DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071

Faculty of Arts, Environment and Technology
Leeds Metropolitan University
Stereoscopic visual effects production
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
MSc Digital Visual Effects
Bratislav Vidanovic
77122071
September, 2013.

Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................1
1- Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................2
1.1 Stereoscopic theory.............................................................................................................................2
1.2 Brief history............................................................................................................................................3
2 - Rationale........................................................................................................................................................4
3 - Objectives......................................................................................................................................................6
4 - Literature review .......................................................................................................................................9
4.1 Basics of stereoscopy..........................................................................................................................9
4.2 Recorded problems in presenting stereoscopic content..................................................10
4.3 Stereoscopic systems.......................................................................................................................11
5 - Research methods...................................................................................................................................15
5.1 Literature review...............................................................................................................................15
5.2 Pilot study.............................................................................................................................................16
5.3 Interviews.............................................................................................................................................16
5.4 Artefact production..........................................................................................................................18
6 - Product development............................................................................................................................19
6.1 Pilot study (completed by help of the literature review).................................................19
6.2 Pilot study project development.................................................................................................21
6.3 Final product development...........................................................................................................25
7 - Findings and conclusions.....................................................................................................................27
7.1 Findings.................................................................................................................................................27
7.2 Conclusions, recommendations and further research.......................................................31
8 - Project management and ethics........................................................................................................35
9 - References..................................................................................................................................................36
Appendix A.......................................................................................................................................................39
Appendix B.......................................................................................................................................................49
Appendix C .......................................................................................................................................................50

S t e r e o s c o p i c v i s u a l e f f e c t s p r o d u c t i o n | 1
Abstract
Many different areas of entertainment, medicine, industry, military, astronomy,
science and education can benefit from employing stereoscopic systems which offers
depth perception. Stereoscopy in astronomy can be used for calculating the size of craters,
or even visible meteors and planets, in medicine it can be used for stereoscopic x-ray shots
to provide an exact location of foreign objects in human body, in military it can be used for
spy aerial shots by exaggerating the stereoscopic effect (that way a building of 10 meters
in height can look like a 100 meters building), in science and education it can be used to
truthfully represent complex chemical structures or geometrical objects. Stereoscopy
today is mostly used in entertainment industry, to provide immersive environment for 3D
games lovers or to bring more exciting experience while watching some stereoscopic 3D
movies.
This research paper is focused on researching the development of stereoscopic
imagery in order to fully explain how visual effects should be produced in order to create
visually attractive, and technically correct stereoscopic visual piece. It will show that
experience gained while watching stereoscopic content in cinema is not completely the
same as one gained while watching stereoscopic content at home, because some of the
known problems can be exaggerated on smaller scale screens, and thus producing
stereoscopic content for smaller screens should be addressed in a bit different way than
producing stereoscopic content for big cinema screens. Research will also provide support
in explanation why the current problems with stereoscopy are present and how to
efficiently solve them.
This research paper is based on literature research which resulted with a good
overall understanding of stereoscopy, current practices and most common potential
problems that one can expect in production of stereoscopic imagery. Literature review
made possible the production of the test pilot stereoscopic video which was then
presented to a group of 10 participants. These participants were interviewed while they
were watching the stereoscopic test pilot and data gathered throughout these interviews
helped to conclude certain theories, support some claims and refute some others. Data
from the interviews also helped in production of final stereoscopic visual piece which will
be used as a proof of concept for findings and conclusion derived from this research paper.
This paper also addresses quality of stereoscopic experience while using different
systems for presenting stereoscopic content, and undoubtedly shows that new modern
methods are far better than old ones. Research is focused on entertainment industry,
specifically on usage of stereoscopy in production and composting of visual effects.
Although many of the things discussed and concluded in this paper can be easily
transferred to any other area or field where stereoscopy can be used.

