Frequently Asked Questions
Question:
I would like to make stereo pairs of prints for my OWL viewer from my Fuji W3 3D camera. Is this possible? Any help would e greatly appreciated.
The “Fuji Stereo W3” 3D camera is very disappointing because its 3D images can only be viewed “in camera”., or by purchasing very expensive ‘lenticular’ prints.
What I hoped to get from this camera is photo-paper stereo pairs to put into my Owl viewer.
As the camera uses two lenses surely this is possible?
Dick Church
Answer from Brian:
Well, Dick. The FUJI W3 will enable you to make stereo cards. You just need to try a little harder.
If you take the data card out of the W3 and put it in a card reader attached to your lap-top, you will be able to open up the folders on it.
Inside – a couple of layers down, you’ll see the picture files themselves.
For each exposure (unless you’ve changed the default settings) you get a JPG (mono, of course) of one side of the stereo, and an MPO file. This strange beast is the combination of the two JPEG files for the two halves of the stereo pair. To use it, you will need to split it into its two component parts. For this you need a simple program … the best one I have found is called MPOSplit.
It’s a free bit of software – and incredibly useful ! [you can download it HERE]
Once you’ve done that, the real work begins. There is a great program for handling the re-combination of these files into a side-by side stereo pair to print out. – it’s called StereoPhotoMaker (SPM). I have never used it, because it’s not Mac-based, but many enthusiasts swear by it. I prefer to do the lining up by hand … and I do it in Photoshop.
It’s a skill to be developed, to generate the optimum print-outs for a stereoscope (I recommend the OWL, of course … best available!)
But it’s not hard to make a start. Trial and error … or … ask someone for advice. If I had time, I think I would write a short book on this subject, because there is a lot to it, and it’s a lot of fun. Anyway you’ll find a lot of discussion about all this on our website and a little in our books … A Village Lost and Found, and Diableries. Alternatively (or also) Join the Stereoscopic Society ! There are some great people there who will gladly help you through these things. OR the National Stereoscopic Society of the USA … likewise, there are experts there who will raise your game enormously !
Good luck !
Bri
Print Sizes for Stereos?
Gavin Mitchell has asked:
I have just bought an ‘Owl’ from your online shop, in which I’m looking forward to viewing both old cards that I have, and new stereo photos I plan to take. I cannot find any information on optimum print sizes to crop to, on Photoshop? Can you advise ?
Answer from Brian:
Thanks for writing, Gavin. Yes – this is a good question. It’s surprisingly difficult to find this information in the available literature.
Most of the formats of classic stereo cards will fit in the OWL … it’s specifically designed to be compatible for these, as well as serving as the viewer for stereos in books such as ‘A Village Lost and Found’. Even the curved mounts of the 1900s Keystone views and Underwood and Underwood will slide down inside the guides at the side of the back plate – and enable the card to stand upright.
As for making new stereo views, this is an area I’ve been very much involved in recently. We are hoping to publish some sets of stereo cards.
The optimum dimensions are these.
1) Outside width of the card – 178 mm. This fits the OWL perfectly, and a standard transparent protective sleeve (Secol, for instance) also fits this width.
2) Outside height of the card – 85 mm. This dimension is not nearly so critical – 85 mm puts the card just a little bigger than the standard 1850s view, and slightly smaller than a Keystone card.
3) Distance apart of centres of left and right images – 70-75 mm. This is an important dimension, since it determines what demands will be made of the convergence of our eyes when we view the stereoscopic image. In a non-prismatic stereoscope the maximum separation of corresponding points on the two images (ideally two points at infinity) ought to be the same as the separation of our eyes – ie about 67 mm. Any separation greater than that will have us asking the axes of our two eyes to diverge instead of converging – which is uncomfortable for most people. However, the way the lenses on the OWL are mounted is designed to give a prismatic effect … which helps our eyes deal with wider apart images without eyestrain … that’s also why a lot of people who normally have trouble viewing in stereo find they can see 3-D easily in an OWL. So we can relax the requirement for separation a little. Most people will find that 75 mm separation os perfectly comfortable using the OWL. And this gives a little more scope for making the images bigger on the card. If the left and right images are mounted with their edges up against each other in the middle of the card, the distance apart of the centres is the same as the allowable width of the left and right images.
