Stereo Distance Perception

On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 09:59:12 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

Not sure what all the fuss is about. When I enter
https://postimg.cc/gallery/3fnjbwcn4/
in Internet browser, the 3 images come up with no problem. Be happy to send
as E-mail attachments within reason.

the fuss is due to people using broken software and blaming others for any problems they encounter.

No broken software here. I just find this to be a worthless exercise. My preference is for images that one can actually see without going through an optical stress test.

Here is one of the images in question, and no matter what, it remains a mess.
https://postimg.cc/XrSqps04

There's two different issues being discussed here, which is confusing
things,

You're talking about the "mess" of the images referred to in the
original message. A valid argument, but about something else.

However, the other person's complaint wasn't about the images per se,
but instead about the about the "mess" his broken software was making
of displaying that message to him.

Those like you and me whose software works don't see any weird display
of the original message of course, hence it's easy to assume that he's
talking about the images. But I don't think he ever got as far as
even seeing the images.

On 8/02/2021 3:49 am, Savageduck wrote:
On Feb 7, 2021, wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 07 Feb 2021 06:23:12 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

I believe that Alfred is referring to your three images not the text. So the Usenet client used is irrelevant.

Ah, my mistake.

The three images are for me an unviewable mess.

No, they are stereo images, and work for me.

You need to focus solidly on the two red dots at the top.

Gradually a third dot will appear between them, at which point the
stereo effect kicks in.

These are traditional examples used to demonstrate the stereo effect,.
if I remember correctly.

OK! However, while others might be, personally I am not particularly interested in this type of stereo vision trickery.


So you'll be leaving the thread now , right ?

geoff

On 8/02/2021 7:41 am, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article
.com,
Savageduck says...

On Feb 7, 2021, Paul Carmichael wrote
(in article ):

El 7/2/21 a las 15:23, Savageduck escribi?:
On Feb 7, 2021, wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 7 Feb 2021 13:00:01 +0100, Alfred Molon
wrote:

In ,
says...
I=20have=20always=20been=20fascinated=20by=20the=2 0phenomenon=20of=
=20depth=20perception=20in=20vision.=20It=20would= 20seem=20that=20=
this=20is=20a=20combination=20of=20two=20mechanism s=20:

I'm getting this very hard to read stuff. What did you use to
post this message?

It reads perfectly fine here using Agent.

Making the question: What are you reading it with?

I believe that Alfred is referring to your three images not the text. So the Usenet client used is irrelevant.

The three images are for me an unviewable mess.

Images?

Here is the first ?image?.
https://postimg.cc/XrSqps04

See what you can make of it. It is too much bother if I have to go through optic gymnastics to discern the stereoscopic mystery.

The images are indeed messy, but I was referring to the text
which came our garbled. Probably the OP used some kind of non-
standard encoding for the text.

Fine here, on Thunderbird.

geoff

On 8/02/2021 6:59 am, Savageduck wrote:
On Feb 7, 2021, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In ,casagiannon
wrote:

Not sure what all the fuss is about. When I enter
https://postimg.cc/gallery/3fnjbwcn4/
in Internet browser, the 3 images come up with no problem. Be happy to send
as E-mail attachments within reason.

the fuss is due to people using broken software and blaming others for any problems they encounter.

No broken software here. I just find this to be a worthless exercise. My preference is for images that one can actually see without going through an optical stress test.

Here is one of the images in question, and no matter what, it remains a mess.
https://postimg.cc/XrSqps04



So why are you still persisting in this thread ?

geoff