1- Introduction
1.1 Stereoscopic theory
Stereoscopic imagery is almost as old as photography itself. As Judge (1935)
argues value of photography depends on truthful representation of what eyes has seen in
particular moment in past. Having that in mind, flat photograph can’t be a truthful copy of
what eyes have seen since there is no depth to it. Sure there are different depth cues that
human eye can perceive, like light and shade, relative size, interposition, textural gradient,
perspective or diminution of distant objects (StereoGraphics Corporation, 1997), and all
this depth cues can in fact be recorded on normal flat photograph. The things that cannot
be reproduced on that type of photograph are two most important depth cues: the
vergence position of the eyes (ability to converge and diverge) and binocular disparity
(Howard and Rogers, 1995).
Same conclusion can be made for flat 2D and stereoscopic 3D video. It should be
stated that stereoscopy is the most important depth cue to human visual system. To
understand what stereoscopy is, one should first understand human visual system and
earlier mentioned phenomenon of binocular disparity. Because human visual system
depends on two eyes which are spaced at certain distance on horizontal axis, objects at
different distances are seen differently by the left and the right eye. This slight difference
between the pictures eyes see is used by human brain to perceive depth (Harris and
others, 2008).
Figure 1 – Simple Finger test
In Figure 1 (above) binocular disparity is presented. If one puts a finger in front of his
eyes, and then look at that finger just with left and then just with right eye, it can be seen
that position of the finger is not the same (even finger is not physically moving in space).

When one repeats that action few times in a row (closing left and right eye alternately) the
phenomenon is noticeable even more.
This is a product of human binocular vision. Stereoscopy or stereopsis is actually an
artificial reproduction of binocular vision effects (Judge, 1935). The word “stereoscopy” is
derived from Greek words “stereo” which mean “solid”, and word “scopeo” which means
“viewing” (Judge, 1935). Literal translation of “stereoscopy” will be “solid viewing”.
1.2 Brief history
Stereoscopy was discovered in 1938 by Sir Charles Wheatstone, but as Judge
(1935) argues stereoscopic phenomenon was closely observed even earlier, and proofs of
that can be found in records of Galen (1550), Gassendus (1568), Baptista Porta (1593) or
Jesuit of Brussels (1613). Even earlier back to Leonardo and Euclid, it was understood that
people see different images with left and right eyes but they could not explain it at that
time. As Howard and Rogers (1995) argues the Greeks were first to enquire the nature of
vision and a lot of Greek philosophers followed the Empedocles theory that light leaves the
eye in the form of straight rays which forms a cone, and center of that cone is in the pupil
of the eye (theory of sight). On the other hand, others (including Aristotle) argued that
objects emit images of themselves that moves into the straight line into the eye through
the translucent medium. According to Howard and Rogers (1995) Aristotle also described
how an object which is gazed upon appears double if the eyes are caused to misconverge.
This is the earliest known reference to binocular disparity (Howard and Rogers, 1995).
As of more recent history of stereoscopy, Zone (2007) suggests that it can be
divided into four different periods:
1. Novelty Period - 1838 to 1952 - Technical evolution and variety of technical
solution to present stereoscopic content.
2. Era of convergence – 1952 to1985 – Cameras used for stereoscopy started
converging on object they are filming. This period was a first boom of
stereoscopic movies in Hollywood.
3. The Immersive era – 1986 to 2005 – Introduction of large format film (IMAX –
70 mm). This technological achievement eliminates awareness of the screen
edge since the screen is massive.
4. Digital Cinema – 2005 to present – release of Chicken Little 3D movie. Digital
cameras and digital cinemas provided much easier synchronizations between
the two pictures (one for each eye) used in stereoscopy.
All this mentioned above suggest that interest for understanding human visual
system and stereoscopy existed long ago, and only now technology is up to the challenge
of presenting pleasant stereoscopic imagery not just in cinemas but privately in homes as
well.

