Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    My colour deficiency seems to interfere with my perception of the images though.
  1.  
    Posted By: loremanMy colour deficiency seems to interfere with my perception of the images though.

    How do you know? I mean, what is your reference?
  2.  
    I just tried a mono version of the "ez" trefoil knot and I think it is actually easier for me.

    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    It shouldn't have any effect by itself. How's your stereopsis in a Wheatstone viewer like a View master?
  3.  
    The most amazing thing to me about these images is that you can scan around in them, and in fact that even makes the illusion of depth that much greater. Your eyeball musckel control system is adaptable enough to scan the illusion! Without losing that false focal plane or degree of convergence.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Here's a last one for Duracell. I find that once you lock in, the depth perception gets stronger and stronger with time. Also I have a little difficulty recognising what I see even though it is quite clear. I imagine this is because the image is being formed by brain processes that do not normally get involved in identifying objects.

    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: alsetalokin
    Posted By: loremanMy colour deficiency seems to interfere with my perception of the images though.

    How do you know? I mean, what is your reference?


    I just find that the ones with more red in them are harder for me to visualize. I can see the bunny fine, though
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuanten
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013 edited
     
    I have looked and looked and looked at all those nice picture, and I never ever see anything in 3D no matter the method.

    ETA: heck I never see anything beyond a jumble of pixel of col,or (or B&W)
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013 edited
     
    Posted By: QuantenI have looked and looked and looked at all those nice picture, and I never ever see anything in 3D no matter the method.

    You have to be pretty critical in your setup. Try this:

    Position your face about 30-35 cm away from the screen or even closer, then _relax_ and look past the screen, like you are focusing on something much farther away. Let your eyes relax and diverge, until they separate by one full repeat of the pattern. For this last one I look at the 4 prominent reddish blobs near the top. Let the eyes relax into overlapping the middle two of these blobs. Then just wait, don't move your eyes. The depth should begin to emerge. When it does you can start scanning around, diving into the depths and climbing the hills. The illusion gets stronger with practice.
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Lacking conventional binocular vision (or indeed any binocular vision) I have never been able to decode these stereograms. But strangely enough -and to my great surprise - 3-D cinema of the type used in Avatar works perfectly for me. That's a bit of a puzzle.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: tinkerLacking conventional binocular vision (or indeed any binocular vision) I have never been able to decode these stereograms. But strangely enough -and to my great surprise - 3-D cinema of the type used in Avatar works perfectly for me. That's a bit of a puzzle.



    When you say you lack binocular vision what do you mean exactly? You must have stereopsis or 3D movies with polarisers wouldn't work. You can judge depth in the real world without moving your head I guess?
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuanten
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013 edited
     
    Posted By: AngusYou can judge depth in the real world without moving your head I guess?



    I can't answer for tinker, but in my case I have great difficulty judging distances. Since I am not using a car it does not matter much in life though. (except when pouring a drink, now that I hate it. I am never able to tell if it will fall IN or OUT of the glass).
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    @Angus. I have had since birth a vision fault that runs very strongly through my mothers side of the family. Always on the same side. Serious Myopia of the left eye and normal vision on the right. Undiagnosed due to an almost complete lack of Strabismus or similar tell-tales. Since I lost the most effective use of the right eye due to a variant form of Macular Degeneration I depend on the vision of my corrected left eye for anything like driving, reading and so on.

    I have always (until the MD problem) used my eyes independently -switching (I guess) my visual cortex from working with just the left and ignoring input from the right and vice-versa. Dependent on what I needed to do. This 'decoupling' enabled me when younger to focus on anything from around 25mm away to the far horizon. I never even realised about the depth perception stuff until I started work in a bacteriology lab, when I realised I was missing the tube with the wire loop too often - because of inaccurate depth perception. Changing my technique soon overcame that particular problem. But I could never play tennis, cricket or football worth a damn. Or see red/green old style 3-D. Though I drive a great deal and for many years (3-400 miles a week) and last Friday 450 miles in one day with an unblemished accident record.

    I don't quite understand it all myself...
    •  
      CommentAuthorDuracell
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: AngusHere's a last one for Duracell.
    Thanks, I appear to have been de-fanged though ...
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Kewl man!
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Here's me doing amateur ophthalmologist: poor focus in one eye but no strabismus- it looks like you were able to converge properly even in spite of any monocular focus error as a child. It is known that you have to learn stereopsis before a certain age, so I guess you must have been able to do it in time. It's also known that stereopsis is quite possible even with one image badly misfocussed, so you may have prevailed over an existing difficulty. Your sense of depth may be relatively weak, though, and require strong cues. The old colour anaglyphs were dim and often had a lot of crosstalk, so they may not have been good enough. Modern 3D films are much brighter and the circular polarisation anaglyph technique has little crosstalk.


    To see 3D films you have to be able to converge to a different distance from where you focus. The mismatch isn't too bad in a theatre but it's pretty strong with stereograms on paper. It's a skill that has to be learned and some find it difficult. If you can't focus one of the images it may be hard to find the right convergence to pick up the correct cycles in the periodic Magic Eye pictures. The little red guide bars in one of the ones I posted might help. But if you can lock in to the right convergence I'm pretty sure you'd see the stereo image, unlike somebody with bad strabismus who never developed depth vision.
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: AngusYour sense of depth may be relatively weak, though, and require strong cues.


    Agreed...hence a rabbit at ball games. Big disappointment to my Pa who was a pro footballer in the 30's.
    •  
      CommentAuthorlegendre
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: AngusYour explanation is correct, of course, and your experience is the same as mine ( in my case I noticed as a small child that you could make the bathroom floor appear to be at the level of your knees by binocularly combining different hexagonal tiles in the pattern).


    For me, it was the repeating pattern in a punched sheetmetal radiator valence in my grandparent's spare bedroom. It sat just the right distance from the edge of the bed.. I found the effect fascinating.

    So.. can we still see these images when a little alcohol-induced nystagmus is in play?
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2013
     
    I can't. But an alcohol-induced misconvergence helps a lot.
  4.  
    My adaption has gone to pot