digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Amazing Stereo Pictures! Must See!

isnichwahr.de — By rapidly moving the image between two perspectives, these images appear to the brain as 3D.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • esssee, on 10/12/2007, -13/+216And damn annoying to boot.
    • ani-pockdotnet, on 10/12/2007, -30/+12If you don't see the alternating JPG's try in FireFox. That fixed it for me. Cool effect!
    • driftwood07, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15sites down http://www.duggmirror.com/design/Amazing_Stereo_Pictures_Must_See/
    • Yashar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+105This is probably the best one
      http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/9862/trexih2.gif
    • knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4holy mysql errors, batman!
    • laplacian, on 10/12/2007, -13/+9surprisingly effective 3d illusion
    • kutza, on 10/12/2007, -1/+48Here is the *actual* artists homepage: http://www.well.com/~jimg/index.html

      There's many more examples than on the site above.

      Caution, some artistic nudity in the gallery (NSFW).
    • soviyet, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4My eyes! This one is kind of cool too though: http://www.glowfoto.com/static_image/17-210127L/7236/gif/02/2007/img3/glowfoto
    • antdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Looks like an earthquake. :)
    • ghee, on 10/12/2007, -13/+163Be honest now, how many people thought they were going to see an incredible audio system.
    • unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -7/+28Alright, where are the porn pics like these? Come on internet people, find em.
    • XISUPERMANIX, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1I agree with unknownsoldierx someone should do that to some Kate Ground pics
    • gutistg, on 10/12/2007, -16/+89Sorry for the comment abuse and the caps-lock.

      THIS NEEDS A WARNING FOR PEOPLE WITH PHOTOSENSITIVE EPILEPSY.
    • oscarsonthepond, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Can't figure out if I think this is really cool or really lame.
    • wharlie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10You can get the same effect without the camera by alternately opening and closing your left and right eyes.
      Still annoying.
    • RossEwidge, on 10/12/2007, -37/+4So DIZZY... Must VOMIT til it shoots out my nose NNNNNNNG!!!!!!
    • RossEwidge, on 10/12/2007, -37/+3So DIZZY... Must VOMIT til it shoots out my nose NNNNNNNG!!!!!!
    • RossEwidge, on 10/12/2007, -36/+2So DIZZY... Must VOMIT til it shoot out my nose NNNNNGGG!!!!!
    • Cglass, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17I absolutely love the 3 minute gap in RossEwidge's comments, wonder what his thought process was like
    • mdhauke, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5Dugg down for the incessant Burning Man pictures.
    • chrisjs169, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@gutistg

      If "By rapidly moving the image" isn't enough of a warning, what is?
    • adstretch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9OH My God! The Enterprise has been hit!!! [insert shakey camera and everyone pretends to fall over]
    • 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"Dear Diary... Today, I made some AMAZING STEREO PICTURES! and everyone got motion sickness."
    • jimrooney, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1gutistg
      > PHOTOSENSITIVE EPILEPSY....
      Yeah, they can put the warning right underneath the one on the monitor that says "don't look at monitors" (photosensitive epilepsy can be triggered just by looking at monitors/tvs, so those with it don't have them)
  • gpollard, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7What an awesome effect.
    • Foosballist, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8This is pretty simple. The difference in the degree of change in perspective is much more evident in object closer up than further away. This is why when alternating quickly between them, the objects in the front seem to move more than the ones in the back, thus, giving a three-dimensional effect.
    • PeteLP, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think it's absolutely awesome too. Almost eerie actually.

      Why the down diggs? Is it because more people don't think it's an awesome effect, or because more people don't like sincere expressions of enthusiasm? Just curious.

  • theexpress, on 10/12/2007, -0/+59It's pretty cool. Some look like 3D pictures, but there are a few that just look like shaky pictures with no effect.
    • WUThad, on 10/12/2007, -10/+42All of them seemed 3D to me, that's weird that so many people can't see it.

      I wonder if it's just my monitor or browser that's better, or maybe I'm just a better person. Who knows?