2 - Rationale
Since stereoscopic technology became cheaper, more accessible and quality of
presented stereoscopic imagery became higher, more and more people are enjoying
stereoscopic content. Growing number of stereoscopic (so called 3D) movies in today’s
cinemas and growing number of stereoscopy capable devices in people’s homes (Lambooij
and others, 2012), presents a rapidly growing need for stereoscopic visual content.
Considering this, it is safe to say that in the future a lot more stereoscopic content will be
needed for smaller size displays, like the ones that we have in our homes (computer
screens, television screens, mobile devices). That is why it is important to fully
understand what the potential problems are and how to effectively solve them. According
to Kroker (2010) it is predicted that 75 million stereoscopy capable computers will be
shipped by 2014. From today’s point of view it is certain that this prediction is highly
likely to be true since all the major computer brands released stereoscopic 3D capable
notebook computers (Asus G74SX-3DE, Alienware M17x and M18x, Sager NP9370-3D,
Eurocom Panther 5D, etc.), a lot of TV devices manufactures released 3D capable TV
screens (Samsung PS51F4900, LG 47LA620V Smart 3D, Panasonic TX-L42FT60B, etc.) and
some mobile phone companies released 3D capable mobile phones (HTC EVO 3D, LG
Optimus 3D P920, Sharp Aquos 102SHII, etc.).
It is also evident that more and more movies are released in stereoscopic 3D. If it is
to be believed to the research done by Tenniswood and others (2011) and Teulade and
others (2010), earnings show that stereoscopic 3D movies in cinemas earn more than 2D
releases, with an apparent growth every year. Tenniswood and others (2011) also claims
that 3D movies have a much higher chance of achieving a big box office than traditional 2D
movies with percentages: 52% for the stereoscopic 3D versus 5% for traditional 2D movie.
Having all that in mind, it is safe to say that need for stereoscopic imagery production is
growing fast with a tendency to grow even more rapidly in next couple of years. Although
stereoscopy is spreading fast and it is now embraced more than ever, some of the big TV
companies discontinued their stereoscopic 3D programs in 2013 like BBC (Cable, 2013)
and ESPN (White, 2013). The cause for this cancellation as news articles suggests is the
low interest in these programs. Low interest can be explained by two main disadvantages
that 3D programs have compared to traditional 2D programs. First one is not enough
stereoscopic 3D content to present on them and the second one is the need for glasses
while watching stereoscopic 3D program. People are not used wearing glasses at home
when watching television. Most of them want to do something else while just having a
glimpse on the TV. Also, if a bigger group of people wants to watch this TV program (for
example stereoscopic sports program) there are not enough glasses for all of the viewers
and therefore 2D program is more suitable. As Civanlar and others (2007) argue, major

drawback for the wide acceptance of stereoscopic technology is in fact necessity for
wearing glasses, but even despite that, numbers of users of stereoscopic technology is
growing, especially in gaming. There is also a growing number of stereoscopic video on the
Internet and DVDs, Blu-ray discs and similar media (Civanlar and others, 2007).
It is therefore highly expected that the number of users of stereoscopic content
will rapidly increase when glasses free stereoscopic 3D screens become a common thing in
households. Except of earlier mentioned cancellation of some 3D TV programs everything
else suggests that stereoscopy is now here to stay. Considering that, it is safe to say that
stereoscopic content in the near future will be widely present. Stereoscopic production is
very flexible and once made the stereoscopic imagery can be transferred to any kind of
system, however, the content itself cannot be changed. That is why it is very important to
understand what the does and don’ts are in production of stereoscopic imagery in order to
provide pleasant stereoscopic experience. Another really important development in
stereoscopy that will hopefully solve earlier mentioned problems present with today’ 3D
TV programs, will be further development of multi-viewpoint video. Puri and others
(1997) argues that stereoscopic video is actually a special case of multi-viewpoint video
restricted to just 2 different views, because it is enough for experiencing depth in the
image since humans have binocular visual system (only two eyes). Multi-viewpoint video
can provide more than 2 different views, so the content on the screen can be observed
even by looking at the screen from the sides.
Stereoscopy, by itself, provides more detailed and realistic representation of the
scene. But it can be also used to improve storytelling and pull in the viewer in the world
presented to him. Almost every 2D movie or game uses visual effects; therefore
stereoscopic equivalents of them will need stereoscopic visual effects as well. Stereoscopic
visual effects can produce much more exciting effect on a viewer than traditional 2d visual
effects, and this should be used as a primary tool in helping to tell the story and emerge
the viewer into the magic worlds presented in front of their eyes. There is no better way to
impress a viewer than to throw out some interesting visual effects in 3D, effects that can
make the viewer try to reach them with hand and make him immersed in the video he is
watching (Brown, 2012). Complexity and quality of stereoscopic visual effects can actually
have a crucial impact on the viewer, no matter what medium is used, game, movie or other
stereoscopic imagery. It is then clear that production of stereoscopic visual effects should
be taken very seriously and should follow the very basic laws of stereoscopy.
Understanding clearly how stereoscopy works, what are the available systems used for
presenting stereoscopic content and what are the potential problems, should be the most
important thing embedded in stereoscopic visual effects workflow.