4) Height of the separate images on the card – entirely at your choice. It just depends how you want the cards to look, and if you intend to leave room to put a title on the bottom or not.
I have made myself a template for mounting the stereo pairs in Photoshop. It has a layer of guides for locating the images for best comfort in viewing.
Maybe I can make this available on this LSC website for anyone who is interested.
It looks like this :
Click here to download the template at full size. [1.5Mb JPG image]
Of course this is only one layer – but it’s easy to convert this into a background and some guides, which can clicked in and out as required. At the size I have set it, the prints need to be made at 16.7 per cent size. This gives a nice bit of latitude on the quality – in other words, if you work in a file this size there will be no problem with getting good enough quality prints to look sharp in the stereoscope, and not show any pixellation.
I hope this will be helpful for a new generation of producers of fine stereo cards !
Cheers
Bri
P.S. Yes – some people make big stereo prints to put on the wall and view with a large box stereo viewer – I do it myself. But the result in STEREO is not as satisfying as one might expect. The classic Victorian stereoscope format is definitely the best quality 3-D experience available.
Stereos of the Moon?
Question:
Is it possible to take stereos photographs of the Moon, by, say having one camera in London and one in Barbados ?
Answer:
Stereo photography of the Moon goes back to 1858 ! Warren de La Rue actually published some nice stereo pairs of the Moon around this time on glass and on cards .. they’re very pretty !
This is not the greatest scan in the world … but …
OK. The diameter of the Earth is not nearly enough to get a baseline to do this. If you do the calculation, it’s a few thousand miles in a quarter of a million … nothing like the ‘recommended’ ratio of about 6 to one.
The way it’s done is by photographing the moon at exactly the same phase (ie exactly the same illumination angle – as near as possible) in different months – they don’t necessarily have to be successive. Because of the phenomenon of Libration, the aspect of the moon presented to us at these different times is slightly altered – the moon ‘wobbles’, as seen from the Earth. It’s because of its elliptical path around us, of course. The Moon’s spin on its axis is synchronised to the time it takes to go around the Earth – but an elliptical orbit means varying speeds, so the spin gets slightly out of synch – resulting in this ‘wobble’ as seen from the Earth.
So – the good news is you don’t need satellites ! But the bad news is that it’s going to take you a little while to collect pairs of photographs that will work in 3-D. I’ve done quite a bit of this over the years, with people like Patrick’s friend Jamie Cooper, and we’ve come up with some lovely stereos. So if you need some help in pairing and mounting the material you get for optimum 3-D, I’m up for it. OK ?
Cheers and good luck.
Brian
More on the “Shifting the Weight” method for taking stereo photos.
Question:
“This is a very stupid question, but to take a stereo pic. I need to pot all my weigh in one foot and then in the other, but I need to have one foot behind the other or next to the other?? sorry for asking this but English is not my first language and when I tried to take my first picture I didnt know what to do! thanks!”
Javiera
Answer:
Well, no, Javiera – it’s not a silly question ! Perhaps we have not explained it clearly enough. The feet need to be just side by side, relaxed, not too far apart, in a normal standing position. Then the weight is put gently on one leg for the first exposure, and then on the other for the second shot … but not to an extreme degree – it’s not ALL our weight we are transferring. This is just a convenient technique for moving the camera a few inches sideways, but keep it at the same height and orientation. We are looking for a movement of the camera of between two and three inches for a normal mid-distance composition … for close-ups slightly less, ideally, and for landscapes with no real foreground, very often 8 to 10 inches produces a good ‘hyper’ stereo. People like to make rules about these things … but really it’s question of experimenting until you get a result you like. Make sure to mount them the right way round when they are printed; if they are swapped over, the effect will be … strange !
The illustration below – from our book (A Village Lost and Found) – shows the two positions as two separate drawings, for clarity.
