I know they are not the greatest images in the world but I'd like to do some more like this and see what sort of effects I can get.

Anyway, they're best viewed with a pair of red/blue glasses ...

Damnit, I need some specs.

The first immage looks good though (even without specs...Mark, I'm just looking at the grey bits before you ask)

First image doesn’t quite work. It’s going a bit too far.

The one of the room works really well, apart from what’s on the sofa to the left. Did you use a special bracket for that, or just eyeballed it?

The flower one was done hand held and probably could do with being a bit closer together and more accurate in the movement of the camera.

The room one was done with a person's leg in the shot and they moved for the second shot hence the leg not appearing in both. I took that one on a table and shifted the second shot to the left by about 4 cm.

You gave me an idea. Thanks. Others will thank you too, I’m sure.

http://www.worldofpaul.com/panoramas/le ... le-3d.html

and

http://www.worldofpaul.com/panoramas/le ... le3d2.html

Here is the method I used for the anaglyphs. It helps preserve some of the colours in the image.

http://www.scec.org/geowall/makeanaglyph.html

I found the colour anaglyph method earlier tonight before reading your post



I like this

It works well.

Thanks!

I like your 3D panorama.

How did you get it 3D with only 1 picture?

I was thinking about it the other day, and I was coming to the conclusion that I’d need some kind of mega rig to achieve it. However, I also thought I’d see if I could use what I already had.

What I tried was to take the one panoramic image and offset one by an amount and see what happens. My theory here being that the “eye distance” is kind of already there in the shot (given the nature of the images and how they were taken). All I have to do is apply the colour filtering. It seems to work.

One thing to try (and I will be applying this to the panoramas soon) is to up the colour saturation of each image by about 60 (in Photoshop - other apps number’s may vary) before doing the levels trick. This seems to help compensate for the loss of colours though the red/blue lenses.

Yellow/blue versions for C4 specs. please.

Meh. Actually, I was thinking about this - I’d need to know the strength of colours to do the mix, which will take some research. The beauty of the red/blue ones is that they are the “traditional” kind and there is as much information out there as you can swallow. Also, I have a decent pair of red/blue glasses which I got as part of a kid’s optical illusion book, and they are pretty comfortable. Anyway, I’ll see what I can come up with for the C4 specs. But not tonight.

Fogmeister - when I said you may want to muck about with the saturation, I probably wasn’t clear. You]d load your left/right images. Up the colour saturation for each by 60 and THEN do the red/blue conversion on them. In Photoshop CS3, I can load each of these images as a smart object, so these things are readily adjustable.

I have uploaded revised panoramas with an increase in saturation. The colours seem more natural when viewed through the colour filters, BUT you will still get swimming in places where there are blues and reds in the image.

paulzolo this... http://www.swell3d.com/color-anaglyph-m ... mpare.html ... website has several different methods for colour correction of colour anaglyphs.

Might be worth taking a look also.

There are numerous ways suggested and some look a lot more natural than others.

I found this site last night too. I also found this:
http://3dtv.at/Knowhow/AnaglyphComparison_en.aspx

which also give various channel mixing methods, which can be helpful.

I have tried to improve one of my panoramas with one of the mixing methods on that site. IT seems to work.
http://www.worldofpaul.com/panoramas/le ... le3d2.html
I have kept the saturation boost on the original images, which seem to work. The sky, being absolutely cloudless that day, makes my eyes shimmer. I have to find out how to compensate for that somehow.

For Linux_User, I have a CHannel 4 specs version of that panorama too.
http://www.worldofpaul.com/panoramas/le ... e3d2a.html

I hope it works for you. It can give me headaches. There are a couple of problems with this from what I have been reading:
1 - The blue lens ideally needs a dioptric lens to slightly magnify it. THis lens provides parallax information, but as you can guess, very little colour information. The right channel deals more with colour. You also need to wear the glasses for a while before watching 3D content because your right eye has to adjust to the low light levels entering it.

2 - There is a copyright on the method. I’ve found a site where a Photoshop tutorial is present, but it’s not giving the proper colours. If you want to use ColorCode 3D™© (which is what the Channel 4 programme used - in America they are known as “SuperBowl” glasses) images, you apparently need a license.

So, this image is probably best described as "amber/blue" or "yellow.blue". Again, the sky is a problem due to the lack of features. Anaglyphs work best when there is detail everywhere. Near flat colours can cause swimmy areas in the picture.

Fogmeister - here is my reference page for creating yellow/blue images.
http://www.tomtroceen.com/3d/my-intru3d ... yph-images

Some quick and dirty renders from Poser.

http://www.worldofpaul.com/anaglyph/

Red/Blue:


Yellow/Blue:


Red/Blue:


Yellow/Blue:


I am finding that in this kind of situation, the yellow/blue lenses are producing better results because the colours do seems to be closer to the originals.

More please, I have a suitable pair of specs. now