Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software Toys

3D Photo Gadget Reviewed 99

Posted by michael from the binocular-vision dept.
Daniel Rutter writes "I've just reviewed Mission3-D's Photo3-D 303 kit. It's a simple and straightforward way to take 3D pictures with your existing digicam, but it otherwise doesn't live up to the hype. It turns out you can do the same thing better, for less money."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

3D Photo Gadget Reviewed More

3D Photo Gadget Reviewed

Comments Filter:
  • I want 3D pron!!!!
    • If you follow the jiggle link on the review page, you'll find some nekkid pictures. One taken in Santa Cruz, but I was just there and there aren't generally naked women climbing on the rocks, more's the pity.
      • The woodsy-road shot actually looked somewhat 3D to my eyes, the rest just looked like that annoying Wang Chung video from the 80's for "Everybody Have Fun Tonight".

        I'm guessing that the large amount of movement of the closer objects helps to spoil the illusion in the rest of the pictures. Anybody know if I'm on the right track here?

      • I've gotta worry about myself when I know I've already seen that page

  • Intresting concept. (Score:5, Funny)

    by notque ( 636838 ) on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @03:07PM (#7212704) Homepage Journal
    It turns out you can do the same thing better, for less money

    Yes.. actually going outside.

  • 99.95% of the time (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    You can always do the same thing for less money.
  • 3D story boards for artist would be good
  • It turns out you can do the same thing better, for less money.

    how do you keep a turkey in suspense?

  • Um... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If you have a digital camera that is quite fast and with manual controls, just take two photos focused differently. With this, given the focal length, you should be able to create a 3d image with minimal programming experience. In fact, if someone could find a way to reprogram camera firmware, it would be even easier.
    • There's actually a really cool page with some examples [well.com]
    • Sounds like that will just give you a blury photo, perhaps with a fake 3Dish look. To create 3D photos, you MUST take 2 photos that are taken from a seperate position (~15cm "slid to the side" I think). Just taking a photo with different focal points isn't going to give you a 3D image any more than sticking feathers up your but is going to make you a chicken.
      • Astronomers have been using this parallax method to measure the distance to stars by taking one image in the Springtime, and the other in the Fall, when the earth is on the other side of the sun 180 or so million miles side-to-side!

      • You could use an old pre-digital sterioscopic viewer to view the prints of you pictures. Very Victorian. Didn't there used to be a desposable camera that would give you 3D prints with some sort of refractive plastic on top?
  • Just use a two or three camera shoot, and use the difference in parallax between the images to create a stereo image. OR, for an even cheaper solution, use ONE camera and move it AROUND the subject. I have seen some really convincing 3-d stuff made this way.
    • This DOES move one camera around the subject. It just provides a tripod with a sliding rail.

      • This is /. - we don't need to read no article to dream up a plausible reply.

        I think it is due to the little known Male Answer Syndrome [winn.com] - the genetic disorder that lets makes guys who flunked high-school physics and haven't had a date in six months able to explain what went wrong at NASA and know what women really want.

  • You insensitive clod! (Score:5, Funny)

    by ejdmoo ( 193585 ) on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @03:14PM (#7212784)
    I've only got one eye!

    (ps--this really is the case)
    • "I've only got one eye!"

      Don't blame us, Ralphie. We all told you what would happen if you got that BB gun for Christmas.
    • That's gotta suck. I have a friend with a similar problem (he actually has two eyes but one of them doesn't work worth shit). He's an artist too, so it kind of sucks for him that things are moving towards 3D, and he will never be able to create 3D things himself. Although with improvements in medicine maybe someday he will be able to use both eyes (or just some stupid looking visor).

    • I have a lazy eye, and only fully focus out of one eye at any time thus I dont have depth-perception the same way most people do. As a kid I allways felt left out when ever I saw those red/blue "3d" movies, cuz I never saw anything but red or blue depending which eye I was looking out of. The only real plus is that I can scare the hell out of anyone riding in my car while I'm driving when I tell them about my less then steller depth perception.
  • Why would we care to save pictures with the red and blue channels smeared, when they just came out with the 3D laptop? Isn't that a bit easier..?
    • 3D laptop: $3200
      3D glasses: $0.32

      You tell me.
      • It's not full color, and that about does it. People want the cool shit, not to go backwards. Unless you want to pull an 80's revival, which I'd say wouldn't be too hard in today's social climate.
    • I realize that this should have gone in the other thread actually about said laptop, but why not a desktop computer or just a monitor. Of course, I don't know how it works. Damn the technicalities, I'm only looking for the ends!
      • And since you already broke the holy subject rule, And how the hell would multiple people look at it in 3-D???! That laptop relies on focusing on one person, right? Or is it split down the middle? And yes, I'm too lazy to go reference that other link.
  • http://www.mission3-d.com/community.php?content=ga llery

    Nice.. gotta love a commercial website, that sells a product, and can't even bother to show samples

    for those who don't want to look, here's what it says
    "Coming soon...
    under development ..."