… but in reality – since the feet do not move during the procedure – a ‘composite’ photo from above might look something like this (though this chap is obviously taking an extreme ‘hyper-stereo’ – maybe it’s the Grand Canyon from a distance !! )
I hope this makes things a little clearer …. Good Luck with your 3-D !
Cheers
Brian
HOT NEWS – NOW WE CAN ALL BE SMARTPHONE 3-D PHOTOGRAPHERS
Question:
Hello Dr B
I believe some time ago you mentioned an app/device for iphones and would be willing to share that info. My husband has a great interest in photography and would love to use a device like that.
Thank you for any info you can pass this way and thank you for a heart full of love for animals.
Sandra
Brian’s Answer:
Hi Sandra
Thanks for asking. Yes, I use the 3-D camera app for taking ’sequential’ stereos … which is very easy to use, and gives great results. Basically it helps you to do the ‘rocking’ technique … in which you take one photo with your weight on the left foot, and then rock slightly so your weight is on the right foot and take the other picture. The app enables you to instantly line up the two pictures you’ve taken, and then it gives you a choice as to how to output … in red and green, ‘flicker’ … or, my favourite by far … the side-by-side format which makes the stereo pair viewable in glorious 3-D in an OWL or similar viewer … or just ‘free-viewed’ once you get the knack.
The app isn’t expensive — it’s worth buying the full version rather than use the free download, because it gives you higher quality output. Note: the subject matter using this technique has to keep still for the two exposure ! So it’s OK with people, and landscapes, but animals and children and fast-moving cars are more challenging !! But it’s endless fun.
Your enquiry comes at a good moment for us – because we’re about to launch my latest invention !! It’s an adaptor for the OWL to make any smartphone fit in it, and the combination becomes an instant nice quality digital stereo viewer !! So people will be able to take 3-D pictures of their pals (using the 3-D camera app, maybe) and then instantly be able to view the snaps in 3-D. It will also work for any side-by-side pictures downloaded from websites or twitter, etc . So everyone will now have instant access to high quality digital 3-D ! It works for movies too ! And all the new VR technology marries up with it like a dream ! I’m excited !
Here’s a sneak preview of the prototype of the device … it’s very simple … but wickedly effective !!
Hopefully we’ll have the OWL Smartphone Adaptor ready for sale in the next couple of months …maybe even some for Christmas !
Cheers
Bri
BRIAN’S STEREO AND FREEVIEW NOTES:
For those of you who are familiar with “Magic eye” pictures, viewing this will not pose a problem. The trick is to view this pair of images from a foot or so away, and look “through” the screen to infinity, allowing the two images to float across each other. Where the two central pictures exactly overlap, you can gently adjust the FOCUS only of your eyes (not the convergence) to fuse the images into a single Three-Dimensional image. This technique is called “Free Viewing” of stereo pairs. In this case I took a “HyperStereo” by clicking at each end of my hotel windows – so I got two images taken from positions about 20 feet apart. The resulting 3-D image looks as if we are a giant with eyes 20 feet apart; the city – Red Square, etc., – looks like a tiny model, with every detail exaggerated in depth… this has always been a passion for me …. I get a similar thrill from images as from music…. hope you enjoy this.
(P.S. – If “free viewing” doesn’t work, and you REALLY want to see this in stereo – you can print out the pair (size about 7 inches across the combined image, and put it in one of those Victorian stereo viewers if you have one lying around … or make one out of a couple of old spectacle lenses…. if you guys are interested in stereo there’s a LOT we can talk about!!! )
Love Bri
How come the 3D images I see when viewing them seem sharper, more in focus somehow, than the pictures taken?
Question:
Nikè Lambooy wrote:
Dear Brian,
A belated Happy Birthday! And please wish Roger the same.
I recently sat myself down to figure out how to freeview stereo pictures for some time – I wanted to know what the fuss was about. Turns out it’s awesome (every time I successfully see the 3D image I go like ‘yay!’ in my head. I especially enjoy the one you posted on your soapbox from Paris). I also downloaded the app to take stereo pictures myself, so here’s one of a certain brilliant album being played on my turntable:
I now find myself wishing I knew about this stuff before I went on holiday. Oh well. Nothing to be done about that.
