My art class recitation teacher. He's a photographer. He's a little loco. He
gets on my nerves and has red-green colorblindness to an extent.
My intention is to draw for my final charcoal, chalk, and pastel picture a red
and green stereogram of something.
What I need you brilliant people to help me with is this: what is the idea
behind seeing them or not seeing them. How can I use these media to create one
say 18" x 24" big?
--
GM -d+ -p+ c++ l? <-u e (+) m+eclectic s-/ n@ h f-- g+ w++ t+1/2 r y?
Bryan D Levenson Still a Buckeye / Nut Ohio State 199something
There's a problem here - Stereograms are generally computer generated and
as such are probably impossible to recreate using charcoal, chalk and pastel.
To view stereograms takes patience and practice, but the results ARE (or
rather CAN BE) impressive. If you look carefully you'll generallt find a
repeated pattern of dots (or whatever the SG is made up from). You need
to `uncross' your eyes (like going crosseyed only in reverse - a bit
harder, I have always thought) as if you were looking at something behind
the plane of the SG (it helps sometimes to put a pane of glass over the
image and focus on your reflection).
Don't look for the dots themselves to form a pattern - what you will see
is some flat planes appearing to stick out above the rest, some more than
others, and these planes will be shaped into whatever the stereogram is a
picture of.
Some people have more trouble than others - I had huge problems when I
first saw them - but practice will help, as it did in my case.
As to drawing them, that's a tricky one. What I think you are referring
to is the older style red & green things for which you need a pair of
filtered glasses. The red image is the left-eye view and the green is
the right-eye view, and the two lenses should block out the appropriate
view so that you see two different views with each eye ==> a 3-d image.
To draw one is tricky (I've tried) partly because it needs to be so
precise, and also the colours need to be completely invisible through the
respective lenses otherwise you get two images in each eye and it doen't
work.
If you want to create a stereogram, try to get hold of the right software
- there's a C-program in this group under ASCII stereograms which uses
random ASCII characters, or you could use the program which was listed in
NewScientist some months ago (sorry I can't remember when - it has a
picture of a terrier on the front) which uses random dots and creates
better quality images. You may find self-created ones easier to see
because you know what you are looking for.
Anyway, these are the most popular ways of creating 3-d artwork ("It's
3-d, but is it art?") and I hope I have helped.
Cheers and good luck!
Nick
Salvador Dali did a stereo pair in oils, so nyaah.
However it might be better and a lot easier to use photograpy if you can
get to do your own colour printing.
--
Richard Kirk Image Processing Group Crosfield Electronics Ltd. U.K.
r...@crosfield.co.uk 0442-230000 x3361/3591 Hemel Hempstead, Herts, HP2 7RH
: Salvador Dali did a stereo pair in oils, so nyaah.
: However it might be better and a lot easier to use photograpy if you can
: get to do your own colour printing.
Have you got a GIF of that? I'd be very interested...
Nick
> Bryan D Levenson (blev...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
> : [snip-o]
> : What I need you brilliant people to help me with is this: what is the idea
> : behind seeing them or not seeing them. How can I use these media to create
> one
> There's a problem here - Stereograms are generally computer generated and
> as such are probably impossible to recreate using charcoal, chalk and pastel.
>
> To view stereograms takes patience and practice, but the results ARE (or
> rather CAN BE) impressive. If you look carefully you'll generallt find a
> repeated pattern of dots (or whatever the SG is made up from). You need
> to `uncross' your eyes (like going crosseyed only in reverse - a bit
> harder, I have always thought) as if you were looking at something behind
> the plane of the SG (it helps sometimes to put a pane of glass ov
The concept (i've recently found out) is that of "Hypersight" (ooo, I love
it!, Hyper-anything!) the ability to 'overextend' your focal vision. You
stare at your reflection is a pane of glass to help you see twice as far as
the image is from you. Once you become pretty good at it, you can look at
a plane sheet of paper, or a Usenet article, with one on it and 'force' the
image to pop out.
Best of luck, they are a pretty cool idea. Anyone know the source?
-Neil
--
:: Neil p Corcoran :: // SocioCyber Anthropology | memetic\.....
