Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I am into Stereo Photography as well as photo restoration and decided to restore some rare stereo nude shots Circa, 1900 and see how much detail I could bring out.

(Download)

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

All retouching has to be done twice and offset the exact correct amount or it doesn't work in 3D.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I can’t fuse the images because they are too far apart for parallel viewing. If you would switch them left/right they can be viewed by crossing the eyes, which is much easier to do.

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

Interesting hobby. As a kid my grandmother had a number of travel photos and a viewer. Never remember seeing any nudes. <grin>

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I don't find the 3D effect very strong. Is that because of the processing, or were the originals weak in that regard as well?

I have done some (non-nude) 3D shots with my Pentax Optio 555 which had the capability built in, and they were really quite stunning.

I think distance to subject has a lot to do with the depth of the effect. Closeups are really quite dramatic.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I know there is no easy way to view these in depth without using a 3D TV or special glasses. I can't do the cross eyed effect myself. I could make anaglyphs so you could see them with red cyan glasses. But at least you can see the content clearly this way. And they do have pretty good depth. I have not heard of your camera. I will look it up. I have no info on these shots, just the date, circa, 1900.

I am doing a few more.

rit z Loc: Upstate New York

By “unfocusing” my eyes I saw 3 images, the two shown and a third in the middle which had a very nice 3D effect

lwhitehall Loc: St. Louis

I am still experimenting with a 3-D lens on my camera, but I pulled out the viewer that came with my lens. You did a very good job on cleaning up the images.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

The images as presented can only be viewed in 3D if the left image is kept in the left eye field of view, and the right image in the right eye. If you were able to fuse the images to a third image in the middle you were using the cross-eyed approach, in which case you do not get the correct 3D effect; things that are supposed to be in the background will be in the foreground.

I downloaded the image, did some cut/paste to interchange the images, and came up with the 2-image cross-eyed version. That image has the correct depth presentation of the foreground/background.

With Fotoartist's permission I would be happy to put that image into this thread. You should see a much better presentation when you do the cross-eyed "unfocussing" to view it.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

I don't need the anaglyphs; I don't like the artificial colouring that they have.

The cross-eyed technique takes a bit of practice because normally when you aim/converge your line of sight to a particular distance the lenses of your eyes automatically try to focus at that distance; so the images are fuzzy. With practice you can force the eyes to converge somewhere between your face and the screen while maintaining eye focus at the screen distance.

A simply device to help with cross-eyed viewing is to take a thin cardboard or large envelope and cut a rectangular hole into it that is the shape of one of the images. The hole should be about 1/2 the size of the image on the screen. You then hold that card between your face and the camera at the distance from your face where the left eye sees/frames the right-hand image through the card (close one eye) and the right eye sees the left image. Move the card back and forth slightly to get the best view.

The Pentax Optio 555 was my first digital, bought in 2003. It allowed you to choose parallel or crossed as the mode. You then took the two images in succession, moving the camera laterally about 5-7 cm. The result appeared as a single image with 2 half-frame images side by side.

ski Loc: West Coast, USA

Interesting.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Hey, I got your viewing technique to work with the rectangular hole in a piece of paper. But yes, the images are in pseudo stereo. Still Pretty cool. Thanks.

For my viewing I use this stereo viewer. It's pretty good, front surface mirrors etc. Made in China, $25. I also have a stereo monitor and two 3D TVs.

This stereo card was hand colored 100 years ago. I have some that are B&W. A lot were hand colored.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

When you say the images are pseudo stereo, did you flip the L/R images or use the one you posted? Your original is for parallel viewing, and the cross-eyed technique will not give the correct result.

Try this one here for cross-eyed viewing with the rectangular card aperture:

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

It looks like the viewer widens the interocular distance for the larger image that you posted. Marty Feldman might be able to view the original without the help of a viewer, but most folks can't look wall-eyed enough to accommodate.

I have practiced both cross-eyed and parallel 3D image viewing without the need for a viewer, but the parallel viewing only works if the images are separated by my interocular spacing. I was able to view your original image pair with parallel viewing but I had to back away from monitor to about 6 feet.