3 - Objectives
This research project will focus on production of stereoscopic visual effects for film,
advertising and entertainment industry, but findings and conclusions derived from this
research can be used with slight changes in any other field where stereoscopic technology
can be applied. Research will be carried out through four objectives:
1. Exploration of binocular disparity and stereoscopy phenomenon
In order to produce stereoscopic content one should be highly informed
about causes of stereoscopy and binocular vision. Since stereoscopy is artificial
representation of binocular disparity which derives from binocular vision, strong
understanding of human visual system is needed. Therefore literature will be
reviewed in order to gather a solid base of knowledge about human visual system,
stereoscopy, current stereoscopic systems, and proposed workflows. Every claim
found in literature review will be checked against other sources in order to
compose final, objective and true arguments.
2. Production of pilot test project
Pilot test project will be a production of a stereoscopic video. Production of
this stereoscopic video will establish a certain stereoscopic workflow that will be
used later in final proof of concept video, but will also provide direct arguments to
support or challenge some theories and claims acquired from literature review in
the first objective. In order to acquire such that data, this stereoscopic video will be
presented to 10 participants and feedback from these participants will be recorded
through interviews. Test project will consist of 5 slightly different stereoscopic
animations, which are made to address the most common problems noticed by
reviewing literature. This will provide undeniable facts on how subject reacts to
motion blur, depth of field, floating window, reflection and color in stereoscopic
imagery. This project will also be conducted on two different platforms for
presenting stereoscopic content and will provide information on which one cause
less visual fatigue and provides better stereoscopic experience. Two different
platforms which will be used are Anaglyph (with red and cyan glasses, possible to
view on every screen) and nVidia Vision (with shutter glasses, possible to view on
120Hz screens and systems with nVidia stereo capable graphic cards). All testing
will be done on small scale screens (17”-19”).

3. Investigation of possible problems in presenting stereoscopic content
Possible problems in presenting stereoscopic content will be discovered by
presenting the stereoscopic video from second objective to 10 participants and
processing the data gathered from interviewing these participants. Production of
the test pilot will be based on findings derived from literature research, so it will
be easy to compare whether the results derived from this test pilot experiment are
correlating with some previously done research by other researchers reviewed
through literature, or if they are contradictory. It is expected that most of the
findings gathered from participant’s interviews after watching this stereoscopic
test pilot will in fact acknowledge the proposed problems found in literature
review. However, interviews could rise up some contradictory statements than the
one stated in some literature and this will be closely observed and explained.
4. Applying findings and conclusions from previous objectives in production of
stereoscopic visual effects
After conducting a literature review from the first objective, test pilot from
the second objective and processing data gathered by interviews from the third
objective, findings and conclusions from all this different sources will be merged
and included in development of stereoscopic visual piece. This final visual piece
will be aesthetically appealing and technically correct for viewing on smaller scale
screens and will be used as a proof of concept which derived from this research
paper.
Going back and forth through these objectives it is clear that every objective
relates to another and forms a closed circle of conclusions and findings (Figure 2). This
way, every statement is double checked against another source and therefore final
conclusion should be highly true and unbiased. Success in every single objective is crucial
for the development and success of the whole project. All of the objectives are easily
measurable. Every objective is based on and connected to previous one so relation
between them can be used for evaluation.

Figure 2 – Objectives Mind Map

4 - Literature review
4.1 Basics of stereoscopy
As stated earlier in this paper, human vision system allows seeing in three
dimensions meanly because of the horizontal disparity between the two eyes. As Judge
(1935) states, the combination of the two eyes and their mechanisms with a help of human
brain to interpret object impressions in order to experience solidity and perspective which
results in experiencing whole three dimensions. In similar way, based on binocular vision
of humans, artificial reproduction of this experience can be done through stereoscopy,
using two different cameras, two lenses camera or one lens camera with changed position.
Two slightly different pictures that are recorded with different cameras (or different
position of one camera) present a stereo pair. This stereo pair then needs to be properly
displayed to a spectator, with the help of some type of stereoscopic device in order to
present the left image only to the left eye (this picture should not be seen with right eye)
and to present the right image only to the right eye (Judge, 1935).
According to Robinett and Rolland (1991) there is a fair variation in the distance
between the eyes among adult males and females and it ranges from 53 to 73 millimeters,
with an average of 63 millimeters. Children have a bit smaller distance between the eyes.
This distance is called interpupillary distance. In order to reproduce natural impression of
seeing in three dimensions, cameras which are used for that purpose need to be spaced on
horizontal axis by the average of 63 millimeters. This distance is called interaxial distance.
For stereoscopic imagery it is extremely important not to have vertical disparity between
the two images. Our eyes are always on the same horizontal axis and every vertical
disparity will cause eye strain and break of the illusion (Hummel, 2008). It is also
important to note that interaxial distance, the distance between the two cameras, can be
smaller or larger than average of 63 millimeters. By reducing the distance, by making it
smaller, stereoscopic effect is getting less noticeable. On the other hand, if the interaxial
distance is greater than 63 millimeters stereoscopic effect is getting exaggerated (Judge,
1935). This can be very useful in achieving some amazing visual effect but should be
handled with great care because big changes in interaxial value can break the illusion.
Seeing the real world with human visual system, one can distinguish what point in space
some object is positioned in. Similar to that stereoscopic effect allows a viewer to
distinguish is the object in front of the screen plane, on the screen plane or behind the
screen plane and to clearly see depth distance between other objects in the scene. It
should also be noted that according to Hayes (1989), most people can see in three
dimensions up to a distance of 1.82 meters, and as the distance increases everything
becomes more and more flat.