<corc...@student.msu.edu>//______________________________| '''''\conduit
:Guerilla Semiotician: / "TV is not feeding us what we want; there's no
->pgp key by arrangement// reason to stay at home.."-Brian Davis,Cyberseed
From Felix Lee
Felix suggested some simplification- starting again from the original,
how's this?
,,,,,,,,,
;%%%u##uuuu%%\
/%%%ur =##uuuu%%%
,""")%%#uu @ =#uuu%%%%%
\__r######mmmmmmmmmmn%%%%%%
########/(mmmmmmmmmmmuu'%%%%%
uuuE mmmmmmmmmmmuu%%%%%%%
uuu#\...::uummmmmmmmuu%;;:..%%%%
uuu\##/uuuuuummmmnu%.;; :...%%%
)##&##########%%% \;) :..%%
###&&#########%%%%% `"'
(###&&&#######(%%%%%%%%
(###&&&########%%%%%%%%%%%
(#############(%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%(############%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
;%%%%;(##########n%%%%%'%%%%%%%%%
;%%%%% %%nnnnnnnn%%%%%'%%%%%%%%%%%(@@
\%%%; %%nnnnn'%%%%%%%n%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@
%%%%nnnn'%%%%'nnnnn%%%%%%%(@@@@@
,nnnnn%%%%%nnnnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%@@@@P
/nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%/ (@@)
uu;;;;;uu
`'`'`'
Wills
Here's the original
.,,,,,,,,,,,,
,;%%%%uuuuuuuuuuuuu%%%\
/%%%%%uuuu====####uuuuuu%%%%
/%%%%%uuuu.....===###uuuuu%%%%%%
, '''''\%%%%%uuu....##.===##uuuu%%%%%%%%
,'''''''')####\%u....../==#/uuu%%%%%%%%%%%
,'''''/#########\%mmmmmmmmmmmmm%%%%%%%%%%%;
#\''/##########(mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnu%%'%%%%%%%
###############(mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnuu%%'%%%%%%;
u\###########/ (mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnuu%%'%%%%%%%%
uuuuuEEE \mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnuuu%%'%%%%%%%%%
uuuuuEEE .:::,#u,mmmmnnmmmmmmmmmnuuu%%;; %%%%%%%%%
uuuuuu\##\:::::##uuummmmmmmmmmmmmmnuu%%;;;; :...%%%%%%
uuuuu\#######/uuuuuuuuuu,mmmmmmnu%%...;;; ::...%%%%
\uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu,mmnu/ \...;;; ::...%%%
>####&&################<%%%% \;;;/ ::...%%%
(#####&&&################%%%%%%% ::..%%%
(######&&&&##############(%%%%%%%%%% ::%/
(####&&&&&&#############(%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(#######&&&&&############(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(#########################(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(# (######################(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(#######################(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%(#####################(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%(####################(%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
;%%%%%%; (#################n'%%%%%%%%'%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(%%%%%%%( ;%nn############nn'%%%%%%%%'%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
;%%%%%%% %%%nnnnnnnnnnnnn'%%%%%%%%%'%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@)
\%%%%%; %%%%nnnnnnnn'%%%%%%%%%'%%'n%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@)
(%(%/ %%%%%nnnnnn'%%%%%%%%%%%'nnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@@
%%%%%%nnnnnn'%%%%%%%%'nnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@@@
%%%%%%%nnnnnnn(%(%)nnnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@@@)
.,;%%%%%%%%nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@@@@
,nnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%nnnnnn)nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(@@@@@@@)
/nnnnnnnnnnn%%%%%%nnnnnnnnnnn)nnnnnnnnn%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%/ (@@@@)
(uu(uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu/ (uu;;;;;;;;;;;uu)
(uu;;;;;;;;;;uu)
(uuuuuuuuuuuuu)
(uu)(uu)(uu)
Artist unknown
::::::
:: William "Wills" Towle : csz...@scs.leeds.ac.uk (cszwt2%s...@gps.leeds.ac.uk)
:: "Keyboard not responding. Press ENTER to continue" - PC error message
Not bad. I like what you did to the nose. Making it clear space was
a good idea; it increases the tonal range of the small picture.
