3D photography

[BAK61]

has anyone fooled around with stereo and/or lenticular imaging.....i have a Loreo that i finally got around to trying...very pleased....and a Nishika that i haven't had a chance to use yet....( let's face it, this is expensive to process )......so..anybody else get some interesting images with these formats ?

 

[Timoris]

I to would enjoy some answers concerning the Nashika:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/film-discussion-q/240082-nashika-n8000-3d-limitations.html

 

[BAK61]

from what i've read, the situation needs to be ideal....there needs to be depth to create your image.....main subject at 6', next part of photo at 8'...( something like that ).........i figure to really give mine a go at the NY Botanical Gardens......remember, unlike stereo photography...this is Lenticular....the processing actually entails slicing the negatives very thin and relayering them....it is done by only one place ( as far as i know ) and that is SNAP3D......go to SNAP3D.com for the order form........to process 18 pics (assuming 36 exp. roll ) it will cost i think 54$ ( i think it's about 3$ per picture )......by the way, they're in Toronto.............check the website first, and the call them to make sure they are still operating.............better safe than sorry.......all in all not an everyday camera, but cool to use every so often...........good luck....

 

[djacobox372]

I do quite a bit of 3d photography. I use a sputnik 6x6 medium format stereo TLR, as well as an old realist 3d half-frame 35mm.

I've found that range to subject is critical. With cameras that have lenses approximately the same distance as the human eye, the 3d effect is best when the closest object is 5-15 feet away from the camera. Farther then that, you end up with a flat image, closer and it becomes straining to view.

When taking photos of large items further then 15 feet away (like a building), you will get a better 3d effect if you increase the distance between the lenses. I do this by putting a cap on one lens, taking the photo and then moving slightly to the left, switching the caps, and taking the 2nd photo.

There's a 1/30th rule in stereo photography that states that for the best 3d effect the subject distance should be 30 times the distance between lenses. So, if your taking a photo of a building 300 feet away, the lenses should be 10 feet apart. If you're taking a photo of the moon the lenses should be 7000 miles apart (this has been done and the 3d effect is fantastic! it makes the moon look like a little ball floating a few feet in front of you).

It's also important to understand convergence--the images should converge at the point of interest, and it's best if this is the closet object in the scene.

Here's a good resource:Stereoscopic photography with a single camera

 

[daveedmiller]

When I look at something with your eyes and see the dimensions that explain the depth of the brain by comparing the images from the eyes of the left and right. To simulate this photograph because it requires images of the same scene, taken from slightly different locations.

 

[Engin]

I do quite a bit of 3D photography and have used a few different methods. The Nimslo is certainly an option with the idea of scanning the uncut negatives and either making stereo pairs or using something like After effects to create inbetween frames to make a good lenticular print. There is also the SDM option StereoData Maker which allows you to use any number of cannon powershot cameras on a rail and get really high sync rates between them. Again you probably want to use After Effects to tween the photos to get intermediate frames, unless you have a huge bank of cameras. Then there are rail systems like the automated Mitton system or you can even repurpose an old typewriter Design Tips ? MIDWEST LENTICULAR | Fine Art Lenticular Printing A key thing is to have a controlled background, landscapes that go to infinity might seem like a good idea but they rob the important forground objects of much of their depth potential.