Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!apple!bbn!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!js9b+ From: js9b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jon C. Slenk) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: 3d (was 3d perceptual abilities) Message-ID: Date: 10 Mar 89 07:48:21 GMT Organization: Class of '92, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 32 Howdy all! Seeing how there is all this discussion about 3d forced by people, how about some discussion about 3d on/by computers. There are a couple of methods that I know of: the standard two colors and respective filters, the polarized (not sure how to do this on a computer exactly) way, and the swapping way. The first works well with multi-colored computers (ie Amiga, Mac II extended, VGA etc.) because you can match the colors to the filters, not the filters to the colors. I wonder why 3d never caught on for games etc. If you get the proper filters, you should be able to do 3d on any color computer, no? The third method has special 'specs which shutter out images to either eye in time with the screen swapping so each eye sees one screen map, and if this is done quickly enough, one sees 3d. Effective, but takes some seriousish hardware. Why is 3d so uncommon? Try using a color computer (Amiga whatever) and making the two color pictures; define a brush with red and blue/green whatever and draw with it. Then change the distance between the two colors, and repeat. Makes all sorts of neat depths to the picture. Perhaps 3d is moot seeing how a proper output device (ie all 4096 colors or whatever) costs ~$5000 last I heard... Sincerely, Jon Slenk / js9b CMU an employee of Academic Computing - "he loved Big Brother" PS: standard disclaimers are all included. You just can't see them :-)