P� 13. nov. 2004 kl. 04.01 skrev Mishka:
a couple of observations:
1. stereo image is not a requirement for seeing and object in "3D". many people who don't have both eyes working properly (e.g. "lazy eye") still see the world perfectly 3D. there's much more to that than just a simple parallax.
That�s not completely true. I lack stereoscopic vision (although both eyes work they don�t cooperate). You should try playing tennis with one eye :-) The fast 3D vision doesn�t work at all, but in slower actions you find ways to compensate like recognizing size of known objects, seeing relative movements (normal people use this at larger distances), differences is sharpness (at close distances) etc.
I think bokeh simulates the DOF of your own eyes.
2. dimensionality is not a property of an image. is a property of an object that the image represents. neither stereo pair, nor holography nor a simple snapshot is a true 3D representation (holography is the closest of the three). i believe, "3D" can be applied to any of them equally, as long as it is understood what is being ment.
I agree. Holography is usually just a more advanced stereoscopic image with the additional features that I can see them by moving relative to the image. Stereoscopic pictures are wasted on me :-)
DagT
