-1- wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:50 pm
When they make three-d movies, or pics, that's exactly the theory they employ. They have two cameras some distance from each other that film the action simultaneously; when it's projected, the left eye receives the image from the left camera, and the right eye, from the right camera. Result? Three-d image.
Doesn't much work with me, and thus I never pay to see the 3D movies. I pretty much ignore one eye unless it sees stuff the other doesn't. All my 3D comes from motion of the one eye, and I have no depth perception for objects that don't move across my field of view. That's just me, and it has to do with the fact that the images from my two eyes stopped lining up properly, so I just learned to ignore one.
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 10:05 pm
-1- wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:43 pm
Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:41 pm
I'm not sure that it actually is, though. Scientifically speaking, is it really comparable?
Yah, actually, that's the case.
A single eyeball and the camera
can measure distance and different distances with just one lens, by having things in-focus and out-of-focus. You know that things that are out-of-focus are at a differnt length away or distance away from the lens of the camera or of your eyeball, from the length or distance that things in focus are. But that is a rather poor instrument or process to measure distance.
...Apparently it's not, because you are now speaking about the whole eye and camera as though it's two comparable variables in their own right. Noax specifically differentiated the back of the eye from the front, because the latter is in fact capturing data on a non-euclidean surface.
I should have said that the front is the lens, and the back is the part of the camera that captures the image, a digital camera more than a film one. Both together is 'the camera', so the entire eye is a camera, not just the back of it.
If a camera caught an image with a non-Euclidean CCD, then the image would not look correct unless projected onto a similar non-Euclidean screen. Either way, (normal or curved surface), there is only one correct place to view the screen, which is where the angle of the image capture is the same as the angle to the edges of the screen. Any other place distorts the image from if you had been at the same point of view.
No movie that I know is filmed at a fixed angle. They are all a mixture of wide and zoom shots, and thus there is no correct place to view any movie in the cinema.