R. * Jeff R. wrote : >> At the risk of further eyestrain, herewith two more cross-eyed >> stereograms: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > No prize - just glory. I like the idea, but there's no way I could do that with only the one camera or without setting up an elaborate rig that will probably be beyond my MacGyver skillz. SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. >* Jeff R. wrote : >> *Without* using a dedicated stereo camera, (cheating), take and post a >> shot >> of a kid throwing a ball towards the camera. >> Ball must in flight, close(ish) to the camera(s). > I like the idea, but there's no way I could do that with only the > one camera or without setting up an elaborate rig that will > probably be beyond my MacGyver skillz. I am a bad person. I am perfectly willing to cheat. http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/stereo-rig.jpg Its not *really* a "dedicated stereo camera" - is it? Actually, the "challenge" would be a piece of cake to fake in ps - with two background shots of the kid and one shot of the ball (selected by itself). Not that I am advocating cheating, of course. ( I was going to insert a gratuitous D-Mac reference here, but I fear that's getting tiresome, so I'll be good.) -- Jeff R. > "Troy Piggins" <usenet-0...@piggo.com> wrote in message > >* Jeff R. wrote : [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > one camera or without setting up an elaborate rig that will > > probably be beyond my MacGyver skillz. Similar here - I don't have two matching cameras, so the synching would be.. er.. interesting.. > I am a bad person. > I am perfectly willing to cheat. > http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/stereo-rig.jpg Indeed - I wondered if you were conveniently pretending that rig isn't the equivalent of that dedicated stereo camera, and I reckon it is near enough.. > Actually, the "challenge" would be a piece of cake to fake in ps - > with two background shots of the kid and one shot of the ball > (selected by itself). And look *genuine*? Easier said than done, I think, but I might give it a try - I'll see if I can train him to freeze as he releases the ball - then I can use one genuine shot of the scene, then another of him from the second angle, then see if I can clone the ball, and make the necessary adjustments into the second one.. I reckon if the original first scene is a genuine unretouched image and you can then PS your way into a good stereogram, it remains pretty close to a photograph.. Other than that, I'm wondering if there is any way to do this with a large mirror... (and maybe smoke) > Not that I am advocating cheating, of course. > ( I was going to insert a gratuitous D-Mac reference here, but I fear that's > getting tiresome, so I'll be good.) It's worth noting (apart from one ongoing exception) that since he-who-shall-not-be-mentioned departed, everything seems very cordial. Even the spam seems to be dropping away... (O: But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? I can't help thinking that all these 'tricky' imaging techniques (HDR, general ps work, IR, stereo, etc) are all just extensions of what has been done in the past. (I even saw an article recently on doing cross-processing in PS, but I didn't think much of the real thing anyway..) Surely there is something new and exciting awaiting discovery..? Or maybe I should just go backwards, and try out daguerreotypes (sp?), or something.. > But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? I did forget one thing I still haven't done much with - I have a ~9-stop ND filter to try out. I must try to keep it in the back of my mind (there's plenty of room!).. so when a suitable scene appears for a daylight time exposure, I'll drag it out. >> But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? > > I did forget one thing I still haven't done much with - I have a ~9-stop > ND filter to try out. I must try to keep it in the back of my mind > (there's plenty of room!).. so when a suitable scene appears for a > daylight time exposure, I'll drag it out. There's an idea. I have my solar filters, but they will introduce *just a little* colour cast to the scene. But - what ps for, if not tweaking colour? -- Jeff R. * Mark Thomas wrote : >> But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? > > I did forget one thing I still haven't done much with - I have a ~9-stop > ND filter to try out. I must try to keep it in the back of my mind > (there's plenty of room!).. so when a suitable scene appears for a > daylight time exposure, I'll drag it out. *snap* Me too! Just got one, but haven't had a chance to actually use it. I want some milky waterfalls or something. When and where are we going? :) SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. > * Mark Thomas wrote : >>> But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > *snap* Me too! Just got one, but haven't had a chance to > actually use it. I want some milky waterfalls or something. Is yours really also a 9-stop? If so, it might be a bit of overkill for waterfalls - it's gunna be REALLLY smooth... (O: I must sheepishly admit that I've never done that sort of 'milky' shot, and when I do decide to finally try that technique (with a much lesser ND or just in low light/low ISO/small aperture), I think it will be one-a-dem-seashore-at-sunset/rise-y shots, I think. I've just seen too many