Adding extra depth to conventional stereo.

tony brown wrote:

tony brown wrote:

uuglypher wrote:

Hi, Tony,

That’s an inter3sting series!

Here’s my take on it (Collectively, excep for the flat, round stones in water which i found difficult to perceive /evaluate compared with all the rest).

The depth distinctions, although definitely discernible from foreground to distant background, appear distinctly magnified in the far middleground - to the interesting extent of imparting a sense of elevation of the terrain in that middleground region.

I have encountered something of the same effect when using a counterposed technique of re-joining sky and terrain in merged bizonal perspective images.

this is all “for what it’s worth”, of course, given the individual nature of illusory perceptions.

I would certainly like to see more as you further develop your technique!

Best regards,

Dave Graham

Thank you for taking the time to examine them.

I have noticed that elevation you refer to which was worse at first but I thought it was acceptable now.

Evidently, it needs more work. Your feedback is welcome and useful.

Here's a re-work of the first image pair, again with lower image the original conventional stereo and top one is the rework.

Hi, Tony,

Here’s my take when comparing the three steps:

conventional S3D, your first re-work, and the latest rework)  I see each as composed of two regions: the foreground and middle ground ending at the near side of our view of the water, and background all beyond that.:

your first rework produced an apparent precipitous drop-off of background water level beyond the middle ground, while in your latest re-work the drop-off seems less severe- less  precipitous.

The delineation between middleground and background does, however, remain distinct.

How does that jibe with your intent?

Best regards,

Dave