The same way human eyes converge on an object in space, cameras used for
stereoscopic imagery can be converged as well. The point they converge in is called
convergence point. Converging cameras to a certain point in space can be useful to attract
the attention of spectator on a certain object but can also cause eye strain and discomfort
so it should be used very carefully. By converging camera to a certain point in space,
because of the lens distortion, vertical disparity is introduced and this can break the
illusion of stereoscopic effect (Autodesk, 2008).
4.2 Recorded problems in presenting stereoscopic content
In stereoscopy, the crucial thing is to know what will be projected on the screen
plane, what will be in front of it and what behind and what will the cameras be converged
on. It is important to know that for several reasons. One of the reasons is certainly the
storytelling and the need to surprise the audience with objects that pop out the screen, or
to pull in the audience in the story by presenting deep scenes emerged into the screen.
Other reasons could be found in more technical limitations to stereoscopic technology. If
one is looking at a scene emerged into the screen (scene and all objects in the scene are
positioned behind the screen plane) there is no limitations, and it can be looked at without
any eye constrain or break of the illusion. However, if some objects are popping out of the
screen (they are positioned in front of the screen plane) a lot of problems are introduced.
The first, most noticeable problem appears when object positioned in front of the screen
plane gets occluded by an edge of the screen and this is called a floating window problem.
At the same time the brain gets input from the eyes that this object is located in front of
the screen, but then again it is occluded by the screen which should be behind that object.
This always breaks the illusion, because brain cannot process it, and on smaller screens
it’s even more noticeable than big IMAX cinema screens (Autodesk, 2008).
Another problem can be noticed when objects are positioned far away in front of
the screen plane, and this causes eyes to diverge, which is not natural (eyes are used to
converge on objects). Besides breaking the illusion this can cause visual fatigue as well
(Yano and others, 2002).
Breaking of stereoscopic effect illusion can be experienced also if the spectator
moves. As Civanlar and others (2007) state, classical stereoscopic imagery is provided
with two fixed views (left and right camera, each corresponding to one eye), and if
spectator moves left or right in regard to the screen, movement feels unnatural, since no
new parts of the object can be seen, which is expected by a spectator. This, however, can
be solved by using multi-viewpoint technology (Puri and others, 1997).

