Welcome to Fractal Forums

For some reason the stereo effect really works with this image. It has a very strong sense of depth, with little or no ghosting. The textures also come through well.

You'll need red/cyan 3D glasses to view it.
(http://www.pbase.com/duncanc/image/118165910/original.jpg)


Regards,

Duncan C

Hey that's much better. Really like this. Though the 3D effect could get even stronger still with some experimentation.

If you were to switch between the two images that make up this anaglyph, you'd see that the background shifts one way, and the foreground (at the bottom) shifts the other way. That's what produces such a striking effect. With the other flatter stereo image, the foreground moved the same distance (and in the same direction) as the background.

Twinbee,

When the left eye image is shifted to the right eye image is shifted to the left, the image appears to float behind the surface of the screen.

When the left eye image is shifted to the left and the right eye image is shifted to the right, the image appears to be in FRONT of the screen.

(The point where the two images match up looks like it is at the surface of the screen.)

If the back is shifted one way and the front is shifted the other way, part of the image appears to be in front of the screen and part of the image appears behind the screen.

Having the image appear in front of the screen looks dramatic, but it is hard on the viewer's eyes. It also tends to create a "window violation". That's when a part of the image that's in front of the screen is clipped by the borders of the image. It doesn't look right because the borders of the image look like a window frame that is flat with the surface of the screen. Your brain gets confused if a frame that is at the surface of the screen seems to clip something that appears to be in front of the screen, and it messes up the 3D effect.

Thus I tend to only put part of the image in front of the screen in unusual cases, where it works visually.

See this link for a discussion of the subject:

http://www.crystalcanyons.net/pages/3DGuidebook/Registration_StereoWindow.htm (http://www.crystalcanyons.net/pages/3DGuidebook/Registration_StereoWindow.htm)


Regards,

Duncan

Agreed, I too have found that it's good if the image starts at the depth of the screen (even though that broccoli one I posted starts slightly in front.). I was just making a point that the difference between the movement of the foreground and movement of background is what counts. So if the front is -5 pixels and the background is 5 pixels, that would create just as strong a stereo effect as say, 0 pixels front, 10 pixels back. But like you say, the latter would look nicer as the depth starts at the screen level.

Still catching up on past postings I have missed.  Have always preferred the anaglyph over stereo, easier on the eyes and one can make any size at all.  A little bit of "ghosting" with one of the colors, but still a very nice effect.

Thanks for sharing it with us.     :)
 

I found my 3D glasses a while ago and looked at this fractal with them. It's so weird! Thank you for posting this!