4 ms·
For casual viewing with the unaided eye, you want to present stereograms in cross-your-eyes order not stare-into-distance order. Most people are not able to ca
by kazinator 1y ago
For casual viewing with the unaided eye, you want to present stereograms in cross-your-eyes order not stare-into-distance order.
Most people are not able to cause their eyes to diverge, so the scale of images in a stare-into-distance stereogram is limited by the interocular distance.
In cross-eye configuration, larger images can be used.
(Of course, the use of magnification in stereoscopes relieves the issue, as well as making it easier for the eyes to focus, since the magnified virtual images appear farther away. Viewing stare-into-distance stereograms requires the eyes to believe they are looking far away due to the parallel gaze, while simultaneously focusing near on the images; magnification brings the images farther out.)
- LorenDB 1y agoI personally find the crosseyed type to be nearly impossible, while the parallel type are pretty easy for me. So I think it really depends on the person. Additionally, most stereograms I've seen (e.g. coffee-table books) have been parallel type.
- kazinator 1y agoThe parallel types are also very easy for me, but they are always small. If the spacing between them is wider than my inter-ocular distance, I find them impossible to converge. I made stereograms in the past and wanted to see larger images with the naked eye, so I had no choice but swap the images and cross the eyes.
- 6yyyyyy 1y agoI flipped them all, enjoy: https://imgur.com/a/OOiQ5AK https://imgur.com/a/OOiQ5AK (FYI: -vf stereo3d=in=sbsl:out=sbsr in ffmpeg.)
- entropicdrifter 1y agoWoo! The true solution!
- pimlottc 1y agoYou can flip images horizontally via CSS: img { transform: scaleX(-1); } Here's a javascript bookmarklet that will do this for all images on the page: javascript:(()%3D%3E%7B%5B...document.querySelectorAll(%22img%22)%5D.forEach((e%3D%3E%7Be.style.transform%3D%22scaleX(-1)%22%7D))%3B%7D)()%3B
- kazinator 1y agoThat is very clever, and useful, thank you. But it doesn't achieve the effect we are after at present. When we reflect the stereogram left to right, the orientation of the parallax recorded in the images also flips and so the net effect is zero: if the original stereo pair is a stare-into-the distance stereogram, the reflected stereogram is also.
- pimlottc 1y agoAh, good point. I wonder if it's possible to achieve the left/right swap in CSS? Alas I am not a CSS guru.