What I am wondering about is how come the 3D images I see when viewing them seem sharper, more in focus somehow, than the pictures taken? Is that just me, or is it because the brain is receiving more information? (Or something like that. Really, I don’t know much about it.)
I am also curious about why some images are so much easier to view than others, for example this one:
[1]
was much harder for me to get right in the beginning than this one:
[2]
Why is that? I read the question on the LSC site about a picture being harder to view because of a tree branch, but I don’t see anything that could be interfering like that in the upper picture (Again: it could simply be me).
On a side note, the method of freeviewing you describe on your site doesn’t really work for me – I do it slightly differently. I block one half of the image for each of my eyes with my hands, so that when I get my eyes to converge the right way I see not three pictures with the middle one being 3D, but only one picture in 3D.
I find it a lot easier, and it might help people who are having similar difficulties. Of course, I doubt it is something I came up with first, but it isn’t mentioned on the site from the London Stereoscopic Company, and I figured you might want to know.
I hope you will answer my questions and thank you for your time,
Nikè Lambooy.
Ps. Please excuse any spelling or grammatical errors. I’m not a native English speaker, so I am (mostly) unaware of what I’m doing wrong.
Sources of the pictures:
[1] T. R. Williams ‘The Byzantine Court – Crystal Palace’
[2] T. R. Williams ‘The Ferry’
Answer:
That’s such an interesting letter, Nikè.
Thanks for giving me this detail – it’s all informative. I think your method of free viewing is very good, and worth communicating to others who are starting out in 3-D viewing.
There are many reasons for some stereos being easier to view than others. There is content itself, including clues for the brain to lock into, the separation of the images, and especially the infinities (if our eyes are being asked to diverge, they don’t like it)… and, often in the case of classic stereos, the alignment is a big issue – the brain doesn’t like any rotational discrepancies between images, or vertical misalignments. In working on the cards which I now publish as part of the LSC, I try to take all these into consideration, and make cards which everyone is comfortable with.
As for the feeling of enhancement in 3-D as opposed to 2-D, I agree, and I think it’s absolutely real. Our brains relish having all these minute differences of parallax to ‘read’ – and we feel a sense of joy at feeling the same sensation as if we were really ‘there’ – rather than just looking at a flat image. To me this joy from 3-D images never goes away.
All the very best
Bri
Do We Need a Viewer?
Question:
As our eyes normally see the world in 3D – would we not need viewers if 3D reproduction was done well enough?
Jen Tunney
Answer:
Jen … yes, we still need a viewer, no matter how good the reproduction is, because the only way our brain can see in 3-D is by processing two different images from two different eyes, in two slightly different positions. Whatever way we ensure that each of our two eyes each sees the picture that is meant for it, we will see the 3-D effect. We can use cross-polaroid filters, red and green glasses, or a geometric device like the OWL … but without this separation, there is no way the 3-D information is available. As soon as both our eyes see exactly the same picture, the perception is that the scene is FLAT … just two-dimensional.
I hope this makes sense !
Cheers
Bri
The Lodge – in “A Village Lost and Found”
Question:
Hi: I bought my copy of ‘A Village Lost and Found’ soon after it came out but kept it mostly unread until just before Christmas when we would be in Oxfordshire. We spent Christmas afternoon in the village and really enjoyed ourselves. I took several 3D photographs but the software for 3D looks rather daunting. Just one question: is it me or is the image of the Lodge on page 167 difficult to freeview. I seem to get an extra ghost image of a branch in the foreground.
Kind Regards,
Ian
Answer:
Hi Ian
Yes, I’ll own up ! The modern image on page 167 IS a bit risky ! I apologise ! The branch in the foreground is very close, and the overall stereo depth is extreme, so it can be hard to view. We’ll take a look at this for the next edition, and either make a new view, or issue a warning !! But it IS a nice challenge !!!