      Either way, that's a great effect. I may try and make a couple.
    • MSTK, on 10/12/2007, -28/+141) Take a picture
      2) Move camera a couple of inches
      3) Take another picture
      4) Put them together as a gif animation
      5) ???
      6) Profit!
    • idonthack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That works fine for stationary objects, but some of these are in motion. They probably used one of those cameras that makes images for 3-d glasses, just didn't colorize it.
    • WatsonFilms, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2I found that I had to switch over to IE to get the full effect. For some reason, Firefox seems to display animated gifs very slowly. I don't know if I'm the only one with this problem.
    • digg-dugg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10You need two cameras taped together and both angled directly towards the subject. Then rig them to shoot at the same time so that you can capture things like splashes without a delay.
    • chaddhall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And some of them look like 2 frame films. Not really 3D, just the resemblance of depth due to movements. I really hope we don't start seeing web ads like this...
  • mrfreeziexp, on 10/12/2007, -13/+10I think my brain is broken, it doesn't seem 3D to me.
    • Achilles, on 10/23/2007, -14/+5No, there is definitely no profit.
  • frank3000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17the first one, with the water, really worked

    it would be better in a larger size and with quicker flashing
  • Flawed77, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Earthquake!
  • Roksix, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Cool...
  • jcapogna, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22That gave me a headache. Seriously, my head hurts now.
    • inspecality, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Yeah me too.
    • VaporBro, on 10/26/2007, -9/+11Gives me a headache when the only describing word people can think of is AMAZING.
    • NoNameHere, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Me three. I also get nauseated and only see parts of it in 3D illusion. There's got to be a way to blend the two frames so as to do away with the jiggling and subsequent inability to focus on anything in particular.
    • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"There's got to be a way to blend the two frames so as to do away with the jiggling and subsequent inability to focus on anything in particular."

      There's no way... This process has this fundamental limitation. Blend the two images and you lose this barely-3d effect.

      The brain has to be able to distinguish each of the two images for this to work, so images cannot alternate too quickly and/or blend.
    • sgen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@kadsbaker
      > "Gives me a headache when the only describing word people can think of is AMAZING."

      Gives me a headache when people can't think of *any* word for a "describing word". Try ADJECTIVE.
  • arkuden, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0mirror is down too..:(
  • karlcbl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is rather easy to do, go here http://www.teamdroid.com/how-to-make-a-cheap-digital-camera/ (or just press the shutter at the same time on two cameras side by side) to see how to get the setup correct then just animate the two images. It's basically a left eye photo and a right eye photo.
  • justinjus, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9wow. imagine filming a movie like this!
  • sfpiano, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5It would be cooler if it didn't look like a bizarro-world earthquake.
  • nickels, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7I for one, can't wait to see some porn like this!!!
    wew hoooo
  • Ryohei, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Curious to know if this is done with a digital camera or good ol' film. A friend of mine used to work for a major car audio manufacturer and the guy the designed all of there amps was so kind of mega genius. He took two older cameras (from 60s or 70s maybe) and disassembled the more or less spliced them together and gave it 1 set of controls for both devices. Can't remember if it was a single role of film or 2, but it was definitely cool. Only problem was I couldn't shuffle the pictures fast enough to get the 3D effect, we had to rely on the cross-your-eyes-till-it-looks-like-one-3D-picture method.
    • turpenine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2you ca just buy multiframe film cameras, , or you can load 2 rolls of film into one with 2 shutters.
  • taybay, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Very sweet.. kind of made me dizzy or cross-eyed or something. I just got a funny feeling when I looked at them. Weird.
    • VelvetoneFusion, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Thats called "motion sickness".
  • cyberpear, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I prefer 2 still images next to each other where you cross your eyes to view them; they look a lot more 3D than these do.
  • SirBriggs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I first saw this on ytmnd, actually: http://frozenintime.ytmnd.com/ -- (just more of the same type of images)
    • jazbek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Those ones are cooler. Love the water splash and the man in mid-air.
    • tipexy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1truly the saddest thing I've said today, but is the music on that website from "oblivion"?
  • LucasVB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13That's called wiggle stereoscopy, by the way.
  • eleventh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Indeed, Tool's most recent album art features some pretty nifty stereoscopic images.
  • petervenkman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I look at all the lonely people....
  • DrDankenstein, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5worked well for me!

    and lol @ those poor kids being dragged to burning man at such a young age. i guess the world needs to keep regenerating its weirdos though. good for them.
  • eleventh, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@eightyd

    AJ's images aren't supposed to flicker back and forth. You are just supposed to relax your eyes and look "through" the image. The two images should "click" in to one in 3D. This is the same principle used on the album art, however included are special glasses that make it much easier. I can't do the ones on AJ's myspace - I need the glasses.
  • Alias12, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3They arent amazing, they're more annoying than anything.

