<

Isn't Life Terrible

Sunday, November 4, 2007

If You Look At Her Cross-Eyed, She Has Depth


No, really.

I've always been interested in taking 3-D pictures, and up until quite recently, the best way to do this was to shoot with a Stereo Realist 35mm camera. The Realist was introduced in the early 1950's, when the entire country was going 3-D crazy.

The Stereo Realist takes two pictures at the same time with lenses separated about the same distance as your eyes are separated. One captures the left-eye view, the other captures the right eye view. Your brain can put these back together into a 3-D image all by itself.

I picked up a used Realist and dragged it many places, including NYU Film and TV School on the day that Marlo "That Girl" Thomas came to our TV production class as a guest lecturer. "Lecturer In Hot Pants" was the excuse the Daily News gave for running their picture of Marlo in her abbreviated and quite shiny attire. I've always preferred my shot.

I had the Realist with me and used the available light in the NYU TV studio to grab a shot. Can you cross your eyes? Are you game to try?

There's something called "free-viewing" a 3-D image that can allow you to see in three dimensions just by crossing your eyes. The picture of Marlo has the two images swapped: the one for your right eye is on the left, and the one for your left eye is on the right. If you have any skill at all in crossing your eyes, you will be able to resolve Marlo in the center of your field of view in glorious 3-D. For further instructions, look here.

Click on the image to enlarge it, then cross your eyes... then try to 'fuse' the images. I picked up the knack years ago, and it's great to have instant 3-D that doesn't require glasses of any kind. If it works for you, you'll find it a pretty compelling effect. Let me know if it did.

Labels: , ,

4 Comments:

  • Well, I'd love to, but my brain barely processes things in stereo, owing to lazy eye as a kid. My eye doctors tell me that the human brain learns to process in stereo early on--about age three, maybe? And that, if there are serious vision issues, it never develops the knack. My brain, instead of learning to combine the R and L visual input, spent its time "suppressing" a portion of my vision to keep me from seeing double. Which is fine with me--flat vision being a lot better than none at all!

    Actually, I have very slight depth perception--a couple of degrees, or something. But, mostly, the world is a movie screen to me. (Hey, that was poetic. Or cinematic.)

    That is to say, I have no way of seeing Marlo in depth. But the 2-D version is sure pleasant enough.

    There was no way you could have known. But not to worry--I'm not a 2-D-vision-awareness activist or anything. Though that would be a funny title to tote around.

    Seriously, your home-movie and -photography posts are fascinating. Your previous essay brought back memories of my best friend's "complete" segment of War of the Worlds. Super 8, no sound, short glimpses of the key scenes. State of the 1969 art.

    This was the same friend who got annoyed with me at Andy Warhol's "Frankenstein" because I wasn't seeing 3-D (.05-D, at best). He wondered what was wrong with me. I didn't know--it was twelve years before I got a proper dx.

    I'm thinking of joining the Flat Earth Society, seeing as my eyes can't tell, anyway. ("Seeing as"--ha, ha!) You wanted to know all of this, I'm sure.

    Lee

    By Blogger Lee Hartsfeld, At November 4, 2007 at 4:05 PM  

  • That's awesome... and the 3-D is pretty cool too!

    You should post more of these... I finally got it to 'work' and it's a great effect...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, At November 6, 2007 at 1:27 AM  

  • Yep, it worked just swell for me. With surprisingly little effort! Enough practice with those damnable "magic eye" puzzles made this one a snap. Marlo never seemed realer... more "free to be... in 3-D." I'm as smitten as Donald Hollanger.

    By Blogger sport, At November 12, 2007 at 12:02 AM  

  • Thanks for the three-D fix! There's enough of it out on the web that I find it worthwhile to keep a pair of red-blue glasses on the computer desk, but I prefer freeviewing. My usual preference is for straight on viewing (uncrossed), and practicing that means you can enjoy stereo slides without hunting down a viewer.

    By Blogger Kip W, At November 28, 2007 at 1:38 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



<< Home