Anyone want to buy a pair of ARSAT 37mm fisheyes from the same factory run? You could build a stereo 180 fisheye full circle camera using two sheets of 4x5 or a single sheet of 4x10 or just shoot 8x10 and crop.
If I ever do... maybe I can look you up?
Originally Posted by maciekz
Yes, you're right. I was expecting either two cameras, or a sliding camera backet, or making a stereo camera - but yes, the filters would be on the enlarger lens and in the glasses. Still not sure of the exact proceedure, but maybe best to start experimenting....
That's not it, film does not "see" polariation of light. You need a stereo camera, which records two normal images from slightly different positions/angles, and then the images would be *projected* through polaroid filters and watched with polaroid filters. So basically you need a stereo camera, projector and two sets of filters.
No... I'm not colour blind. My eyes are pretty normal. My left isn't quite as good as my right, but good enough to read with. I don't wear glasses and on the whole my eyesite is as good as it gets for my age - it's just I don't have the capacity to see 3D. Or at least, most forms of 3D, as I said, black and white through polaroid lenses sometimes works, for some reason. I haven't tried coloured glasses with BW images, but I suspect they won't work. I'll have to try. My hunch is that the difference may be that rods (used for BW vision) are scattered more widely around the retina. Cones (colour) are concentrated in the fovia (the very central bit). I wonder if when I combine images from my two eyes my brain 'cheats' by taking the central fovia from just one eye, ignoring the other fovia, but combining the (easier) periphery from both eyes? Therefore BW is easier because the fovia is not so essential to BW viewing?
Originally Posted by filmamigo
Don't know - just guessing!
[QUOTE=filmamigo;957263]Can I ask... are you colour blind? That would impact your results with the colour 3D tests.
Color blindness does not impact the results of color generated 3-D images. The color filters, in combination with appropriately colored images, serve only to isolate the left and right eyes' images, so they can be manipulated and then re-combined into a single (hopefully) 3-D percept. This works in the same way as your colored camera filters do, and is independent of the individual's ability to discriminate different colors.
I have a Sputnik, and while it's certainly no luxury camera, I still use it more than any of the others in my bag. It's brilliant.
Originally Posted by jnanian
A "new" Sputnik needs some attention to stop it leaking light, but it's not much more complicated than glueing a length of wool into the groove that forms the light trap. It's shiny inside, so it also needs some kind of non-reflective material applied to the inner surfaces. After that, and the CLA that any fifty-year-old camera needs, it's a decent 120-format stereo camera for a fraction of the cost of the modern Chinese equivalent.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
i have been sooooo close to buying one of these, and /or a gaumont ...
Originally Posted by edp
i hate threads like this, cause i always want to buy more stuff ...
its a good thing i'm flat broke eating lentils in a refrigerator box leaching
wi-fi from the guy next to me in a double-wide ( washer dryer box ) ...
I haven't done any experimenting yet,
but I have been thinking.
Taken some paracetamol, now, having a lie down....
Thing is - I stillcan't see how to make a polaroid stereo image. As was pointed out further up the thread, BW film isn't polarization sensitive - but then neither is the paper. So... projecting two seperate images on top of each other fromthe enlarger through polaroid lenses can't work either.
So... how to encode a single image so that when viewed through glasses with differently polaroid lenses, you see a 3D image?
That is the question!
You can't. Nothing is encoded in the recorded image itself, except the difference in perspective between the left and right eye images.
The polarisation-separation works, because the light used to view the images in is polarized. 90 degrees different for each in the pair. View those through polarizers, also at 90 degree angles, and each eye will only see one of the two.
You can't turn a single image into a stereo pair.
Our stereoscopic vision works because both of our eyes see slightly different views of the world.
Stand a friend in front of you and close one eye. Then open it but close the other.
Without getting into how it works, the polarised glasses make it so that one of your eyes sees one picture and the other eye sees another picture. Born of these pictures are usually taken with the camera about the width of your eyes apart.
I struggle with anaglyphs and the coloured glasses but when one eye sees one picture and the other sees another stereo works great for me.
There are a few ways that you can make your own but you will need some kind of viewer.
One way that has been suggested is to take two pictures of the same non-moving scene with one camera. Make the pictures 6-8 cm apart. You will probably need to use a tripod.
If you shoot on slide film then there are a number of viewers and mounts that you can buy.
I use a viewer that came with a book of 3d photos from the 1840's called "A Villiage Lost and Found." You can mail order this from Amazon for about £20. There is also a set of cheaper books that I saw on there that have a slightly different viewer that is attached to the book. I think the one that my mate has is called "London in 3D" or sonething. It is also full of pictures from the 1800's.
Both books have lenses in the viewers that somehow make it so that one eye sees one image and the other eye sees the other.
You just need to print out your images so that they are similar size (around 6x7cm) as the ones in the book, stick them under the viewer and then it should just work!
They can be really impressive.
At the moment, I am using an arrangement of mirrors to view 20x16" stereo pairs of silver prints from 4x5 negs. They are working really well.
If you are prepared to resort to digital, you can test this by taking left side photo followed by right side photo and then print them in Boots (UK high street chemist) on 6x4 mini prints with either two images or four images per page. Pop them into one of the viewers that I mentioned and they work in 3d.
Good luck. There is a lot of fun to be had!
Bit of a recap - going back to the original post.
The one type of image I personally can see in stereo is a single BW image, consisting of two super-imposed views from slightly different viewpoints, viewed through polaroid glasses. I have never managed to get two separate images (using a Victorian style viewer) to work.
Usually, combined single images are in two colours and are viewed using two different coloured lenses - so you print two views on colour paper. Fairly easy. But how on earth do you encode two images on one sheet of paper with different polarisation?
I'm beginning to think you might need to make a sandwich of BW slides with polaroid filters... but surely the top filter would block all the light from the image/filter underneath?