Here's something silly I just did. I took the original Thumper
picture, displayed it in a window, dumped the bitmap, converted it to
a GIF, and then ran it through gifscii, to get a 24-line picture. The
result is a mess. Fiddling with the contrast and brightness doesn't
help much. The picture below was the best I could get. So much for
my hopes for an automatic pantograph for ascii pictures...
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!U@@@!W?tE@W@X!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!XUT$BE!TT*9BEU$$TN!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!X!!!WW*69E!MW@@@#T@N*W*!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!S!!S9$$l$NXWUU9SR@$I$I$6X!!!!!
!!!!!!B@!@@@WWtWWWWWWWWWWW@K@W@t!!!!!
!!!!!!IIIIIIIIT@ZZIIITTZZI?IITIIBUX!!
!!!!!!@!@!!!!!!?@@@@@@@@@@@@!@@@@@@@!
!!!!!!I!QZlU!!?QXUIIIQQllIUIQT!?TTIII
!!!!!!!!!!!@*@@@?!@!@!!!!@!!*!!!!@!!@
!!!!!!!!!!?T$B$I66$$BBI6EBN2!!Z2@!!X!
!!!!!!!X!@N$W$@@RR$$@@@N@NW%!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!WBBIRW@BBI66$$$U$l96UN!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!$$$*E@l$$$*$$$*WTW#9@TWTU!!!!!!!
!!!!$#$@@WNN$$@@WNN$U*U@5W*U*U@!!!!!!
!!!!!U*9BI66$$BBI66$T$TBET$T$TBETU!!!
!!!!!W*@@@RR$$@@@RR$5W*N@*W*W*N@*W!!!
!!!XQI$IU!66$$BBI66*!I$6BNI$I$6B$I$X!
!!!?!@W@$!tWUWUWWUW@W@W@t!@W@W@tW@W@W
!!!!!6ZI!!IIIITTZQIIIIIT?IIIIIIIIIIIT
!!!!!!?!!@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@!@
!!!!!!!!UIIIIIlQIIWIIlQIUIUIIIIIIIBQQ
!!@!@!@*@**@!@!X@!@!@!!@!@*@*@**@@*#9
?TTTITITTZTITITTZ!*TTTTTZTITTTTT!!TTT
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@!!!@!!@!!!!!!!
I applied smoothing to blur the ascii characters a bit, then applied a
gamma function to intensity, to normalize the brightness and contrast
of the picture. (xv gives you more flexibility than gifscii.)
The gifscii results are much better now, but still not as clear as the
manual reductions...
.souUUUUUUUWz:
.XRR#**"~MR$@**MR5.
---X@@$8( :@!!$M8M@@@N:
-((()UBBIIXx:xS7SR5BBBBBI
tx\@@@@@@MW$$$$$$$W@@!@@@@>
7TBBBBBBT7BBIBBBBBBIIZD?IIDu.
@@@$H``` `@@@@@@@@@@@@@@%@@@@h
'TIIIlu. `UIQIIIIIIIIIIIT!`#"TID
'`H@@H@@@*@@@@@@!@@@@@!`!: %
"TBBBBBBBBBBBB&BBT'\:!! !
.:@@*@@@@@@@@@***@@*!
UBBBBBBBBBBBBB98BBBBB&
:@$$$R@@@$$$$$$M@@@@@@@@@L
9F$$$$$$$$$$$$$H8888888888bx
.MR$$$$$$$$$$$$MRRRRRRRRRRR5.
:@N@M$$$$$$$$$$NH@@@@@@@@@@@@Nx
UBBBh"RRBBBBBBBRXIBBBDSBBBBBBBIL
'!@@@H @N@@@@@@@!@@@@@!@@@@@@@@@@t
'TZZ> IIBIIITUIIIII7lIIIIIIIIIIDB
``` !@@@@@@!@@@@H@@@@@@@@@@@@@@N
dIIIIIIIIQQDIIIIIIIIIIIIIITII
.:@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@*@@@@@@@H***
dITIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDT"TITTTTT?TIF"" """
` H@!!!!!!@>