3D modeling with only one sensor and lens?

Pat S. Parallel pair.  Del Rey Beach FL  (1957)

I have seen lenticular prints of all kinds over the years. I collected a few. Interesting and of value being viewer free..most are 11X14 and do not engulf one as great stereo aspires to do...I could be wrong on that, let IMAX lovers decide...:-) Most are a mere simulacrum of the depth effect of the original image ( look up term orthostereo, it is important info ). Why lenticulars never really took off and are often cheesy IMO. Polaroid Vectographs were another interesting but pola glasses based Polaroid process. A slide in a viewer is only way to judge the quality of an image in stereo. Meaning that any reliance on two pairs on a flat page even with a Pokescope ( look up Pokescope) or similar prism or mirror aids are never really super duper great. As for anaglyphs. Less I say about anaglyphs the less I will offend those who see the world in flashes of cyan and red orange However, there is a good site that shows some well made stereos especially by a brilliant 3-D artist named Harold Lloyd. That Harold Lloyd.. And for those who seek quality on a computer page with eyeballs only, it is worth checking out. I hasten to add that depth effect is an important part of stereoscopy but photographic quality of subject is important. Placement of the stereo window (another significant term to check out) is vital, and can make or break an image in 3-D...if you understand the stereo window concept which some do and some do not alas....... Harold L had skill in all the foregoing..Treu.... Me, .I always tried and shxxtcanned those that did not measure up.... ( PS. I have at least four old but good achromatic viewers with lights that I use for my rather large collection of vintage family scrap book slides. All hand mounted by me...shoot, it is a hobby and my first love. My second love? Doing portraits of the fair sex...Aloha for a while, signed, Gerry with a G...:-) Postscript ): This happy forum has a range of interests. Some new, some old hands it seems...Gear is part of the pictture verily and is often a do it yourself approach- given lack of corporate market support that just is and will remain I fear. It is rewarding effort but tough IMO as is most good things. I modestly refer tp a few simple recipes to gain enjoyment and involvement... We all would like an easy road. Me too... Not there ... Since the boom of the 1950s and the late lamented Fuji W two lens cams series spurt, it takes some doing. I mean serious intent... George Themelis a serious contemporary practitioner does his work with spliced cameras or spliced digital cameras. Now THAT is tough work and I admire his approach...Check out "DR T" on Facebook and eBay. Smart guy... And Hillary Hess, who does both still and video and movie in 3-D. Helpful folk all....Happy Trails, ye two eyed folks. Look at Hillary's site here: Both cross and parallel, side by side. For those who learned the parallel (my much preferred method. There is a never ending debate on cross vs parallel. Some just can't do parallel. i get it...I use the Pokescope gizmo a lot if pairs are large separation FYI. Look up Pokescope prism device. About fifty US simoleons. I have no vew on Virtual Reality. I await its presence in the local mall before I render praise...so it goes.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/400565609972144/?ref=bookmarks