Quote:
Originally Posted by JG26_EZ
The photo that was linked in one of the earlier posts that has the picture of the dinosaur, best describes what irR4tiOn4L is trying to say (I think). If you look closely, you can see that the nose moves less than the rear section of the head. This is the depth perception problem that I believe is being discussed above.
So, I think that it's not just as easy as taking an image from two different angles when you've got such depth as miles of background visible. My suggestion would be, to crop the spit away from the background, and have the spitfire's amount of adjustment different than the background scenery's adjustment. (Basically, if you were 5 feet in front of a spitfire looking back at it, and you moved your head from side to side, you'd see more unseen areas of the spitfire than you'd see of the background.)
If ya get me..
(I'd set it up, but it is 100% impossible for me to see 3D with those types of images, and my eye doctor will back me up on that one.)
|
Problem with that dinosaur is that 3d effect is achieved moving the dino head, and no simulating the two eyes point of view. The 3d effect is similar, but the way the model moves is not. As you noted in real stereoscopic the closer an object is to the eyes, the more shift it has between the two images.