Unidentified bug (stereo). Close-up added.

[Beatsy]

Shot with Minolta DImage 5400 scanner lens at roughly 2x. I had to edit out a pin and fix a couple of small flares, but I think I got away with it. Tried a logo which ended up a bit distracting where it is, but it often caused me to lose the stereo effect with it positioned too far away in a corner. I think I'll forget logos on future stereos.

[rolsen]

Very nice stereo, really jumps in your eyes!

[Macrero]

Seems some kind of Argidae -> Arginae (Sawflies). Nicely done!

- Macrero

[Olympusman]

Wonderful 3-D and illumination. My wife and I share the same home office, and once in a while she spots me looking at cross-eyed 3-D and it freaks her out.

Mike

[JH]

Excellent stereo!
Best regards
Jörgen Hellberg

[Beatsy]

Thanks everyone, and especially for the ID Macrero!

Here's a closer look with much more diffuse lighting this time (3 Janso style LED lamps and a ping-pong ball "mini light tent"). The first stereo above was lit with two "naked" Trond flat-panel LED lamps. I used a 10x Mitty at 10x so FoV after a slight crop is ~3.2mm. I also did two partial stacks for retouching spots of transparency (the mouth parts overlapping the furthest front leg).

[rjlittlefield]

Very nice!

One additional spot of transparency popped out at me. Near bottom center, there's a place where the palp passes in front of a bright spot that is located on the thorax between the front legs.

--Rik

[Sumguy01]

Very nice.
Thanks for sharing.

[Beatsy]

Very nice!

One additional spot of transparency popped out at me. Near bottom center, there's a place where the palp passes in front of a bright spot that is located on the thorax between the front legs.

Thanks, and aargh! I saw that spot but mistook it for a speck of lint. Probably easy enough to deal with using spot removal rather than re-re-touching, but I won't bother posting another.

While you're here. The antennae that points toward the viewer accounted for more than a third of the stack (~320 images total), but it doesn't appear to extend outwards quite as much as I expected (in 3d view). Is there a limit to how "deep" a cross-eyed stereo can portray? On a related note, I'd really like that antennae to appear to poke out of the screen. I don't see any parameters that might affect that though. Is it even theoretically possible with cross-eyed stereo?

Thanks

[Adam Long]

I'd really like that antennae to appear to poke out of the screen.

That's exactly how it looks to me - very effective. Was going to remark on it even before I saw your comment.

Admin edit [rjl]: to fix quote tags

[rjlittlefield]

On a related note, I'd really like that antennae to appear to poke out of the screen. I don't see any parameters that might affect that though. Is it even theoretically possible with cross-eyed stereo?

As Adam notes, you have succeeded in that goal, at least for some viewers (including myself).

What Zerene Stacker does by default is to put the center of the stack at the same depth as the screen. That is, the center source images in the stack will be framed exactly the same in the left and right views.

This relative depth can be easily changed in StereoPhoto Maker by simply shifting the images left/right within their frames.

So, in terms of left/right disparity, it is no great challenge to put any part of the subject "in front of the screen".

A harder problem is getting it perceived properly. Some people easily and painlessly perceive things in front of the screen, some people perceive it strongly but painfully, and some people don't get it at all. It is simpler to perceive an object in front of the screen if it is near a reference point, like the left/right edge of the window where the frame establishes the depth of the screen. But if part of the subject is in front of the screen and overlaps the edge of the window, then you get something called a "stereo window violation", which is described by one web site as

A stereo window violation occurs when an object appears in front of the stereo window and is cut off by the window. It’s a physical impossibility that a window frame, seemingly appearing behind the object, is able to obscure it. Usually, this paradox cannot be well processed by our brains and such an image hurts our eyes

Because of these problems, some stereo pundits recommend essentially "just don't do that". In other words, set up the stereo separation so that everything is at the depth of the screen or behind it. I think of this as the "display box model", where the screen is the front glass of the display box.

Personally I often like stuff in front of the screen, even when there are window violations. But I have been chastised enough times that now I generally adjust in StereoPhoto Maker so that everything is behind the screen, or at least there are no window violations.

--Rik