Using the FUJI FINEPICS camera
The software that comes with the Fuji digital stereo camera is a little strange. Personally, I ignore it ! There is a little program you can download from the Internet, called SplitMPO, which will attack the MPO files that the Fuji gives out, and make you a pair of JPEGs. Then in Photoshop, it’s not too hard to combine these into a side-by-side stereo pair, and print it out, to view in an OWL stereoscope … Good luck !
Cheers
Bri
Viewing Stereos with Reading Glasses
[Courtesy of www.brianmay.com]Question:
Jessica Breen from Newfoundland, Canada asked … “Can I make a viewer out of old glasses? I was wondering how, because my Dad wants to see the stereo photos and doesn’t know how to see them online. Thanks Jessica”
Answer:
Dear Jessica,
Thanks for writing … yes, I do think the Jupiter Stereo is particularly fabulous ! Though perhaps am just a little biased ! I’m glad to hear the art of Free-Viewing is spreading – well done ! Your Dad can do it too, but he will need those glasses. If, like me, his accommodation to view close-up objects is gone, this is what I recommend.
Tell him to get the strongest pair of spectacles he can find … 3 dioptres, or even more, is best. Then get my Jupiter picture up on your computer screen. Your Dad will then have to get quite close to the screen to see the picture in focus – about 4-5 inches, probably (10 cm or so). He needs to be sitting with his head straight in front of the screen, level, not tilted to the side. To clearly see the picture on the screen, your Dad will be feeling a bit of a strain – he has got the screen in FOCUS, but he has to nearly go cross-eyed, to bring the images from his two eyes together to make one picture in his brain. When he’s been doing this for a few seconds, and he’s getting tired of it, ask him to relax his eyes altogether … but without changing his position. Tell him, quietly and gently, to imagine he is now looking THROUGH the screen, as if it has become transparent, and he could see the wall behind – in fact, way beyond the wall, to infinity. Ask him what he sees. I expect he will say he now sees FOUR Jupiters, not two, and that they are blurry, and swimming about. If you like, you can now ask him to gently and slowly revert to what he was doing before – crossing his eyes inwards, to bring the screen into focus. He may begin to get a feel for what is happening, as the images ‘swim’ in front of his eyes – begin to be able to use the ‘convergence’ muscles, which tilt the eyeballs, consciously to move the Jupiters back and forth. Now get him to relax again, and look to infinity, through the screen, as far away as he can.
NOW ! Ask him to very slowly pull back – without changing the focus or convergence of his eyes … without changing ANYTHING … until the Jupiters are in perfect focus. And tell him the middle two of the four Jupiters should now fuse together if he allows them to, in a relaxed position of the eyes. Now he will, I hope, see the central Jupiters magically coalesce into ONE central image. And this image will spring into glorious solidity and depth … a beautiful smooth round ball, floating in black Space ! He is FREE-VIEWING !
OK ? Please write and tell me if this works ! I will also expect a small medal.
Good luck to you both !
Cheers
Dr. Bri
The OWL and the Internet
Question:
Linda Baker asked “Will the OWL work on stereo photos on the Internet ?”
Answer:
Well, I guess the answer is – yes and no …
On our websites (Brianmay.com and Londonstereo.com), we normally ‘print’ these stereo pictures roughly the size of a standard stereo card. For free-viewing, this keeps the maximum convergence required of our eyes down to just parallel – which is the way our eyes are when we’re relaxed and looking at a distant cloud. So all is well in this respect if we now transfer to a magnifying viewing device such as the OWL. It will work … you will get a nice stereo image, and the OWL allows you to go right up to the screen, unlike a Holmes viewer. So far so good. The problem, however, is the screen itself. The resolution of computer screens is currently much less than any photographic print, or even a screen print in a standard book (very much less than the resolution in our book, which is printed ‘stochastically’ – more about that later). So, although you’ll see a picture in 3-D, the lines on the screen will be very noticeable, and they’ll mess up the feeling of ‘reality’ which you’d expect from a good stereoscopic experience. Printing the pictures out and popping them in the OWL will improve matters quite a bit, especially if you use a program to ‘dolly’ them to a higher resolution by interpolation (Photoshop does that even without being asked), but really we’d need to send you bigger files of the pictures for you to get a really good result.
