4 ms·
True, occlusions would be a problem but we’re taking about fake autostereoscopic 3D here, where most of the stereo rigs used for capture have but a modest basel
by iamleppert 8y ago
True, occlusions would be a problem but we’re taking about fake autostereoscopic 3D here, where most of the stereo rigs used for capture have but a modest baseline. Almost all of the depth perception comes from disparity, occlusions would still in fact be very visible by the averaging method I described and be at whatever depth plane of the occluder which is probably a good guess anyway. Not like your other eye would receive a correspondence from an occlusion in the real world.
- romwell 8y agoFYI, there's online software[1] to recreate 3D/stereoscopic 3D imagery from the depth-enabled photos taken e.g. by Moto G5S (which has a dual-camera setup that computes the depth map, but no API to extract/store the image taken by the other camera). My personal opinion is that true stereoscopic images feel better when there's enough detail; those occlusions do matter. For some imagery it doesn't matter as much though. [1]http://depthy.me http://depthy.me