  • Here's a good resource regarding color anaglyphs:

    http://www.aifx.com/3d_cavar.html [aifx.com]

  • Does anybody make a reasonable consumer-level digicam that will take 3D shots without all the monkeying around with moving the camera and re-shooting the same subject?

    I would LOVE to be able to snag some 3-megapixel or better 3D shots with someting along the lines of a wider 2-lens Canon S230.

    Does anybody know of anything like this? Reasonable quality, easy to use, affordable 3D digital camera?
    • I'll bet it would be cheaper just to buy 2 cameras and fasten them to opposite ends of a stick.

  • Fear (Score:1)

    by grub ( 11606 )

    If you thought your eyes were burning before, wait until the goatse.cx guy gets one of these units..

    • have you ever given thought (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      to the fact that you may be obsessed with the goatse guy? posting about the man in every article is one of the symptoms. i know it's a hard sight to get over, but awareness of the problem is half the fight won.

      -well wisher, president of goatse's anonymous

  • summary: $129 tripod with two-position slider (Score:4, Informative)

    by JUSTONEMORELATTE ( 584508 ) on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @03:32PM (#7212912) Homepage
    Bah. For $129 you get a tripod that lets you slide the camera to a right and left eye perspective.

    --

  • How lame. I've done better handheld. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Goldenhawk ( 242867 ) on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @03:36PM (#7212937) Homepage
    The "gallery" is "pending" - no photos there! If you want to sell a product, get the web site complete first! Urf.

    The only thing really useful here is the color-combining software, and anyone reasonably competent with a good image editing program can do it manually.

    I've been taking crossed-eye stereograms for years - take a photo, move sideways a few inches, take another, then place the images side-by-side and cross your eyes until you see one combined stereoscopic image. The main problem with this method (as with the kit being discussed in this story) is the delay between shots - fine for still life, lousy for action shots (or even still life with moving stuff like wind-blown trees, or running water).

    Turns out those old stereo viewers are quite useful: http://www.threedview.com/Images/showstereo.jpg [threedview.com] They may be antiques, but they really work well, as long as you're content with a 3x3 image (which works just fine for most shots). And you can print a pretty high-quality image pair on any inkjet printer these days.

    The TRUE benefit of stereo viewers that don't depend on color shifting is that the colors look completely natural, and they're a lot easier on the eyes than color mixing.

    But you can get the same effect with crossed-eye stereograms, with ZERO equipment, as long as you're physically capable of crossing your eyes and refocusing.

    Here's an excellent primer on setting up and viewing crossed-eye stereograms. http://www.angelfire.com/ca/erker/freeview.html [angelfire.com]

  • yeah... just you try and get everybody to hold that pose real still while you slide the camera over for the next exposure...

    and as for patent pending on their do-hickey... just wtf is so innovative here??? the Victorians were doing this two viewpoint with single camera. I seem to remember seeing a sliding camera tripod bracket long ago back in the sixties as well...

  • My Pentax Digital camera does this (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It's pretty easy to do, it shows you an faded image in the lcd while you move the camera. I've taken some great 3D shots with it.
  • It's DISPLAYING them that gets difficult. To shoot, take something like a Nikon CoolPix 775 (what I use) , and put in a frame of some kind so you can slide it back and forth a few inches without changing any other dimension. Point at a static scene, snap, move over 2 inches, and snap. There you have a full stereographic representation of the scene just like your eyes would see it.

    But how to view? I was playing around with my iArt shutter glasses, researching stereo pictures, found the .jps format, and then
  • I posted some lengthy notes on this thing at Tweakers.net quite a while ago when it first surfaced there.
    ( http://www.tweakers.net/nieuws/28494/ )

    Suffice to say that this product is much more appealing :
    http://www.3d-brillen.de/3d/produkte/kamera.ph p 3

    Although it's not quite a clip-on system for existing cameras, but a single-camera solution, the concept is simply.

    Split the photo frame into two halves (yes, your photos will only be half width), and have each half be exposed by a different lens at eyes-wi
  • Remember that attraction at Disney land with Michael Jackson? That was awesome 3D and it didn't use those lame red and blue glasses. Show me how to do that with my digital camera and I'll think about it.

    • Polarized projection. Carefully crop your images to form a proper stereo window. Convert your digital stills to slides using a film printer. (Preferrably, you can just shoot slides to begin with, since you'll get better resolution, color saturation, and dynamic range without any of the mismatched JPG artifacts.) Place the slides into a pair of slide projectors. Project through polarizing filters oriented at 45 and 135 degrees onto a silver screen. Don a standard pair of polarized glasses, and you've g

  • build your own 3D camera for $10 (Score:3, Informative)

    by Temsi ( 452609 ) on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @04:15PM (#7213161) Journal
    I build and use my own 3D cameras all the time.

    I go to the corner store and buy two tiny disposable cameras and fit them together using a cardboard template I made.
    I only have to make sure the iris' have approximately the same separation as my eyes (approximately 7 cm or 2.75").

    Then I just snap the cameras simultaneously, which takes a bit of practice, but it's a snap once you get the hang of it... no pun intended.