    The background moving around so much is very distracting from what the photo is supposed to be about.
  • paco505, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4It's the same as the bullet-time effect but just with 2 pictures.
  • crashingechelon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3These kind of pictures are nicer to look at in real life. I saw some examples in my History of Photography class, these were popular in the 1800's early 1900's I think it was. The only thing that got me was the device you had to hold in front of your eyes. It had like a lens with a wall down the middle and a slider that you put the photos in and you just moved it till you saw the image. What it did was block out your eyes from seeing the image at the same time so each eye saw each image on it's own and put them together in 3d in your mind.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoviews

    If you want to see more on it. Also this effect was used in Metal Gear Ac!d 2 for the PSP with the Solid Eye Viewer.
  • BrownV, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I think I saw Willy Wonka in one of them!
  • geekitechture, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Not for those prone to motion sickness. Looked at them only with difficulty and now I want to throw up.

    They're silly, too. Things wiggle around thanks to JPEG layering techniques? Big deal. Flash is somewhat similar in effect and just as (yawn, boring, anything *good* on Digg tonight?)...old.
  • Evolve, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Omg thats awsome. Big time digg, only wish it was monday so i could digg it a few more times.
  • SgtAl, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Someone should have warned me that it was 3D photos of a bunch of damn hippies!
  • Trevor2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Works best if you look at it with one eye open. If you have only one eye open and have horizontal movement on the screen you get a 3d effect in games too.
  • phantomsnow, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Umm, dugg down for people too ignorant to have any clue about, or understand the principles of motion picture 'technology'. 3D, give me a break.
  • Iwantawii, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2It's sort of like the slo-mo they used in the original Matrix, but with only 2 cameras.
  • phantomsnow, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3There aren't 2 cameras.
  • blakholephysics, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3If you sped up rate at which the pictures transition, would it look any better?
  • sfslim, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Dugg! (And not just for my ducky nightclub in the left background of the second photo.)
  • hobnob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1i think i just had an anxiety attack ;x
  • TheChance, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Little more 3D, a little less eye bleeding would be nice
  • aserer511, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2very cool
  • shinelikeitdoes, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0stupidest thing i have ever seen..."by showing you two frames of a video sequence these pictures appear to be moving!". wow. you would be very impressed by "flipbook" technology too, i am sure ..."why..that stick figure appears to be running!"
  • CelebVoy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0I cannot even begin to fathom the possibilities which this creates for not only images, but also video games.

    That said, wonder what prolonged exposure would do to the eyes?
  • bourbonandcoke2, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1Buried as innacurate. Not amazing, not stereo and not a must see.
  • chattin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2This is the trippiest thing i've seen on the internet in a while...
  • batfink, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Did that make anyone else feel really... really sick?
  • effward, on 10/23/2007, -6/+1Where is my 3D stereo porn?!
  • Lupich, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Why are these so 'AMAZING' I didnt see anything that amazing..
  • DrunkenCP, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0That's a pretty neat effect but the amazing "JiggleVision" sort of takes away from the experience. It's not amazing, since that's pretty much how holograms work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hologram
    • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Ehm, holograms don't work like that... at all.

      Did you actually read the wiki article you are linking to?
  • ckufggid1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1GAY
  • jimbobaii, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2It gave me sea legs. Digg now flashes back and forth. I'm going to stare at a blank wall for a bit before I fall over.
  • DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Ok I've seen these "Amazing" 3d animated gifs many times on digg, let me quote myself from another similar thread:

    "Some animals (like birds) will quickly move their head from left to right to augment their depth perception. Sometimes we do it too without even thinking.

    The brain is trained to combine the images from the two eyes to estimate depth. This gif animation spreads the two viewpoint images over time instead of space, and it seems the human brain is also (somewhat) good at estimating depth this way.

    Is it real 3d? I guess it depends on your definition of it.

    While I was impressed by this phenomenon when I saw it on digg a year ago, I quickly found what is the basic limitation:

    The animation has to alternate frames at a somewhat slow speed so you'll see some heavy flickering no matter what. If you speed up the animation the two images will look like they blend together and the 3d effect will stop working."

    The only thing interesting about these is that you can see them on a standard 2d monitor without glasses and without crossing your eyes. Aside from that, it makes some people dizzy and the novelty wears off pretty quickly.
    • Kentdigg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Of course the brain interprets this as 3D. What's the difference between this and playing back the same 2 frames alternately in a movie for example?
  • awol21, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Neat idea, I'm going to try making some of these myself.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.