According to Lambooij and others (2011) other causes for visual discomfort are 3D
artifacts that can be introduced if there is not sufficient depth data, fast motion and motion
in depth and unnatural blur which can be introduced by depth of field. Quesnel and others
(2012) also argue that motion blur, introduced by using slow shutter speed on standard
24 frames per second video, is introducing motion artifacts and making viewers fell
discomfort and unpleasant stereoscopic experience. They also argue that higher frame
rates with faster shutter speeds reduce discomfort and provide more comfortable viewing
experience. However Peter Jackson’s Hobbit (2012) in stereoscopic 3D was released in late
2012, with frame rate of 48 frames per second (double the standard 24 fps), and a lot of
people actually felt more discomfort than standard 24 fps movies. According to numerous
articles and blogs, a lot of people at some point found high frame rate more immersive
then normal 24 fps, but also at some point very distracting and disruptive. There is also a
claim by Kurt Akley, principal researcher at Microsoft Research that should be considered
as well. He claims that many people felt discomfort caused by limited depth of field in
James Cameron’s Avatar (2009) (Kroeker, 2010).
4.3 Stereoscopic systems
Stereoscopic technology is not perfect, and a lot of problems can be introduced
while watching stereoscopic content. However, stereoscopic displays are way more
immersive than flat 2D displays, and they are the only reasonable solution in perceiving
depth at this time. Volumetric displays are the next technological trend, since they will
provide a real 3D picture, but due to undeveloped technology, they are still far away from
usable. This leaves stereoscopy as main medium for presenting imagery with depth.
Development of new stereoscopic systems rapidly reduces the cost of such systems and at
the same time improves stereoscopic experience. Even if new types of systems emerge,
like multi-viewpoint video, it will be based on principals of stereoscopy. Multi-viewpoint
video will actually allow user to reveal new parts of object if the screen is looked at from a
different angle. This type of video can actually provide a holographic like experience
where users can slightly look around the object. Usage of multi-viewpoint video instead of
fixed two view video can actually have a really important application in developing
interactive television, interactive education systems and simulators, specializes movies,
medical surgery planning, new generation of video games, new systems for virtual reality
and industrial remote operations (Puri and others, 1997).
Having that in mind, it is to be expected that stereoscopy can in fact develop even
further, and can be used as a base for some different cutting edge systems for presenting
volume and depth.

There have been a lot of different methods throughout history for viewing
stereoscopic imagery. The illusion of stereoscopy can only be achieved if the left and the
right eye see the image designated just for left or right eye. That means that right eye sees
only the picture designated for right eye, and left eyes sees only the picture designated to
the left eye. This can be done with using special types of glasses and special types of
screens.
There are few main types of 3-D glasses commonly used, they can be passive or
active, and they are: polarized glasses, anaglyph glasses and shutter glasses (Froner and
others, 2008). As Hummel (2008) notes, all of the 3-D glasses systems have an impact on
the brightness of viewed imagery. All types of mentioned glasses reduce the brightness of
the viewed stereoscopic content for 3-4 f-stops.
Anaglyph glasses are a passive based system. Imagery from the screen is divided to
each eye using different light spectrums. Left eye is presented with the red spectrum and
the right eye with a cyan spectrum. Image presented on the screen can be prepared just
for anaglyph viewing, which means that image has slight color shifts (red and cyan) in
relation to depth or some software can do this conversion in real time from differently
packed stereoscopic video (Hummel, 2008). Object on the screen which doesn’t have any
color shift is positioned right on the screen plane. This system is far away from perfect, it
introduces a lot of ghosting (because filtration of complementary colors is not absolutely
accurate), and also reduces the range of visible spectrum (some colors cannot be
perceived as concluded in section 7.1.5 of this paper). This system is good for grayscale
imagery, and it’s good for on set or in production judgment of depth, since a great deal of
software allows a user to see a scene in anaglyph in real time. Anaglyph glasses will be
used in production of test pilot and final project.
Another, more sophisticated system is based on light polarization. Polarized
glasses are considered as a passive system and they can be linear polarized or circular
polarized. Linear polarized glasses have been in use since 1939. As Hummel (2008) states,
this system uses two differently linear polarized glass pieces on the glasses (for example,
vertical and horizontal polarization) and stereoscopic imagery is projected on silver
screen (silver screen is used to reflect the light while keeping the polarization) with two
also differently polarized projectors. This means, if the glass in front of the right eye is
polarized vertically, it will be able to see only image from a projector that is vertically
polarized and will be unable to see the other image. This separation method works really
well but only if the head is straight. The moment viewer tilts his head on either side,
stereoscopic illusion breaks because in that moment both eyes can see both pictures. This
problem was solved using circular polarized glasses. Principle is exactly the same as linear
polarized glasses except this glass pieces used in the glasses are polarized circular

