User:3dnatureguy

This is not intended as a regular Encyclopedia posting:

This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:3dnatureguy.

User:3Dnatureguy appreciates the effort on everybody's part to spell out a policy about 3D[edit]

This is a revised page (Feb 5 2007) reflecting my sense that good faith is represented by all opinions by the concerned editors. I am genuinely grateful for the time and attention devoted to the issue. I will try to co-operate with the likes of Martyman, Dshwan, Stude62, in no longer advocating use of "compatible 3D" on Wikipedia as the sole image. There is a place for "compatible 3D" elsewhere on-line, but not in the present Wikipedia. I have read your opinions and have been persuaded that Martyman and Dshwan, have come up with a better approach. It will be easy to provide a perfect 2D image from new shooting. Since the MAL-REGISTRATION is typically only 1,2,3, or 4 pixels in a good existing "compatible" image. Almost all can be recomposited to have no 3D artifacts, or 3D in the thumbnail. Future images, made in 2006 will be shot at an average of 10 megapixels per side. Both sides will be archived. I will encourage every education/science stereographer I know to donate their best work, but not to overload a page. I will suggest that they go to the history file, and contact one or more of the active article contributors, and seek advice before posting. I will be more discreet in this as well... I promise. I still want to have samples on this page, but my comments are in the process of amendment.

At the upper left of the page please note. I consider this to be a "bad anaglyph", old style 3D display taken from a Wikipedia posting at the top/left side of the page:

TRADITIONAL ANAGLYPH 3D IMAGE: from a recent Wikipedia article

In the interest of seeing the overall picture, both 2D and 3D, I would suggest that you contact one of the several companies on-line who give away free Red-Cyan glasses. It is very important to consider that between 25 and 40 million paper glasses were made in 2005. Who would have thought so! There really are lots of people who have them.

NASA Will launch a new 3D mission called "STEREO" in a few weeks. They will orbit the sun for two years with a left eye on one orbiter, and the right eye on the other. The solar flares will be visible in labs, and perhaps on line or NASA TV in real time, in 3D.

Details of this rule are very important[edit]

The details should enable the "proper mix" of these special images when posted in 2D/3D pairs As much input as possible should be sought prior to applying the rule. The proposal under consideration will effectively block all "3D ONLY" images from use in articles so the 2D image paired with a 3D is the only way to have more than a token 3D presence on Wikipedia. There is a suposition that "compatible 3D" in not possible. The images here might suggest otherwise. The link through a small red-cyan glasses icon is ok with this editor as a reasonable alternative. I will express my enthusiasm for compatiblity elsewhere. With Wikipedia, I will strive to deliver good "copyright free" images, of my own, and from my peers in the 3D photography discipline.

I KNOW IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE...30 MILLION GLASSES IN 2005

Please note that this is 21st century digital technology[edit]

It delivers good color and very little artifacting compared to "old fashioned methodology".I have to admit, I didn't consider that a lot of less evolved 3D might appear from other sources and degrade the overall look of Wikipedia's images. That's why I completely changed my opinion of the proposal. I will always now save the 2D version of anything else I shoot, and will pass that on to my peers at our National Stereoscopic Convention in south Florida this summer.

The main advantage of 3D in an encylopedia is that it permits more detailed study of small objects, even microscopic images. Scholarship, on a lab level is largely about close observation. The other powerful factor is kid appeal. It is so imprtant for Wikipedia to reach out for the world's kids.

IT IS A FACT THAT AROUND 30 MILLION GLASSES were produced last year, and distributed around the world. Young people do have the glasses. They will soon be able to see geometry illustrated in 3D. They will be able to see some of the thousands of electron microscope images in 3D, .Archeologists, Art History Students, Space Exploration buffs, Naturalists, Geologists like the Scientists at USGS will be able to post any of there several thousand royalty free 3D images of the geology and scenic veiws of the US National Parks.

USGS 3D "compatible grade" image. 3D red cyan glasses are recommended to view this image correctly.

Point Reyes Nat. Seashore USGS 3D red cyan glasses are recommended to view this image correctly.

Thousands of good 2D/3D pictures will be available, (when needed) over time from the many active stereographers, working in digital 3D photo-journalism , in paired 2D and 3D images as suggested by User:Martyman. There will be no overloading, as concern for the enclyclopia look of Wikipedia is an over-riding concern of all of us. Captions in these images are for this article only...Not original text.

.

A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A "COMPATIBLE 3D IMAGE"[edit]

Look at Zhou Enli at any size...still looks good in either 2D or 3D.