Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by wkat4242 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

wkat4242·

You should move it by the distance of your pupils for the best effect. Mine is bog standard 63mm so I'm lucky.

If you get it wrong things will look too big or too small and the 3D effect will be softer or too pronounced.

View on HN

The point is that you can force the respective of a giant or an ant if you so choose.

Using two cameras I had a time lapse of a fog coming in where you could see the 3d structure becuase they were at two different streets looking out.

Like op this was done nearly 20 years ago. Now you don't even get fog any more.

I remember reading about a physical device someone constructed with mirrors (I think at an early burning man) that gave you the experience of a huge inter ocular distance to get a giant's eye view. I've always wanted to try one (or the opposite to experience a tiny inter ocular distance).

Found it http://eyestilts.com/intro.html

A pair of periscopes laid flat will do it, but it'll really confuse your eyes. I can feel it on these images: the eye muscles are trying to converge on a distance closer than the focusing muscles want to focus on, and I can tell that's a bit weird. That might be an age thing though.

You get the same thing with VR headsets as their physical focus is always around 1 metre away (3-4 feet). But you get used to it quickly.

The reason you need to change the inter-frame distance is because the amount of information carried by the parallax drops off quite quickly, to the extent that at the sort of distance in the tree photo, your brain is mostly using motion cues for 3d reconstruction, not stereo vision. Increasing the horizontal distance simulates bringing everything correspondingly closer.

Yes but that makes it look like a miniature world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com