by moultano on 2/26/25, 6:19 PM with 116 comments
by thih9 on 2/26/25, 7:02 PM
by colingauvin on 2/26/25, 7:05 PM
It takes quite a bit of practice to see them well:
https://spdbv.unil.ch/TheMolecularLevel/0Help/StereoView.htm...
by CGamesPlay on 2/26/25, 8:05 PM
Bonus, I also found this real-time 3D-ifier for your screen: https://github.com/zjkhurry/stereopsis-anything
by jasonjmcghee on 2/26/25, 8:27 PM
Same content, but all lined up and rendered the whole article in cross-view.
You can now read the article and see the pictures while in cross-view.
https://jasonjmcghee.github.io/you-should-make-cross-views-3...
by ziofill on 2/27/25, 4:48 AM
You’re welcome.
by Karawebnetwork on 2/26/25, 6:54 PM
Something like stereoscopic GIFs come to mind, e.g. https://tenor.com/fr-CA/view/dain-stereoscopic-daingifs-3d-m...
In other words, taking the two images and swapping them quickly creates the illusion of depth.
Edit:
Looking into it, there's a word for it. Wiggle stereoscopy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiggle_stereoscopy
by fritzo on 2/26/25, 7:50 PM
https://cdn.coastalscience.noaa.gov/datasets/aerialphotodb/u...
https://cdn.coastalscience.noaa.gov/datasets/aerialphotodb/u...
EDIT it can be tedious to discover such pairs. If only there were a tool...
by ben7799 on 2/26/25, 7:05 PM
The tiny thumbnails at the bottom of the page work, but the larger images I can't cross my eyes enough.
I think it depends greatly on getting the screen/image size just the right size and also getting the viewing distance right. On large monitors it seems harder to see.
by tombert on 2/26/25, 6:31 PM
I'm not sure how practical the "crossing your eyes to get 3D" thing actually is, it makes my eyes water after a minute or so, but it's still sort of cool to see my cheapy monitor doing 3D without any special glasses.
by EvanAnderson on 2/26/25, 6:53 PM
I had a lot of fun with doing this 20 years ago. Sadly, my visual acuity has become significantly different between my eyes (even w/ correction) and the enjoyment of 3D displays has really diminished as as result.
Just musing because I'm working and busy:
I wonder how difficult it would be to do video. (Obviously you'd have to shoot two videos in parallel versus just moving the camera and shooting again.)
Converting existing 3D videos to a cross-eyed viewing format would probably be the easiest way to experiment with it. I wonder if anybody has done that. I've never looked at 3D movie formats before. I always assumed it was two interleaved streams.
by JKCalhoun on 2/26/25, 8:20 PM
Last summer on a road trip to Alaska, it was almost my exclusive camera for the trip. When I got back I wrote an app to take the MPO files it contains and turn them into a printable parallel-view image. The side-by-side images are intended to be printed and used in an old-fashioned stereoscope.
by zehaeva on 2/26/25, 6:49 PM
by throwaway494932 on 2/26/25, 7:18 PM
by globular-toast on 2/27/25, 8:11 AM
The problem I think most people will have is screen size. If the screen is too big then going cross eyed will be harder and might cause strain. Straight eyed can be easier, but I still think there's a limit on screen size. Magic eyes when printed are about the right size for people's heads so just work.
The second problem is the pictures look half as big as soon as you "go 3d". So although it's very cool and I buy the author's point that some pictures need the depth to make sense, there's always something lost from the full size picture. On my phone it made it like looking at a postage stamp!
Still I might try it myself given how easy it sounds. I imagine even a slight bit of wind would make some subjects impossible, though!
by LVB on 2/26/25, 7:59 PM
by perching_aix on 2/26/25, 10:31 PM
Even with just a single eye, it is possible to see depth: this would be via monocular depth cues, such as depth of field.
If you ever wondered why 3D visuals, no matter how technically advanced, never quite felt right, this is likely the culprit. When your eyes adapt to the stereo 3D cues, the monocular cues are lost and vice versa. There are some VR technologies that do hope to achieve both at the same time using eye (and iris?) tracking, but I haven't been following the topic for a while. It's essentially a quest for a lightfield display.
by haunter on 2/26/25, 7:05 PM
by whycome on 2/26/25, 8:12 PM
by Agingcoder on 2/26/25, 8:56 PM
by teknopaul on 3/5/25, 4:58 PM
Your eyes have to focus. For things close enough they can tell from the required small angle of cross-eyed movement, how to focus.
These pictures (and stereograms) disconnect the focus and angle of your eyes. Do it enough and you loose the ability to focus quickly. I found it out playing with steregrams on a 286 pc a long long time ago.
YMMV but I lost the ability to quickly re-focus object that you dont already know the size of; and it's a bitch.
by dividuum on 2/27/25, 2:27 AM
by Cogito on 2/26/25, 11:37 PM
Set up so the two images (with slight differences) are next to each other, cross your eyes, and look for 'shimmering' spots - these are the differences between the images.
It makes differences very easy to spot, which is pretty cool!
by groggo on 2/27/25, 4:46 AM
Thanks for sharing!
by smusamashah on 2/26/25, 8:05 PM
It will only work with parallel eye images though (at the end of this article).
by rahimnathwani on 2/26/25, 7:47 PM
most stereograms are designed to look correct when you cross your eyes
This is how I look at stereograms (looking nearer than the page), but at least some of the images on this page seem like they're designed for the other way around (looking in the distance, beyond the page).This one looks weird when I look at it cross eyed, but fine when I look at the other way.
https://moultano.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/17...
by jjtheblunt on 2/26/25, 9:28 PM
https://www.atarimagazines.com/creative/v9n1/162_Stereo_grap...
by BrandoElFollito on 2/26/25, 8:32 PM
by stronglikedan on 2/26/25, 6:59 PM
That's a stretch, but I guess clickbait is required to get engagement nowadays.
by nashashmi on 2/26/25, 6:37 PM
by offsky on 2/27/25, 3:30 AM
by StevenNunez on 2/26/25, 7:38 PM
by deadbabe on 2/26/25, 6:44 PM
by Kerbonut on 2/26/25, 6:44 PM