How to view : You have to go crosseyed! The idea is to cross your eyes whilst still maintaining focus on the two images until they blend together to form one image in your view. Some people (like me luckily!) are naturally gifted with the ability to go crosseyed at will without anything to focus on. Others find it almost impossible. For those who find it difficult, put your index finger close to your screen, then slowly draw it back towards your face but maintain focus on your finger! When u get to the ideal crosseye position your brain should jump in when it sees the two images on the screen line up and say 'hey! its 3d!'. Best viewed from about a foot away, any closer and you will strain an eye muscle trying to maintain focus :)

Enjoy!

(I plan on doing many renders this way, as I find the 'fake' 3d adds realism to a picture and also is very easy to create digitally! :)

Soluble Hamster
The one, the only, dissolvable rodent.

This one stands out a bit more. Soluble Hamster The one, the only, dissolvable rodent.

I love 3D stereo views; do as many as you want. I've a few in my gallery if you have an interest (used to be a lot more, but most got lost when Renderosity did one of their upgrades, and I haven't gone through the effort of uploading them again).

Yes, it works fine. Probably because I already knew the trick. But this one really puts a strain on the eyes! You can actually move the two images closer to eachother without spoiling the effect. groping for some asperine

Smaller images and closer would help. As for myself, I prefer shutter glasses or headsets as compared to the strain of eye-crossing. If you have a utility, you can turn them into stereoscopic images (JPS or other) which either interlaces the two images together or puts both images in one file for page-flipping.

What program you using to produce the pictures?

What's the distance you should move the camera apart from the first image? I assume that if it's too far, it won't work right, and the same with too little?

I did this one playing around after someone posted about it on the Poser newgroup. I can not remember what the offset was now, but it came out pretty good. It was compostited in PSP for the final picture.

Camera Separation, in 3D graphics anyway, is a matter of proportion. In this case, it would be best to use the distance between the eyes of a standard model (like P4 male, V2/V3, Don, Judy, whomever). In C4D and LW, I set up a camera rig to accomplish this automatically - two cameras grouped into a hierarchy with the same target for "focus" on a particular object or area. This is the downside of real "stereoscopic cameras" (though there may be some that compensate for this) - that each lens does not angle towards the focal point as real eyes do. Real eyes both cross slightly and change their lens shape to focus.

... that's why reading for too long can give you eye strain. :)

Wow...I dont know what is scarier....when I first go crosseyed and everything is blurry, or after I stare that way for a while and it comes in crystal clear focus. Rawnrr

Try an animation in stereoscopics - WOW!!!

I think I well stick to my bi-color glasses and StereoMaker.

I tried this for a bit, just too hard on the eyes after awhile, but is fun to do. Move away from the screen to focus. Tashar 59

Err... Tashar, didn't you switch left and right? I see the background in the front!

Strange, I see it the right way. I read there were 2 ways people see these. Maybe I'm one of the oddballs. Yes I switched R/L, if I reverse them I see it wrong. Any one else see wrong way? I should have raised the camera up a bit so the bench back wasn't so straightand blended so much into the background. Tashar 59

I saw it the right way. But I'm having trouble confirming! ;)

I find these much more painful than those Magic Eye stereograms.

Very painful and hard to achieve at times. Although shutter glasses can also cause eye strain (and nausea, headaches, etc.) with too much use, much of that can be alleviated by limiting use (i.e.: taking breaks) and using high refresh rates on the monitor. Headsets are the best way, if not the most expensive!

Try this one, works best for me with my eyes about 6 inches from the screen. All the others are too big to work for me, maybe I'm not crosseyed enough!

Jim's and Tashar's pictures have the 'eyes' reversed so you have to look THROUGH the picture to see it properly, ie. go UNcrosseyed :) Which I can JUST manage to spread my eyes far enuff apart to focus on. Then have a migrane for an hour. :) My renders were all done with main and aux cameras set up at 100mm Focal, the same xyz dolly, same xz orbit, and with the aux camera offset on the yOrbit by +5 deg from the main. Any less and the effect is lessened, any more and the amount of information 'lost' by going too far around the model makes it look... strange on the edges. ie. hidden elbows, shadows enlongating too much etc. Shrug. Soluble Hamster The one, the only, dissolvable rodent.

I don't see anything reversed or wrong with Jim's and Tashar's pictures -- no offense, Soluble, but I find them a lot easier to focus than yours, which seem too far apart. (Though I do get yours at about three feet.) I can sit nearer to the screen with Tashar and Jim's. (Jim says to go to six inches, but I get more out of it at two feet.) It seems highly unlikely to me that either of them would not understand which angle goes with which eye -- I think you just have to face the fact that different people's eyes tackle this artificial focusing problem differently.

Bill

I look at mine the same way I did the Magic Eye ones, only way I can get it to work. I remember it took me a while to do it the first time (with the Magic Eye book), now they sort of "swim" into 3D after a couple of seconds.

So what is Majic Eye, I learned from a tutorial on a site that I can't find now, they had some free backgrounds to use for this. I find it easier to focus the way Jim and I do it. I don't think there is a right or wrong way of doing stereoscopic, just depends on what is the easiest on your eyes. Tashar 59

It is a book with a bunch of these kind if images, actually they aren't like these at all, they are sort of "fuzzy", but you look at them the same way. Your library might have a copy- after a couple of hours viewing it you can also get a REALLY big headache! Dare I say this here? I've done a couple more, they are in the General Discussions Forum at PoserPros. There is an explanition how they were done, too.

Thank-you. Tashar 59