What we’re hoping to do is publish some high quality cards at some point, for this very purpose. They’ll work perfectly in the OWL, like all stereo cards do. I’ve actually already been preparing for this for months … but right now we’re fully occupied with the preparations for the launch of the book. It’s an amazing amount of work ! And I thought putting records out was hard work ! ha ha.
Cheers – and I hope this answers the question.
Bri
The OWL and the iPAD
Question:
“Will the OWL allow stereos to be viewed on an iPad ?”
comments: Hi Brian,
I met you last night at the wonderfully informative lecture in Downtown LA. Very impressive! (I am the one that brought the iPad, and showed you the signed album cover I have in my collection.)
The incredible news is that I just downloaded a few of the stereo Queen images from your site to see how they look on the iPad. Using your Owl viewer, the 3D effect of the images work beautifully on the iPad!
New technology meets the old
Thanks again,
Darwin Foye, USA
PARALLEL-VIEW STEREO INTO CROSS-EYED
Question:
Dear Brian,
I loved the picture of the comet you posted on Thursday, but because I can only free-view cross-eyed stereos, I couldn’t see it in 3D. So I copied the picture into powerpoint twice, cropped it and swapped the two halves, figuring that this would turn the parallel into a cross-eyed version (I hope you’ll excuse me taking such liberty with your photo!). It worked and it looked absolutely amazing!
Does this make sense physics-wise, to simply swap the two halves in a stereo to go between cross-eye and parallel? I had a few goes at taking stereo photographs myself and used this technique, but while I did get a fairly decent 3D effect, I never got the whole picture into 3D focus, so I thought I’d ask if I’m maybe doing it all wrong before trying some more.
Tonight, on this 24th of November, we’re performing Mozart’s Requiem with the choir I sing in. Sadly fitting…
Best wishes,
Susanne
ANSWER:
Ah yes, exactly…
Just swapping the two images over will change the pair from a parallel-view stereo into a cross-eyed view stereo.
And vice versa !
I guess I ought to give in and put every stereo up for both views ! I tend to just publish things the way they would be if it were a stereo card. But actually, in a quick poll I did a couple of years ago on the Soapbox, it seemed that more people free-view cross-eyed than parallel ! My Friend Maki Ubukata in Japan usually publishes cross-eyed versions of my stereos on her site which is to be found at … http://brian-mayniacs.com/stereo/DrMay_stereo.htm
Good luck with the Requiem. Is it for comet ISON ?!
Cheers
Bri
Loreo have published a Stereo photography guide on their website which you may find helpful;
http://www.loreo.com/pages/articles/article_howto_stereo_photography.html
A UK source of same viewer here:
http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk/Catalogue/Viewers.html
Viewing Stereos on Computer Screen with a Viewer
Our friend Gina has sent details of a viewer which apparently works really well, if all efforts at Free-Viewing are in vain. She says it is brilliant for viewing stereo pairs on a computer screen. I am going to try one …. and … well, maybe this will save some of you a headache !! It’s inexpensive, and it’s called a “Pixie”.
The link to the shop is
http://www.loreo.com/pages/shop/loreo_products_online.html
Parallel Format Print and Monitor Viewer
The Lite 3D Viewer is a Parallel Format (side-by-side) Print Viewer made of card paper. It also works well as a Computer Monitor Viewer for medium sized images. Cheap, lightweight, foldable and mailable, it folds flat to the thickness of its lenses (7 mm) and fits into a 4R (4 x 6) photo album sleeve. It is suitable for viewing 3R and 4R (optimum) prints, and 5-7 inch wide images on a computer screen.
Right: Loreo Lite 3D Viewer made from plastic coated card paper with the inside surface printed black to create the dark viewing chamber.
How a Stereo Viewer Works
Here’s a neat animation, showing the way a stereo viewer works … check it out – especially if you are still mystified by our explanations !! … http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/genius/extras_watkins.html
Cheers – Bri
