|
Hi Gug,
No need for you to stop writing your comments, we are all adults here. I used the word deviation incorrectly, I meant parallax. You had made the comment, "... the impossibilty for the human eyes to see in one stereo image objects that have different deviation angles. You can see only one angle at time. For this reason all image with frames by Brian is an incongruence and the
result is a bad and unconfortable view".
I interpreted this as if we can only focus on one angle/depth level at a time because our eyes re-focus ( correct me if i'm wrong) This makes sense but stereo images are full of different angles and depth levels!!
Are you saying that an anaglyph of a cactus is an uncomfortable view? The needles are all at different angles, or an anaglyph with a foreground, subject and background is an uncomfortable view because we can only focus on one depth level at a time? By "incongrunent series of angles" do you mean art??? At any rate don't leave the group (again) on my account :)
Tim
--- On Sat, 7/31/10, Guglielmo Menegatti <kems(-at-)magia.it> wrote:
From: Guglielmo Menegatti <kems(-at-)magia.it>
Subject: Re: [Anaglyphs] Attenion for all friends Wojtek, IMRE, Tim
To: anaglyphs(-at-)yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, July 31, 2010, 4:39 PM
Wojtek
this group is fantastic.
IMRE write that the rule of 1/30 is not good.
I reply to IMRE: use the 1/30 rule but add a distance between the first object.
This is the suggest formula
Minimum distance from the first subject (in meters) = 4 + distance between the photocameras (in cm)
IMRE reply me: I not understand
IMRE confuse a constant with a parametric value and write
<<So If use 2 cm base, the minimum distance is 4 meter +2 cm????
The number "4" is a constant and have not a dimension.
Tim reply a my message
<<Each object is at a different depth level and therfore at different deviation.
In other words each objects in a stereo image have a different angle?????
Tim has invented a new prespective: -)
I am complete surprised
Probably I stop to write my comment for a long period
Ciao
Guglielmo
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 6:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Anaglyphs] Attenion for all friends!!!!! !!!!!!
Gug,
This 1/30 rule is to the CLOSEST object, so, forget about your 'second' rule.
Cheers,
Wojtek
On Jul 31, 2010, at 1:52 AM, Imre dr.Zsolnai-Nagy wrote:
The rule of 1/30 is also ok, I prefer 1/40 but this is not important.
To resolve the problem that you have in some cases is to add a second rule.
The second rule is extremely simple and is the rule of the minimum distance.
The "Minimum distance" is the distance between the photocameras and the first subject
| 