On 5/20/2012 6:01 PM, bionicdeepa wrote: Mounting! You are so last century Bill. I still mount my digital views, just like film, what has changed??? Ya gottaMessage 1 of 179 , May 20, 2012View Source
On 5/20/2012 6:01 PM, bionicdeepa wrote:
Mounting! You are so last century Bill.
I still mount my digital views, just like film, what has changed??? Ya gotta space the two views (aka mounting, as Dr. Hart mentions) ....
There is no 'mounting' in digital cinema.
Someone must create far point separations, or you instruct software to do such? I recall many posts where you talk about negative and positive parallax... I can only assume you were horizontally shifting the two images in regards to each other...
All of this discussion was regarding viewing the identical image on a small screen and a large screen and noting the visual difference.
As mentioned, I mentioned in all my posts about the infinity separation, I would have suspected you would have picked up on that, or noted that your graphic let the infinity separation fall wherever the scaling allowed it..... often undesirable window placement vs. the window.
Pleased to see that you agree that there is distortion. Why didnt you say that 300 posts ago :-)
cause you missed me writing this, for maybe 275 out of the 300 posts!! :-)
... Thank you for the negative globe, Steve. I can not experiment on this just now because I am not at home where I have the 3DTV. I have viewed it with SPMMessage 179 of 179 , Jun 8, 2012View Source--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "SMcQ" <smcquinn@...> wrote:
>Thank you for the negative globe, Steve.
> All Negative Parallax globe at ZP/IA Ratio 10, in photos section:
> It is odd how the axis tilt forward (30 degrees) creates the effect of the northern hemisphere bulging. There is nothing in the geometry or stereography to support this, it is a psychological effect owing to the projected curvature of latitude and longitude lines.
> The shift of zero parallax to the back of the globe was done entirely in Stereo Photo Maker, the simplest method. The full globe is in negative parallax, in front of the screen.
> This pair is better than any preceding pair at showing how the depth squashes when the viewer moves toward the screen.
> I think for my interlace monitor a bit lower ratio, maybe 9, would give best roundness at the distance I sit from the screen.
I can not experiment on this just now because I am not at home where I have the 3DTV. I have viewed it with SPM and looks nice, but I am limited to view it in parallel view (very small size), so I can not do any useful test. I can neither see the axis tilt that you noticed.
I will comment on it when come back home.
>Please take a vacation, at least until I come back home to see the globe:-)
> I'm nearing the burnout threshold for this little endeavor; likely the whole list concurs.