New to this forum - How best view side-by-side?

Rene Gr wrote:

Just a curious question: How do you view the side-by-side stereo images on this page? I can do it with the parallel eye technique. But it is tiring. Are you using any tool or gadget?

My opinion:

SBS images for cross-eyes are easy to view, parallel SBS images can be reversed for cross-eyes or turned into anaglyphs (with a proper software viewer).

To view 3D SBS pairs mounted in parallel the best solution is with VR devices.

The Loreo Pixi Viewer is available - see:

https://3dstereo.com/products/loreo-3d-pixi-viewer-hands-free-parallel-viewer-for-computer-monitor-viewing-new?_pos=10&_sid=4aadd2cb9&_ss=r

For best effect you need screen pixel density as high as possible, preferably more than 300dpi, since this viewer magnifies the pictures.

An even more important aspect - do not exceed maximum width. Look at a ruler through the viewer, and note how wide are your viewing areas for each of the eyes - _without_ moving the eyes. Then your left/right images should be no wider than the measured minimum of the two.

No,it's $8.95.

I've been used to buy packs of 10 to get some discount,

Read the remark on loreo.com - they decided to cell all their products through 3dstereo.com instead of maintaining their own internet shop.

Do check the delivery cost for a pack of 5-10 items. Maybe you can save this way.

Anyway you will want to have several viewers if you indeed go into stereo photography.

3D Gunner wrote:

SBS images for cross-eyes are easy to view, parallel SBS images can be reversed for cross-eyes or turned into anaglyphs (with a proper software viewer).

To view 3D SBS pairs mounted in parallel the best solution is with VR devices.

I have to argue.

For me parallel SBS are easy - I just reduce the size until I can fuse them. Interestingly, I end up with larger sizes for backlit images (e.g. computer- or phone screen) than with paper prints.

And I just cannot see cross-eye at all.

Regarding VR devices: only some are usable, since many are made for distorted images in order to gain wider view - without window borders.

What most of us want are plain old optical stereoscopes - for undistorted parallel SBS.

I have one - a small folding device branded "American Scientific". It has two legs, and I can put Sony Xperia X5 Premium phone under it. The phone has 800dpi screen density, and .. this is _the_ _thing_.

If you insist on VR devices, this one (VR Fold) could be suitable:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/304828828949?hash=item46f936cd15:g:uv0AAOSwPetkBZjD&amdata=enc%3AAQAHAAAAwJ7Aglt3uG5vnzJuFr9O0ONP%2FBFkKMGkht4deHoFan4h2Qjmbdkuf39%2FEsrRtbbkHuUUOwZSu3%2FyGOsFXStQvba5V%2Brp0my%2FIQaD2CS313yScVEilVCBZkTlAe6N%2BzuhCzOsKzSrxzkhQkbes6UQqGzaw8EFmnnfEji3F5GCrdgJUtbOfbvL1DZknrPFlu69DrzTLqNJ%2BWyG3VI3NfcD4qThvvt9fX5NvnYKC5ct31gA88mkgsaHl1nvCNe%2FHZZ6Zg%3D%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR6Kd2PDYYQ

At least similar ones bought several years ago were OK, though pretty inconvenient. You need to reduce the picture so that it fits into your field of view of course. Don't just scale - resize properly in StereophotoMaker, so that each view stays centered in its half.

And as with stereoscopes, high pixel density is a must. We are supposed to see ~300dpi with bare eyes, so do provide ~600dpi for 2x magnification, and so on.

Oleg L K wrote:

3D Gunner wrote:

SBS images for cross-eyes are easy to view, parallel SBS images can be reversed for cross-eyes or turned into anaglyphs (with a proper software viewer).

To view 3D SBS pairs mounted in parallel the best solution is with VR devices.

I have to argue.

For me parallel SBS are easy - I just reduce the size until I can fuse them.

........................................

Regarding VR devices: only some are usable, since many are made for distorted images in order to gain wider view - without window borders.

What most of us want are plain old optical stereoscopes - for undistorted parallel SBS.

