Playing with anaglyphs for last few months. Comments invited.

Using normal digital camera to take two shots with varied lens spacing from inches to several feet. Use was aimed at architectural ruins but Covid-19 lockdown constrained my subject material.

Capturing moving objects usually out of bounds but with a little manipulation can often be overcome for birds, flags and aircraft in post processing.

Simon Zeev wrote:

tony brown wrote:

Using normal digital camera to take two shots with varied lens spacing from inches to several feet. Use was aimed at architectural ruins but Covid-19 lockdown constrained my subject material.

Capturing moving objects usually out of bounds but with a little manipulation can often be overcome for birds, flags and aircraft in post processing.

Nice 3D but why not "cross eyes"?

It hurts my brain!  (;-}

It might be my age wrt eye muscles. I'm in my 80's. Also with anaglyphs, I can determine which objects are to appear 'out of screen'. Anaglyphs can also occupy the whole screen or be expanded beyond and still work.

Viewing specs are very cheap though not, of course, free like 'cross-eyes'. Besides, my Mother (God rest her soul) told me my eyes might stick like that if the wind changed? (:-}

Simon Zeev wrote:

tony brown wrote:

Using normal digital camera to take two shots with varied lens spacing from inches to several feet. Use was aimed at architectural ruins but Covid-19 lockdown constrained my subject material.

Capturing moving objects usually out of bounds but with a little manipulation can often be overcome for birds, flags and aircraft in post processing.

Nice 3D but why not "cross eyes"?

Here's my "cross eyes" version of one of the above locations. Love the colour but viewing didn't come naturally. I can see that 3D enthusiasts would be open to this format but would find it difficult for my 'fresh to 3D' contemporaries.

Thank you for the suggestion which expanded my horizons.