Pieris

[WojTek]

Hello everyone,
Scales of the Pieris:


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/529 ... 27d6_o.jpg



https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/529 ... 7c5d_o.jpg

Best, ADi

[Lou Jost]

Very curious. A word or two about technique/equipment is always welcome from you.....

[WojTek]

Hi Lou,

Setup: viewtopic.php?p=289641#p289641

EOS M6 Mark II ; Raynox DCR-150 ; Nikon Plan Apo 20x/0.75 ; 1/20 s ; 450 * (DOF/3)

Best, ADi

[Lou Jost]

Thanks!

[WojTek]

3D red/cyan


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/529 ... 12f2_o.jpg

[rjlittlefield]

This stereo is very nice!

I often find red/cyan to be uncomfortable, but this one works very well. I'm guessing that's because the scene is almost monochrome to start with.

--Rik

[WojTek]

This stereo is very nice!

I often find red/cyan to be uncomfortable, but this one works very well. I'm guessing that's because the scene is almost monochrome to start with.

--Rik

Hello Rik,
Probably that is the reason.
But sometimes I have also received contradictory feedback,
so I suspect that it could also be due to the glasses.
e.g.

Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

I often find red/cyan to be uncomfortable, but this one works very well. I'm guessing that's because the scene is almost monochrome to start with.

Probably that is the reason.
But sometimes I have also received contradictory feedback,
so I suspect that it could also be due to the glasses.
e.g.

Surely it is not entirely the glasses, because I find this second image very uncomfortable.

There are at least three reasons.

First, the black background makes any crosstalk quite evident. Most combinations of monitors and glasses will leak some red through cyan and vice versa, and when this happens against a black background, each eye clearly sees some of the other eye's image in addition to its own. The result is that the stereo separation is not complete, and instead of the subject looking like one solid 3D object with somewhat odd color, it looks like an object plus a ghost.

The crosstalk problem is reduced with a brighter background.

If you're really hardcore, then with a brighter background it is possible to subtract a little of each side's image from the other side, so as to partially compensate for leakage in the lenses. The idea is to make crosstalk produce only a color shift, not a luminance shift. But of course the success of that approach depends on exactly what monitor and glasses are in use. I found it helpful some decades ago in a captive environment, but I'm pretty sure it would be less useful for internet display.

Second, in this troublesome image there is a lot of crosstalk no matter how good the glasses are. For example on the top left side of the "spire" of the right-hand subject, there is an area that seems should be pure red, but Photoshop reports the pixel value is (255,74,100). Similarly an opposing area that should be pure cyan is (137,255,255). Meanwhile the background is pure black (0,0,0). I suspect some shenanigans with masking and/or levels adjustment, and I would be interested to know what workflow produced this anomaly.

Third, it seems that the front portion of the left subject is mostly missing from the stereo pair. This results in an odd conflict of the geometry, in which the front inner lip of the opening appears to be floating in space with nothing supporting it, while the center of the front face of the subject fades away revealing the back face instead.

Some of these issues can be seen more easily by pulling the image into StereoPhoto Maker as anaglyph and then converting it to side-by-side. The loss of the front face simply becomes more obvious. The spire of the right-hand subject, in side-by-side, has an odd ghost in the plane of the monitor, instead of receding cleanly into the background.

Now that I've taken the time to analyze what's going on, I find the anaglyph to be a little less disturbing. But yeah, it's still not very successful.

In contrast, with the Pieris wing most of the prominent 3D features consist of dark subject seen against a bright background. Crosstalk is greatly reduced, and I don't see anomalies.

I hope this helps!

--Rik

[WojTek]

Hi Rik,
Many thanks for the analysis of the 3D photo!
The picture of the radiolarians is a bit older and I don't have the original files anymore.
But I have another bright version of it:

I can remember viewing the images from a long distance.
I have a small problem with the 3D images :-)
Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

But I have another bright version of it

This is better, thanks. Crosstalk is much less of a problem. The missing front is still confusing, but that's not fixable without proper sources.

I have a small problem with the 3D images :-)

A good viewer helps enormously. Check your local sources for something like this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/3Dstereo-Stereo-Wide-View-Viewer-Monitors/dp/B07DQT8QD6 .

The last fellow that I turned on to this viewer replied to me as follows:

The stereo viewer arrived tonight, and now I understand!
...
The [parallel pair] in your email below ... is beautiful in a way it couldn’t be without the stereo, and this is a lovely image to start with. But with the parallel viewer its depth is natural and glorious. And the set of images underneath [with swapped sides] – ok, now I understand, yes it has depth, but its quite wrong and obviously so. As though Salvador Dali or Escher had been playing with it.

Impressed. Now I can see that my previous cross eyed viewing was not in any way giving me the whole picture, if you’ll excuse the pun, (I’m English, we can’t help it).

I have to say that while I’ve only been playing with the viewer for 20 minutes this is something akin to a revelation.

--Rik

[WojTek]

Hello Rik,
I have this:
http://www.stereoskopie.com/Handbetrach ... oskop.html
So, I have just created an image with default values:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/529 ... c577_o.jpg
Can you recognize any 3d effect ?
Probably I will have to change some preferences such as: Shift X Limits (or even Shift Y Limits).
Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

I have this:
http://www.stereoskopie.com/Handbetrach ... oskop.html

That looks OK. I have never used that particular model, but anything with mirrors will work OK as long as the image pair being viewed is properly sized to match the viewer.

So, I have just created an image with default values:
...
Can you recognize any 3d effect ?

Sorry but no -- this is two copies of exactly the same image, so it appears dead flat.

You can confirm this by displaying it as a stereo pair, either in StereoPhoto Maker or inside Zerene Stacker using Tools > Stereo > View Existing Stereo Pair, and observing that the images do not change when you click the Swap Sides button.

I have watched a person create such "flat pairs" by accident in Zerene Stacker. The error that I saw was to make an extra mouseclick in Output Images, which set both panels to displaying the same image, just before they did Stop Stereo View and then Make Stereo Pair. The pair that they got certainly matched the last pair that was showing in Stereo View, but they had not noticed they had made that last pair flat!

I suggest to try again, being careful to keep the left image on the left and the right image on the right.

Probably I will have to change some preferences such as: Shift X Limits (or even Shift Y Limits).

I suggest to use the Stereo Calculator to determine proper shift values. See https://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/syntheticstereo#calculating_shift_based_on_viewing_angle.

The default values work OK with stacks that have significant depth, say total depth around half the frame width. But for stacks that are much shallower, you will need correspondingly smaller shifts.

Stay away from changing Shift Y Limits for now. That is provided for special situations such as rocking around a conical path.

I look forward to seeing the next try.

--Rik

[WojTek]

Hello Rik,
I have to learn how to create 3D with Zerene :-)
So, I have just tried with another tool:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/529 ... ed9c_o.jpg
Best, ADi

[rjlittlefield]

This looks correct, as parallel layout appropriate for use with viewer.

What other tool did you use?

--Rik

[Sym P. le]

Is it me or is the latest image reversed?

I've attached a portion which I adjusted slightly and reversed.