Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Zenman53186

I'm not sure! What do you think?

(the link is included for those who want to go see examples)

One of the problems with stereoscopic is you need glasses (for anaglyph at least). I also see the images you post are in side-by-side, requiring additional processing before I can view them in anaglyph. Not a lot of people have a pair of these red-blue glasses lying around. I know there is a way to "free-view" them, like those old magic eye pictures...but I can't see them that way. Maybe with new technologies, stereoscopic images will take off...then again...because of all the complexities, probably not...

I have and will continue to do so in the future. The first problem, I think, is that there are several ways to view stereoscopic images and I'll annotate each: * cross-eye defocusing - gratis, but requires some skill. I can do this occassionally, but only for limited periods of time. This only works for sufficiently small images (with respect to distance) and can be painful (result in headaches or dizziness). * stereogram - interesting, but that's about it. ;) * red/blue anaglyph - cheap and easy (what we're all looking for). But they don't work with color images well and do not provide the amount of depth as the color differences between eyes vary and are subtle. * stereoscopic glasses with a CRT monitor - this is a good mid-level approach. This is the one that I use. The problem here is the current ubiquity of LCD monitors, which are incapable of doing the interleaving, persistence, and scan-rates of CRT monitors. Also, you need a video card capable of doing 3D stereo in drivers. ATI, for instance, still doesn't have 3D Stereoscopic support whatsoever (last I looked). * stereoscopic headset - with LCD monitors embedded. One of the best ways to view stereo images, but alas, one of the most expensive and fragile markets around. They come and go frequently, usually with no support after short time periods. * stereoscopic monitor - this is new technology and is therefore still very expensive (in the $3000-$15000 range). These monitors do what the stereoscopic glasses do without the glasses. NOTE: In general, all stereoscopic viewing has the potential to disorient the viewer or cause headaches and dizziness with prolonged use. The second problem is software with which to view, create, or convert images. There are many formats available, but most software supports a limited set. I use something called "Stereo Image Factory" which is really great for viewing, creation, and format conversion. But there aren't many others. So you have side-by-side images, single images that need to be combined, interleaved images, and several more proprietary formats. This lack of support and standardization makes for difficulty in ubiquitous creation and distribution. So, the reason for the dirth of stereoscopic 3D images is that few people have everything required, the financial resources, and/or an interest. Additionally, a quality 3D rendering takes time. To do stereoscopics, you need to double the time. There seem to be by far more stereoscopic photographers, but you can't get them to photograph the scenes you'd like. :)

Great post kuroyume0161. That pretty much sums it up... :D

I thought there was a tutorial on creating images like that out here already. I have made a couple of small ones before, but I dont think the headache thing is a big problems since most people [most] dont sit and stare at it for hours, just a minute or two to get the effect.

I prefer the analglyph type, they are easier to see, I did one of these at rendervisions.

Images like these don't work too well for people with certain eye sight problems. I have a dominant left eye and don't really use my right eye to see. I also have severe astigmatism. I just don't see the pictures the way the rest of you do. Due to my glasses, cross eye don't work too well.

If you can`t see these pictures they can be converted to analglyphs quite easily.

Personally I don't get them :-) Id rather just look at a picture, than have to work to see it the way the artist intended. What are they supposed to do? Be seen as 3-D? Maybe I am just lazy LOL. Sarah

Attached Link: http://rendervisions.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1045

Attached Link: http://www.stereoeye.jp/software/index_e.html

It's interesting the comments on having trouble with "crossing eyes" when viewing my stereo renders. I've never had a problem doing so, and just assumed others could do it as well. I view mine very easily at full size (although I don't do it for many minutes because I do feel the strain).

Jim Burton, when I cross my eyes on your image above, the depth perception is reversed; that is, the cannon is closer. The images are arranged to be viewed in a parallel fashion (the "parallel" approach). The images are reversed from how I present mine (the "cross-eye" approach). I've read that to see the parallel type requires de-focusing until the images join in the middle or the use of a stereoscope (3D Viewmaster, anyone?)...while mine requires crossing the eyes. I've never been able to see the "parallel" type properly.

I do not enjoy anaglyphs much at all; I can see so much clearer using the "cross eye" format that anaglyphs seem a very poor second.

Here's another consideration I don't think people take into account with anaglyphs... I'm sure I'm not the only person on this site with a disorder called Scotopic Sensitivity Syndrome (also called Irlen Syndrome, and it's estimated that at least half the people diagnosed with ADHD really have Irlen syndrome and not ADHD as a number of the symptoms are the same). It basically makes you hyper-sensitive to certain colors. For me, that color is a shade of red. That makes anaglyphs unviewable to me, as the red portion of the image completely overpowers everything else, even with the 3D glasses. The condition is easily corrected with a pair of glasses specifically tinted to the color your eyes take in to much of, but without them, or putting the 3D glasses over my regular glasses quickly leads to disorientation and nausea...

Message edited on: 07/15/2005 08:37

With the parallel pictures, you can use two magnifying glasses to make the pictures merge together.

kuroyume0161, what viewer are you using with your glasses to view 2D images. I've still got my Revelator 3D page flipping glasses (liquid crystals blank each eye one at a time while the monitor displays the image for the eye that can still see). They work my NVIDIA graphics card, but the 3D viewer they supplied ruins the 3D effect by somehow rescanning the image and compressing it so that the pair of images have different levels of artifacting that throw away the stereoscopic effect. One of the cool things about these glasses and having NVIDIA support is that most 3D games can be viewed in 3D.

I'm in a boat similar to Kristta. Indeed, roughly 35% of the population is in a similar boat. Part of the reason for so many different variants is they are all trying to overcome something to do with inability of people to see the effect. It's kinda sad. I like 3D stuff -- I can see most holograms and holographs fine, but stereoscopic anyting is pretty much lost to me :( last time I took my kids to see a movie in 3D, we bought all the special stuff for them, but then I left and read a book.

Attached Link: http://stereo.jpn.org/eng/