milky waterfalls for them to get me excited (or maybe it's my age..) But I reserve the right to change my mind, if I can find a really cool waterfall that is in reasonably easy hiking distance - I'm currently recovering from a dicky ankle.. > When and where are we going? :) Shall we meet half way - I seem to recall you are near Sydney, Troy? I was actually hoping that Jeff might come good for that party he promised, maybe within a month or 3 - perhaps we could tie it all together with an expedition? (O: (I'm not entirely joking...) (stay away, DM, STAY AWAY!!!) Jeff, you going to set a deadline for that event, or pike out? (O: mt > Jeff, you going to set a deadline for that event, or pike out? (O: I'm very fond of Kanangra Walls. Failing that, there's lots of nice walks around Katoomba/Bleakheath. (Ruined castle, Narrer-neck...) Of course, there's a pub 5 minutes walk from my place. My shout. Its been a month now. Whadd'ya reckon is reasonable? -- Jeff R. (not piking - no sir-eeeee) > mt >> Jeff, you going to set a deadline for that event, or pike out? (O: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Of course, there's a pub 5 minutes walk from my place. > My shout. Trubble is, *I'm* in SE Qld too, you know.. I think half way is a more reasonable compromise, so that would make it... oh I dunno, and I'm too lazy to look at the map right now.. > Its been a month now. Whadd'ya reckon is reasonable? I'd give it a couple at least. Although if we keep making it clear that there are some matters outstanding, like the apology to AC, the linear panorama, the outstanding legal documents, etc... we might keep stringing it out for much longer. And besides, I'll need to save up to afford the trip... Anyway, did you know I have a new employee? Name of Julian. Gave him a little basic training (he said he had already been trained, but when I tested him on the basics, it became clear whoever taught him photography didn't have a clue...) and then I sent him out today to try his hand at a stereogram. Here's what he came back with: http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/that_spot_in_manly.jpg Looks strangely familiar.. And the more I look at it, the more I think it just *cries out* for a linear panorama instead.. >>> Jeff, you going to set a deadline for that event, or pike out? (O: >> >> I'm very fond of Kanangra Walls. Love Kanangra Walls have some spectacular pans taken with both the Noblex and Technorama >> Failing that, there's lots of nice walks around Katoomba/Bleakheath. >> (Ruined castle, Narrer-neck...) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > reasonable compromise, so that would make it... > oh I dunno, and I'm too lazy to look at the map right now.. Hey Mark T Ill be up your way 5/6 next month to shoot that interchange pan at Southbank - staying at Kelvin Grove and taking a trip out to Macleay Island. r >> Of course, there's a pub 5 minutes walk from my place. >> My shout. > > Trubble is, *I'm* in SE Qld too, you know.. I think half way is a more > reasonable compromise, so that would make it... > oh I dunno, and I'm too lazy to look at the map right now.. Dang. I fell asleep in class. I thought you had a Manly connection and thusly were more local than that. It cost me $100 to fill my Falcon's tank a few days ago. I agree that long trips are -whilst not written off - requiring a little more circumspection than previously... > Anyway, did you know I have a new employee? Name of Julian. Gave him a > little basic training (he said he had already been trained, but when I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Looks strangely familiar.. And the more I look at it, the more I think it > just *cries out* for a linear panorama instead.. Pat him on the back. None too shabby. Maybe he can be "unlearnt" and saved after all. ...but surely he doesn't insist that's a "stepped-out" stereogram? Sigh.... Do I have to put up another satirical page, parodying you Queenslanders and your photographic prowess? -- Jeff R. (ducking and running) * Mark Thomas wrote : >> * Mark Thomas wrote : >>>> But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Is yours really also a 9-stop? If so, it might be a bit of overkill for > waterfalls - it's gunna be REALLLY smooth... (O: Oh, you're right. Mine is a 6-stop. B+W 1.8 ND filter. > I must sheepishly admit that I've never done that sort of 'milky' shot, > and when I do decide to finally try that technique (with a much lesser [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Shall we meet half way - I seem to recall you are near Sydney, Troy? Auchenflower, Brisbane. I was just down in Syd on hols for the long weekend. > I was actually hoping that Jeff might come good for that party he > promised, maybe within a month or 3 - perhaps we could tie it all [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jeff, you going to set a deadline for that event, or pike out? (O: SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. Troy Piggins wrote,on my timestamp of 19/06/2008 1:49 PM: > * Mark Thomas wrote : >>> But now I'm getting a little bored with stereograms, so what's next? