[madaeon] couldn’t find a digital viewer for his stereoscopic 3D images. He felt that he could probably build one, so he did. He found two identical digital picture frames and made a custom rig to hold the two frames. The method he is using involves polarized lenses, so you do have to put glasses on to see it. Being polarized though, you get full color, like modern 3D movies. We think it would be even nicer to see them without glasses, but some people have a really hard time with this style of 3d image.
6 thoughts on “Portable, Digital Stereoscopic Image Viewer”
Leave a Reply
Please be kind and respectful to help make the comments section excellent. (Comment Policy)
I love this kind of thing, I have felt for a long time now that we all need to take 3d pictures and videos.
use lenses to reflect both images together on to one surface
@cyanide
That would not give a 3D image… it would be the same as looking at a standard computer screen.
Eric Kurland of retinalrivalry.com did all of this several years ago. He also has a wide by side stereoscopic viewer using a psp, it can do stills and movies.
Blah, not a fan of the 3d hype. There is a reason it never took off in the 50s, the 60’s, or even the 80s, only one person can experience it at a time. Till they can get around that, without quality deprecation mind you, it will never take off into the mainstream.
It is still nice to see the idea played with though….
I agree that 3D just isn’t something that is going to take off in the consumer world. It’s interesting, no doubt, but I just don’t think we’ve found it’s niche yet.
Medical imaging, science labs, those kinds of things I think are all a given. Being able to see things in 3D that are normally too small to see with our eyes I have to believe is a big help. But for entertainment, it just doesn’t seem to be something we really want.
I mean, we want new stuff of course, and 3D is a buzzword right now, but when we get 3D our collective reaction is really just sort of ‘meh’.
I think holographic displays, multitouch large displays, and that kind of thing (i.e. minority report) stand a much better chance of making it big in our consumer world than 3D.
Besides, we already have perfect 3D movies that the whole audience can perceive at once without glasses. They’re called plays. *smile*
Seriously though, I think the furthest we need to go with 3D and movies is the bringing the atmosphere to life maybe. Like in a war movie, have some small fireworks and smoke effects in the theater. Or in a winter scene have some cold air rushing across the audience every now and then. I don’t think we need the depth to feel like we’re there, just the ambiance.
Obviously we can’t go overboard with that though, no water (too many electronics and white shirts, wait, maybe water is a good idea) and nothing super loud, but just that little bit to make the theater seem like it’s part of what’s on screen. And it would only work for the epic type movies. The drama or comedy genre wouldn’t gain anything by letting us smell the fart.