Mars In 3D

xaositects writes "Now I know all of you have your 3D glasses from 1985 still, so don them once again to check out these cool 3D images of Mars's Arctic landscape from the Phoenix Lander's stereoscopic imager. There are also a few close-ups of the parts of Phoenix that are in view and a link to more pictures on the Phoenix Image Gallery."

Comments

The obligatory....

[Anonymous Coward]

"My eyes! The goggles do nothing!"

Re:The obligatory....

[hesiod]

...and true. I spent a whole minute looking at four images (happened to have a pair of R/B 3d glasses at work, amazingly) and another 4 minutes for my eyes to start working properly again.

1985

[BPPG]

Now I know all of your have your 3D glasses from 1985...

I was born in late 1986, you insensitive clod!

Re:1985

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I was born in late 1986, you insensitive clod!

What a coincidence... I lost my virginity in early 1986!

Hannah Montana

[Robotech_Master]

If you wander by a Wal-Mart, you can probably still find a display full of 3D goggles for the upcoming Hannah Montana concert video.

separated images available?

[radarsat1]

Does anyone know if they post the left and right images separately anywhere?

For those of us who don't have immediate access to a pair of red-blue glasses, there are other ways..

For instance, they could provide an animated gif of both images alternating, which gives you a 3D impression as if you're moving your head to the left and right. This doesn't require glasses and can be a pretty effective way to get an image to "pop out" without actually being stereoscopic.

Re:separated images available?

[dredwerker]

For instance, they could provide an animated gif of both images alternating, which gives you a 3D impression as if you're moving your head to the left and right. This doesn't require glasses and can be a pretty effective way to get an image to "pop out" without actually being stereoscopic.

Are we still talking about Hannah Montana?

Re:separated images available?

[Kiaser Zohsay]

For those of us who don't have immediate access to a pair of red-blue glasses, there are other ways..

I prefer cross eye freeviewing.

No worky...

[eln]

I'm blind in one eye you blue-tinted insensitive clods!

Re:No worky...

[somersault]

Just spin a coloured transparent disk - half-red, half-blue - in front of your eye reaaaaally fast while looking at the pictures, and your brain will probably get the idea after a few minutes*.

*this may be a load of bollocks, I just made it up.

Psh

[neokushan]

Go into any good supermarket and you can pick up a full 3D model of Mars for pennies. Screw the 3D glasses, you can feel the ridges on it yourself, even dig to find if there really IS water beneath the surface.
So far, all I've found is Nougat and Caramel, though...

Mars is 3D?

[Daimanta]

Who would have thought?

Was that sand and pebbles?

[oodaloop]

I can walk outside and see that in 3D anytime I want.

VERY IMPORTANT!! Turn glasses backwards!

[ClioCJS]

Citation needed, but I trust my own eyes: If you have 3-D glasses, you'll need to fold them inside out / turn them backwards / invert the red and blue. These pictures have red & blue inverted compared to most 3-D images. NASA has it backwards, if you will. The results were MUCH better looking and MUCH less painful with glasses on backwards. With "normal" glasses, my wife & I were both quite confused as to why it sucked so bad. It didn't. NASA just does red blue backwards.

that's because

[ClioCJS]

You need to turn your glasses backwards/inside out/blue red instead of red blue. Silly NASA.

General gripe about 3D formats.

[Chatsubo]

So many places make these shitty R/B images available and not the seperate image pairs. There are many ways to display a 3D image, you've mentioned one. There's also free-viewing, where you cross your eyes and actually get a much better result than viewing with R/B glasses (no colour augmentation, no ghosting). And then there's my personal favourite, LCD shutter glasses (some ghosting, but no need to strain your eye muscles, and you can view a full screen).

Of course, you can create the R/B image from pairs, but not the other way around, at the very least, places that want to make 3D content available should provide both options.

I've noted the item earlier this week about a standard emerging sometime soon for 3D broadcasting. I can't wait.

Re:General gripe about 3D formats.

[djmurdoch]

In the case of these images, the left image is entirely in the red bits in the image, and the right image is the sum of blue and green, so you can separate them, if you've got any image processing software. (Or did I get left and right reversed?)

Re:General gripe about 3D formats.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm. I just realized that's a copyrighted image... Taking it down sorry.

Leave it up. Work products of the U.S. Government (ie. any pictures from NASA) are public domain with a few exceptions that don't apply here. Just because someone sticks a copyright notice on something doesn't make it copyrighted.

Why these green/red thingies?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

The glasses look admittedly geeky but steroscopic projection has come a long way since 1985. Better than even the polarized glasses are the LCD shutter based glasses. They effectively have LCDs that will black out the left eye and then the right eye some 30, 60 or 120 times a second. The glasses are synched with a display that will show left image when left eye lens is clear and right eye's view when right lens is clear. Thus most CAD models and CGI images leap out of your plain LCD display screens.

What is more important almost all the 3D Computer Generated Images have depth information already to do hidden line removal. Thus there are already displays in the market to render any OpenGL or similar input into stereoscopic projection. So yeah, it is getting more and more popular in CAD, CGI worlds.

Sorry don't have time to search and post links to these technologies, but they are easy enough to find using google.

The Parallax View

[d'baba]

I'd guess the reason they don't use anything more expensive than 1920's technology is that you don't really get anything for it except the cool factor. Note also that the term 'cool' is one of those nebulous characterizations that's been around almost as long.

I keep a pair of red/blue 'glasses' (my current pair is from celebrateexpress.com) and a pair of polarized ones for snitz and giggles but I would like someone to tell me what kind of real, useful information you can get from these parlor tricks. I'd think that if fine-grained 3d images were useful then you'd be seeing holography equipment aboard instead of bi-chromatic stereoscopes.

Please prove me wrong.

-- Hypertext isn't what it's marked up to be.