    When I have the photos developed, I get a picture CD at the same time (saves me the hassle of scanning 2x 27 photos every time), I then bring the images into Photoshop and crop and match them if necessary.
    Thanks to the massive depth of field in these tiny cameras, almost everything is in focus, and I have a bit of leeway as to the position of the 3D convergence point.
    Then I just run the left + right photos through the free Anaglyph Maker [stereoeye.jp] and presto, I got my very own 3D image.
    Using two cameras means that I can shoot 3D anywhere, even pictures of moving objects or from a moving vehicle.
    Using a tripod with a movable head to shoot two images separately is rather lame IMHO, as you're forced to shoot only static setups.

    Now I just have to try this with two digital cameras small enough to fit within the approximate 7 cm separation.

  • The LOREO "Lens in a Cap" (Score:3, Informative)

    by jamiefaye ( 44093 ) <jamie.fentonia@com> on Tuesday October 14, 2003 @04:23PM (#7213242) Homepage
    will convert a 35mm SLR or a digital camera like the Nikon D-100 into a 3D Camera instantly.

    It is an assembly of mirrors that gathers light from two viewpoints and focuses it down onto the film/image sensor so that when it is printed out at a photo lab or on a printer, it makes a 3D card just like the ones from Victorian times.

    LOREA also makes a camera with this lens built in. It works pretty good - the only drawbacks are the long focal lengh (F11) and a blurry border between the left and right image. Some versions can also show unwanted reflections.

    I got mine for my Nikon film SLR and it works on the D-100 too!
    • Here is a URL in the LOREO website, with more info on this gadget:

      http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/loreo_3dcap. ht ml

      LOREO has a number of other cool things. For example, a "Lens in a Cap" that lets you do view-camera style perspective control, one with a pinhole "lens", and another one that lets you convert your SLR into a "Point and Shoot" camera.

      http://www.loreo.com/

      LOREO is the RonCo of photo accessories!
    • I have two 3D attachments from Loreo - the ordinary 3D Lens in a Cap and the "T" version, which is for digital SLR cameras. Most digital SLRs are non-full frame. The focal length multiplier will mess up 3D photographs taken with an ordinary 3D attachment. I've tried it. The two images are wrongly cropped and don't fuse. If you're using a D-100 you need the non-full frame 3D attachment. There are some interesting photo galleries at the Loreo website [loreo.com].

      IMO, the coolest thing they have is the Lite 3D Viewer [loreo.com].

  • When I first read the title, I thought this was a device that would take two images (from mirrors placed apart from each other, the distance of your pupils) and combine them into your digital camera's lens, each filtered different colors (red and cyan). That way you wouldn't really need a tripod and only had to shoot one shot of a moving subject. Of course, you still must keep the camera level.

    Now that would really be a cool gadget!
  • Pentax Optio 430RS has a 3D photo mode which splits the screen with a grid, you take the first picture, it shows it on the left of the viewfinder, and then you can line up the 2nd picture. It ends up being 2 shots side by side on the same frame, then you use the included viewer (not red/green) to look at the 3d image (required you to print it out first though).
  • Think about it... it's easy enough to stick two camcorders together at about eye-distance apart, record nice high quality video either on separate tapes or directly into some sort of dual-feed capture card (or maybe 2 computers). Any modern computer should have the ability to red-filter one feed and green-filter the other feed and combine them on the fly at the display, or feed them out to two separate screens in some glasses-style eyeware. Imagine watching some extreme skiing, biking, any sort of sports (o
  • This kind of a thing is nothing new. People have been taking stereoscopic photos for years. Actually the craze was back in the 50's. Most of the stereoscopic cameras [corsopolaris.net] you can still buy are mostly made in the 50's with a very few exceptions.

    http://home.att.net/~drt-3d/toys/bogen/index.htm [att.net].

    David Burder made a custom stereoscopic digital camera [stereoscopy.com], but as far as I know, it's not really for sale.
  • I use a split lense atachment to my 35mm camera to do side by side stereoscopic photography.

    http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/jpn/photography/kumon / image/k12-10_i.jpg

    Simple idea realy, you should be able to make a simple mounting system to let you use one of these with just about any camera. Its just four mirrors in two sets of two reflecting each other to split the image at two diferent focal angles. Using photoshop, gimp or whatever you can cut the resulting image in two and drop the needed color value to

  • He's talking in the review about jigglevision as a 3-d simulation technique: basically you put the two images in a GIF animation loop. It looks funny [well.com], and not good funny.

    My question is, couldn't this technique provide realistic 3-d effects? If I could put the two images in a 60fps loop, wouldn't the eye be fooled into seeing both images at the same time and somehow giving the 3-d effect? If this works, I'm sure somebody did it before. Anyone has references? If it doesn't work, why not? Maybe I would just s

  • ...is Callipygian 3D [callipygian.com]

    Also, chek out their 3D Challah! [callipygian.com]

    You can view the anaglyph images with the glasses you got from "Spy Kids 3D"

Slashdot Top Deals

The gent who wakes up and finds himself a success hasn't been asleep.

Close