3D vision seems to come and go

Bill Costa wrote:

$799 is expensive just to view 3D photos which is my main aim.

I agree, but I bought it anyway. I got an open box unit from Amazon for $750 which is still too much. There was one recently on eBay with some extras for $650 that was a good deal by comparison. But that's gone now. In any case, I'm pretty hard core about s3D photography, so it was a must have, even though it is far from perfect and way too expensive.

Referring to the web site, it does not tell you how to get the photos or video to the device.

Well s3D video is dead simple, just plug an HDMI cable into your 3D Blu-ray player. This seems to the primary market that they made this device for. And gamers I suppose.

Also it does not tell you what type of photos and video the device accepts.

Stills (and videos I guess) can be read from either a USB thumb drive or a micro SD card. You can use the standard photo gallery program to view SBS with pillar boxing for 16:9 aspect ratio. Or you can load a third party s3D viewer app that understands MPO files and it will format them automatically to fit.

Maybe other similar devices will come on the market in the near future.

Well there is always the hope that something better and cheaper will come along, and with electronics technology that is almost always the case. But with digital s3D I've found that it is best to get it while you can. The best purpose digital 3D cameras, the Panasonic 3D1 and the Fujifilm W3 are no longer made, and both now command a premium price if you can find a new one. No more s3D TVs being made either, although those tend to be a bit easier to find used at a good price. But given how specialized this viewer is, I decided to bite. I think seeing a better one in the near future depends upon how popular VR becomes.

Thanks for the info Bill.

What I'd like to see is a VR headset that you can use sitting down and not have to wander about. All I need is a view to my left and my right when I turn my head around.
It needs to have some type of remote that allow me to move forward and turn to me left or right. This would allow me to explore a museum without being there.

I have a feeling that you will be able to stream video or stills on the internet using a VR headset in the future and pay a small fee for viewing a museum without actually being there or buy a program of a museum to load into the VR headset.

It would also be good for the Real Estate Market when you can view a house using a VR headset.

Maybe one day Google maps will allow VR viewing.

At the moment you can download from Youtube 360 degree videos. I don't have a VR headset so I have to click on the screen and drag the video picture about to see what on my left, right or behind me. It may also depend on what type of video card you have.

The problems faced when using a 3D or VR headset for long periods such is the bright screen can give you a headache and you can't look away for a moment to give your eyes a rest. You are unaware of anyone being in the room. If your using headphones or ear buds for sound then you could miss a phone call or someone knocking at the door.

Brian

A separate (and somewhat serious) issue with current VR of actual scenes is that...

YOU MUST KEEP YOUR GAZE LEVEL!

Tilting your gaze cannot be "corrected" by software of actual scenes.

Computer-generated imagery can do this, but not actual "photographed" scenes.  The amount of photographic data required would be ENORMOUS!

A light-field or plenoptic capture system would be required...

Brisn5757 wrote:

I have a feeling that 3D TV will come back better than before. As 3D TV is no longer on the market I consider it a failed attempt that needs to be improved upon.

There is a VR viewer for my Smartphone but as there is very little demand for this device most shops don't have it in stock. So at the moment there is no real demand for 3D at least not in New Zealand.

I came across a YouTube video where you can make a cardboard 3D device but it was for a smartphone mounted in front of it.

There maybe a lot of 3D devices in your country but not in New Zealand where it's a matter of making your own 3D device to view 3D photos.

Brian

Wherever you are think stereo taking or viewing can be iffy/and or expensive at this point I live on an island too, Oahu far from LA where there is lots of action stereo wise. I Been experimenting with home made digital 3-D devices. I have a Fuji W 3 and several film cameras, I like the project idea of pairing two planar digital cameras. experimental pair I am , One can find old or discontinued models relatively cheap and it is up to you to build a cage to hold them in the right alignment. Options abound, from simple wood to what have you.... As you say, viewing is a matter that is trickier and yet some folks manage it. I have seen plans on the ISU and the National Stereo Association pubs that have ideas. (There may even be a Kiwi group) that meets down there. Folks who do astronomy find the same limitations...meaning big bucks or garage puttering. PS This forum has some ideas, but only the beginning of any research. But you all know that..( PPS Still working on dual remote shutter release with appropriate resistors etc etc.....Dr T has done lots of these. Look him up on eBay and elsewhere, for ideas)

Twin Panasonic GX 7 with 20mm lenses on improvised bracket rig

A detailed look at one person's experiment with budget digital cameras, illustrated for the clumsy but pure of heart. ( yesterday I saw a mint shape MGA red sport sedan in the parking lot. Now that little British carburetored  baby takes time and work to keep puttering away no doubt.  Part of the hobby- love geist I suggest. )

http://drt3d.blogspot.com/

http://drt3d.blogspot.com/2016/10/twin-samsung-nx1000-for-stereo-iii.html

Everyone has to own one sports car.  I had my Alpine.  pictured in parallel mode with my

Parallel pair.  Best viewed with prism device for decent spatial effect.  Stereo Realist slide copy. (1961)

date in 1961 near Bethesda MD.   It sealed my distrust of British automotive engineering.  But then it was cheap and cute.  I heard that Alfa Romeo owners said their cars sucked big time too....I think only Mazda had success in low cost cars with oomph and style that stayed out of the shop...your experience may be different.  But you would be off the distribution curve IMO.

Apart from the car talk the 3D effect works well using the cross eyed method.

Brian

Turbguy1 wrote:

A separate (and somewhat serious) issue with current VR of actual scenes is that...

YOU MUST KEEP YOUR GAZE LEVEL!

Tilting your gaze cannot be "corrected" by software of actual scenes.

Computer-generated imagery can do this, but not actual "photographed" scenes. The amount of photographic data required would be ENORMOUS!

A light-field or plenoptic capture system would be required...

I don't understand what you mean by "Tilting your gaze"

Brian

Move your head towards your shoulder, for instance...

Understood, thanks.

Brian