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > actually use it. I want some milky waterfalls or something. > When and where are we going? :) Next time you're in Sydney on or after a rainy day, let me show you this place: http://wizofoz2k.deviantart.com/art/fairy-steps-58749512 http://wizofoz2k.deviantart.com/art/witches-hair-69060527 all hand-held, of course. Might even take you to the other place up the road: much larger falls... ;) * Jeff R. wrote : >>* Jeff R. wrote : > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I am perfectly willing to cheat. > http://www.mendosus.com/jpg/stereo-rig.jpg Oh I knew you had that rig. You'd posted it previously along with some stereograms :) > Its not *really* a "dedicated stereo camera" - is it? More dedicated than my sole dSLR ;) > Actually, the "challenge" would be a piece of cake to fake in ps - with two > background shots of the kid and one shot of the ball (selected by itself). I thought about that. I actually had a better idea of how to fake it without pasting the ball in PS - using a real ball taken in the same shots as the thrower to get the real perspective. Trick would be to suspend the ball with fishing line or something so it's actually stationary, and have the thrower hold still in a throwing stance while I take the 2 shots. >:) If the string shows up in the shots, clone it out. You bugger, you got /me/ thinking dirty... > Not that I am advocating cheating, of course. > ( I was going to insert a gratuitous D-Mac reference here, but I fear that's > getting tiresome, so I'll be good.) Appreciate that. SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. When I am doing these I have trouble remembering which pic was taken from the left and which from the right. You can tell by close examination of the pics. So is it correct to put the left photo on the right and vice-versa? I think that works best for cross-eyed viewing, but those with a Stereoscope (or whatever that thingy is called) will get better results if the pics are kept left/left and right/right. * Annika1980 wrote : > When I am doing these I have trouble remembering which pic was taken > from the left and which from the right. You can tell by close [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > called) will get better results if the pics are kept left/left and > right/right. You're going cross-eyed, so your right eye views the image on the left and vice versa. SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. > You're going cross-eyed, so your right eye views the image on the > left and vice versa. So does the image I took from the leftmost camera position go on the right? * Annika1980 wrote : >> You're going cross-eyed, so your right eye views the image on the >> left and vice versa. > > So does the image I took from the leftmost camera position go on the > right? Yep, that's the vice versa part. :) SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. > When I am doing these I have trouble remembering which pic was taken > from the left and which from the right. You can tell by close [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > called) will get better results if the pics are kept left/left and > right/right. For some reason, Bret, I thought of you when I saw this car: http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/car_stereo.jpg Reminds me of that butt-ugly thing you won. By the way, does anyone else get a strange (and stupid) desire to shift one's head sideways as you are viewing these, to be able to 'look around' objects... embarrassing! (O: * Mark Thomas wrote : >> When I am doing these I have trouble remembering which pic was taken >> from the left and which from the right. You can tell by close [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Reminds me of that butt-ugly thing you won. Lol. Nice 3D effect on that one. > By the way, does anyone else get a strange (and stupid) desire to shift > one's head sideways as you are viewing these, to be able to 'look > around' objects... embarrassing! (O: No. It's just you. You must be weird. :) SignatureTroy Piggins I always appreciate critique. >> When I am doing these I have trouble remembering which pic was taken >> from the left and which from the right. You can tell by close [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > one's head sideways as you are viewing these, to be able to 'look > around' objects... embarrassing! (O: Hello Mark Are you Evan Thomas' brother? He has a brother called Mark who is a photographer and computer consultant in Queensland. If so we are (distantly) related. Secret Squirrel SignatureIngrid Rose clandestin.ecureuil(insert missing symbol here)gmail.com > Hello Mark > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Secret Squirrel Hi, SS. No, as far as I know he isn't a relative.. unless via some distant historical pathways. I just goes to show how common we MT's are - in the small town I used to live in there were two other Mark Thomas's. One of them now works in the same place I used to (in marine research).. and another used to teach photography, as I did too in my spare time! Things got very confusing sometimes.. So now there's another in Qld? - I must look him up! cheers, mt >> Hello Mark >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > mt You may have to move states again. On Jun 24, 6:33 pm, Mark Thomas <markt@_don't_spam_marktphoto.com> wrote: > For some reason, Bret, I thought of you when I saw this car: > > http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/car_stereo.jpg > > Reminds me of that butt-ugly thing you won. I kept wanting to see the car stereo. Then I got the joke. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.