Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-12-2012, 12:44 AM
raaaid's Avatar
raaaid raaaid is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,329
Default

so as an expert whats your theory of my seeing this in 3d?



hallucination

subtle chromostereopsis

subtle shade with distance with hints my brain into distance

that is actually such an alien perfect 3d you dont notice as you dont notice 3d in real life

...
__________________
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/fmkld-1.jpg2.4ghz dual core cpu
3gb ram
ASUS Radeon EAH4650 DI - 1 GB GDDR2

I PREFER TO LOVE WITHOUT BEING LOVED THAT NOT LOVE AT ALL
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-12-2012, 01:02 AM
Ailantd's Avatar
Ailantd Ailantd is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid View Post
so as an expert whats your theory of my seeing this in 3d?



hallucination

subtle chromostereopsis

subtle shade with distance with hints my brain into distance

that is actually such an alien perfect 3d you dont notice as you dont notice 3d in real life

...
As I said, I can believe that you feel that in 3D as a brain, yes, hallucination or fake 3D, extracted from other information ( I think is not difficult for any in this forum to realize your brain works in a extrange way ).
As you said shade/fog can contribute to depth perception, unless in space there is no fog but in nebulas, so that shade, if is there, is not related to depth.

But, even if I can asume the possibility that you feel 3d sensation looking a 2d photo where is no depth information available ( like fog or perspective ), I can´t in any way think that the depth information you think you are extracting from that photo is representative of reality, because that information simply is not there.

If you agree with this, nice. If you don´t there is extremely easy to prove you wrong. You can render two spheres with arbitrary different sizes, one closer to the camera and then you have to tell what one is closer. There is no way you can do that without pure casuality. Or even more easy. You can do this even in the real world. Pick two stars at night, guess wich one is closer, then compare it with astronomical data. You will found you wrong most of the times.
__________________
Win 7 64
Quad core
4Gb ram
GTX 560
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.