What is Digg?61 Comments
- Snowdaddy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3yea that is some neat stuff....i tried it with a digital camera and made a gif of it and it turned out much like the pic in this dig. I also found a pic similar a while back http://images12.fotki.com/v210/photos/1/131129/2526941/Dino3d-vi.gif
- 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's a pretty cool effect. It threw me into a seizure that lasted almost twenty minutes. But a cool effect nonetheless.
It would be interesting to experiment with different sizes of image and also different update rates to see how this changes the observer's perceptions. - psytek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3what would happen if you speed it up say 30fps or so?
- mcmorrowk, on 05/06/2009, -1/+3it's like bullet-time with only two cameras.
pretty cool. - meangene, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Your work must suck if a picture of the woods is NS. As for the links at the bottom, one certainly reads "(anything past the mainpage may be nsfw)"
Cool link! - Zeuser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thegreenarrow: YOU'RE COMPLETLY OFF-BASE !!!
"what do you think this stereo image is? it's like a Quicktime VR, but instead of 360 degrees, it's like 2 degrees. Yeah, a 2 degree Quicktime VR"
TOTALLY WRONG!
It's not shifting 2 degrees, it's moving the camera 2 inches. There's a huge difference in the end result.
Go and read a book on the basics of 3D photography! - Zeuser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2THOSE WHO DON'T SEE THE GENIUS, DON'T KNOW *****!
Pretty cool idea.
One form of stereo photography is to place 2 photos side by side and have the view cross his eyes. Eventually both pictures merge and a third one pops up and you get a 3D photo in full color. This is far better than the usual blue-red photos.
This "wiggle" is similar to that but instead of making the viewer cross his eyes, the wiggle effect makes your brain see the 3D effect from the motion.
If you want to try this yourself, it's fairly easy. You just need to take 2 photos. Put your camera on a tripod and take a shot. Move the camera about 2 inches to the left or right and take your second shot. - Philbert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I should try this in 3D, Lightwave has an option for doing stereo renders.
- luccidono, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So... with this in mind. Could you make a 3D video? Say 2 side by side recordings spliced together alternating frames.
- fudgebrown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i just got motion sickness and barfed all over my keyboard
- m85476585, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"what would happen if you speed it up say 30fps or so?"
It would look like a blur. You need time to see each image. If you make it 30fps and one red, one blue it would work. - jeznav, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Interesting effect if you look at the image through an electric fan...
- gchance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I saw this same trick done in 1980 or 1981 on That's Incredible with moving video. The resolution was much less, of course, extremely blocky, but the idea was the same. I didn't like it then, I don't like it now.
- craigily, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://img368.imageshack.us/my.php?image=faster3d6uv.gif
sped up to 30 frames a second. i think it isnt as good. what about you guys. - craigily, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i heard something like the nintendo revolution will use a similar kind of technique to produce true 3-d graphics. I hope it's not so wiggly tho aye yai
- portilaj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Put two fingers held together right in front of your face so they block just one eye from seeing the jittery image.
Now wave the fingers across your face so they block each eye in turn. Do this at 'just the right speed' and you can get a full color 3D view without the jitteryness.
You'll look like a damn fool though. - NegPol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1$15 cameras and $4 'mount'= stereo pictures for $35
radioshack model DIGIGR8 VGA 3-in-1 Digital Camera = $15
http://tinyurl.com/a67wm
And the $4 usb hub that fits 2 cameras perfectly at eye separation-
http://tinyurl.com/derk3
not that one, actually, the $4 is black and from iconcepts, but this one would work as well.
The pictures are as bad as you would expect for a $15 camera, but it does have a 640 by 480 mode that does decent pictures in decent lighting. - PlayWithFire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1as a matter of fact, there is a NSFW label there
but, it's pretty old for me
i've even sort of done something like myself. Very easy to do with a static object, and either a tripod, or a level camera surface - glitchp-udd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1quicktime vr is not stereo, nor is it 3d. it does not offer a 3rd dimension. in fact, the perspective in quicktime vr is even further from reality than in a standard photograph. quicktime vr is closer to an ehnanced panorama than to 3d or stereo.
in fact, quicktime vr is built on keeping the camera on a pivot and moving it around. stereo photography is built on having two cameras or taking two photos from different positons.
this wigglevision is a nifty effect, nothing more. just a cool trick. but i don't think the red/blue glasses provide any less of a novelty act. - madtiger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow. Just, wow.
- glitchp-udd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that woman on the rocks is the best example, imho.
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1i think i'll try and do this myself. cool link,.
- fudgebrown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0LOL
- bluffcityjk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2How about a NSFW tag??
- edrift101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pretty cool effect, passing fad at best though.
- Squeegee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Very interesting.
- greenup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0does anyone know how to make the other "3d without the glasses" technology work? Lenticular? everybody I've run into seems to say it takes 9 pictures to make work...
- Kryptonitfusion, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow...I can't take my eyes off it!!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Another good way of making 3D photos is with this software http://www.callipygian.com/3D/
- Skettalee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1ooo 3d porn!!!
- Snyder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow. this is freakin awesome. :-O
- wylddog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0thats cool
- dj_sea2005, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i really wanna speed this gif up to about 30 fps and see what it looks like then. anyone know how i could do this?
- craigily, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0also, out of curiosity i downloaded the Jurassic park one, sped up the frames... it actually kind of looses the effect when sped up. i wonder what would happen if you tried using transparencies also.
- DKasler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Halodecks here we come!
- skwhirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That's pretty nifty, but didn't really wow me too much.
One of these days I hope to break down and buy a pair of those 3D video glasses that create the illusion of a virtual 70" screen in 2d -> 3D. - sych0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0....weird
- t35t0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah so what does happen if you increase the speed to 28fps + ?
- xavi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pretty cool, even though it makes me kinda sick... =X
- craigily, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0t35t0r
it looses the effect. - WebStuntDouble, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0VOLTRON for ALEX back in 1984!
http://kitschy-kitschy-coo.com/columns/2005/2/9/
There's also a bit about The Last Star Fighter - one of the worlds first movies to include CG. - electronicmaji, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0can someone host a sped up version?
- J0nnyB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Geez for a second I thought i was delusional or something LOL
- unclejesse0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My head hurts. And I didn't need to see naked guys.
- glitchp-udd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i disagree with theassertion that it is not an illusion. if you're staring at a 2d photograph and see 3d...that's an illusion.
and what you say about modern polarized graphics is true, and it in no way differs from what the post says: "commonly associated with 3d images". when people think 3d, that's the first thing that pops into their head.
nothing factually wrong... - Arkz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this is amazing, nothing like crappy quick time vr you foolish fool!
- fudgebrown, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3some interesting rocks in this one
http://www.well.com/user/jimg/stereo/stereo_moist.html - fudgebrown, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0works for me in safari - try refresh
- justinryan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1how is this nws?
- ayde98, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I agree with the "wiggley picture" comment. The Jurrasic one looked better, but it still just reminds me a bad "trip" :)
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