I have one - a small folding device branded "American Scientific". It has two legs, and I can put Sony Xperia X5 Premium phone under it. The phone has 800dpi screen density, and .. this is _the_ _thing_.

If you insist on VR devices, this one (VR Fold) could be suitable:

And as with stereoscopes, high pixel density is a must. We are supposed to see ~300dpi with bare eyes, so do provide ~600dpi for 2x magnification, and so on.

For me, it's important that stereoscopic images are as big and spectacular as possible, not just seen at a small size.

If they want to see spectacular content, three-dimensional imaging enthusiasts need to research and invest in a minimum of hardware and software that allows for quality viewing of stereoscopic pairs.

For this task, VR devices are by far the most spectacular performers.
There are apps that solve every problem.
Want to see images in full field of view, undistorted and in a frame? There's some stereoscopic players that lets you set all the necessary parameters.
Want to "navigate" inside stereoscopic images? These can be collected in panoramic format and viewed with a player that allows zoom-in and orientation with Head Tracking, etc...

The device you recommended in the link (Portable Folding VR Glasses) is actually just a cheap and simplified version of a mobile phone based VR viewer.
For just a few dozen dollars more you can buy a device that offers a far superior experience.

And so we are back to where we started, which is that the best solution to the problem at hand is based on VR devices.

(a smartphone + a dedicated 3D viewer = a VR device)

3D Gunner wrote:

If you insist on VR devices, this one (VR Fold) could be suitable:

And as with stereoscopes, high pixel density is a must. We are supposed to see ~300dpi with bare eyes, so do provide ~600dpi for 2x magnification, and so on.

The device you recommended in the link (Portable Folding VR Glasses) is actually just a cheap and simplified version of a mobile phone based VR viewer.
For just a few dozen dollars more you can buy a device that offers a far superior experience.

No, that's wrong - I tried numerous VR viewers, included rather expensive ones, and this worked the best in the role of stereoscope.

Please pay attention that VR-fold has:

- both focus and inter-eye distance adjustments

- large lenses

Given you manage to fit full left/right images into FOV of the corresponding lenses, the quality is measured in:

- the number of pixels you squeeze into the viewable areas

- absence of distortions or image destruction caused by viewer software processing

This simple viewer happens to have one of the largest FOVs, so it provides you with more pixels.

A disclaimer: don't waste time with standard 400-dpi phones. Buy an old  (800-dpi) Sony Xperia Z5 Premium or Sony Xperia XZ Premium. I'm not sure about their new models - the current trend of enlarging screens reduces pixel density.

What's not so good about VR-fold, is that you cannot easily "freeze" the whole assembly. I'd try to construct a desktop stereoscope out of it.

Oleg L K wrote:

3D Gunner wrote:

If you insist on VR devices, this one (VR Fold) could be suitable:

And as with stereoscopes, high pixel density is a must. We are supposed to see ~300dpi with bare eyes, so do provide ~600dpi for 2x magnification, and so on.

The device you recommended in the link (Portable Folding VR Glasses) is actually just a cheap and simplified version of a mobile phone based VR viewer.
For just a few dozen dollars more you can buy a device that offers a far superior experience.

No, that's wrong

What's wrong?

The very name of the device says it all: "VR Glasses- 3D Movies Vrbox Box Mini Foldable Glassess for Smartphone Portable"

A Sony phone with a 4K screen is an accessory/option for "Portable Folding VR Glasses", not a component.

These "accessories with 4K screens" are worth using with more serious mobile VR devices.

Let's avoid bringing each other to the court:).

Yes, "For just a few dozen dollars more you can buy a device that offers a far superior experience." - that's true by definition,

But in practice you don't know which model is indeed better, and my experience of spending tens of dollars more ended up with this cheapish thing (VR-Fold) being the winner.

This all relates to using VR viewer as a traditional stereoscope and judging based on image quality alone.

For instance, one of the other options was ~"Shinecon" (not remember exactly) which is mechanically perfect; probably that's how a Leica would feel, but its lenses were terrible.