Can you see stereoscopic photography without equipment?

[Mirc]

Just wondering... Can you see stereoscopic photography without equipment, only with your eyes?

I find it amazing how so many people can't... In fact in my school nobody believes me that I can see even the hardest ones without any problems, even those which have an inscription like "equipment needed for viewing".

Basically, there are 2 types of stereo-photography: crossed eye and parallel eye. The crossed eye one typically gives better results and can be viewed in larger formats. Though I can easily see both, the parallel eye ones are clearly harder.

The crossed eye ones imply focusing closer to yourself than you see the image, the parallel eye ones imply focusing further, beyond the image (like watching something infinitely far away).

Basically, if you cross your eyes until 2 of the images meet in the middle (thus making a total of 3 images - normally they would be 4, resulting from the 2 on the screen that multiplied by 2 as you cross or "parellelize" your eyes), the image in the middle is going to be 3D!

The results are amazing, IMHO. I know the physical explanation too, but I'm way too lazy to explain it now.


So can you see them in 3D?


Examples: Cross-eyed stereo photographies:

Spoiler very large :

Parallel-eyed stereo photos:









^ The last one is supposedly "extremely hard" without equipment.

 

[Ecofarm]

No, I can't.

I'm deficient.

 

[Masquerouge]

Cross-eyed are so much easier...

 

[Hitti-Litti]

I can see the cross-eyed, I think. Though not accurately.

 

[fishlore]

The cross eyed flower I can see really well. I can see all of the cross eyed ones except I can't get the midget for the life of me. I can't see the big yellow car or the one in spoiler tags either. I find the parellel ones easier to see except the last one, that one I can't see.

 

[brennan]

I'm not prepared to put my eyes that close to a particle accelerator. (CRT)

 

[Mise]

Well it's much harder on a monitor...

 

[stormbind]

Its near impossible on a monitor. I don't see any of them in 3D.

You can also create stereo-photography/film by emiting two polarised images with fields of different directions from a single screen.

 

[CaptainF]

Ich Kann Nicht!

 

[Mirc]

Its near impossible on a monitor.

For you.

For me it's very easy... Turns out I'm in the minority again, just like in real life.

 

[Taliesin]

All of them work for me quite easily as parallel-eye pictures. I can get a couple to work with crossed eyes, but not stably enough to actually look at the pictures (also it hurts my eyes more).

It's pretty cool when the eyes lock onto the composite image, so that I can easily scan it without losing focus even though there's no actual object to anchor my focus at that depth. Nice thread, Mirc!

 

[History_Buff]

Crossed Eyed ones are easy to visualize, and the castle I can actually reduce to one 3D image. But you have clearly never used proper Stereo Equipment. This is amateur hour compared to a proper mirrored stereoscope; those things appear so real you'd think you could reach out and touch it.

 

[Flak]

I can only do the parallel ones, but I could probably get the cross-eyed one with practice. However my attempts to do the cross-eyed ones give me a bit of eye strain, so no more of that.