(clockwise and counter clockwise), and both projectors are also polarized with circular
polarizers. That way, the eye looking from clockwise polarized glass can only see a
clockwise polarized image from a projector bouncing of the silver screen. Because it is
circular polarization if the viewer tilts his head, stereoscopic effect stays strong without
breaking the illusion. This system is commonly used in today cinemas and the most
famous one is certainly the Real D system. (Verrier, 2009)
Third most used system is active stereoscopic system with shutter glasses. This
glasses have a small liquid crystal displays (LCD) instead of glass in front of each eye and
infra-red receiver to sync with the monitor. They are powered by a battery (this is why
they are called active). For this type of stereoscopic system, stereoscopic imagery needs to
be presented on a 120 Hz screen. This screen then synchronizes with the glasses and the
LCDs on the glasses are turning on and off (allowing light from the screen to come through
or not) in a sync with refresh rate of the screen. This means that of 120 Hz, every second
refresh goes to a different eye, each eye gets 60 Hz refresh rate, and sees only the picture
presented in that 60Hz. This system is widely used in gaming computers and home
entertainment systems (Froner and others, 2008). One of the most famous and
widespread used shutter glasses systems are definitely CrystalEyes and nVidia’s Vision,
which will be used in the experimental stage of this project.
There are also a couple of auto stereoscopic systems that provide stereoscopic
experience without the need for glasses. The two most promising principles today are
certainly lenticular displays and parallax illumination 3D displays. Lenticular screens uses
an array of vertically oriented cylindrical lenses positioned on top of the LCD panel, and
the light from each row of pixels is presented in certain horizontal plane in space. That is
how left eye and right eye always see two different pictures (two different rows of pixels
which correspond to left and right image used for stereoscopic effect) (Pastor and
Siegmund, 1997). Parallax illumination displays uses a barrier, which is positioned in front
of the LCD panel and this barrier allows each eye to see the light coming only from
alternate image columns (Pastor and Siegmund, 1997). On 2013 CES show, few companies
presented glasses free TV systems. As Jared Newman (2013) from The Time Magazine
records, the most immersive glasses free experience presented on CES was Vizio’s 55 inch
4K glasses free prototype (uses lenticular system). Stream TV Company also presented the
Ultra D TV system, and other glasses free 3D TV’s were presented by Phillips and Toshiba
as well.
Figure 3 – Illustration of different types of stereoscopic glasses

All the systems mentioned above can use two different pictures for left and right
eye packed in some of the possible ways (see Figure 4) which are then merged to fit the
stereoscopic system used (via hardware and software). However, anaglyph (or any other
complementary color system) can also use one picture for stereoscopic imagery which is
actually a combination of left and right eye with shifted colors. That is why footage
prepared just for anaglyph system can be viewed on any screen (without need for merging
them via hardware of software in real time), and it can be even viewed on paper (see
Figure 13). On the other hand all of the other stereoscopic system uses two different
inputs, one for left eye and one for right eye. These inputs can be merged into the same file
(if viewed digitally on home computers or TVs) or they can be played from two separate
files, on two different projectors (like in cinemas). If one uses one file to present
stereoscopic content, two views (one for each eye) can be merged in few different ways:
side by side, over/under, row interlaced or column interlaced.
Footage merged like this can be viewed on every stereoscopic screen (with shutter
glasses, polarized screen, and viewed on glasses free displays) since all of these
stereoscopic systems support this types of decoding. Thus, it is really important to know
on what type of stereoscopic display imagery will be presented to know how to merge the
two views to assure the best quality of presented content.
Figure 4 – Illustration of some possible merging of stereoscopic video

5 - Research methods
In order to successfully meet the objectives outlined in the beginning of this
research paper a number of research methods and techniques should be used. Because the
data will be combined from few different sources, each one will be complementing and at
the same time verifying another, it can be said that triangulation of methods will be used
(Flick and others, 2004). Methods and techniques that will be used in this triangulation
will be: literature review, pilot test project with pilot study, interviews and artifact
production. This project will be mostly based on the experiences, feelings and
observations. Therefore, qualitative research will be used. As Keegan (2009) argues,
qualitative research explores questions what, why and how, rather than how many and
how much, and understanding what is going on is the essence of this type of research.
Qualitative research also involves small numbers of people, representatives of some
group, and it is person centered (it is based on fillings and experiences of individual
person). Quantitative research, on the other hand, involves large numbers of people and
provides numerical measurements and statistical data (Keegan, 2009), which is not
suitable for this research project. Also, as Tracy (2013) argues, qualitative research is
more suitable for young scholars, because they don’t have comfy offices or high tech
laboratories, and they are happy to escape their shared apartments to venture into the
field. Tracy (2013) also argues that qualitative research is excellent for studying contexts
that one is personally curious about, but never had obvious reason for entering in that
research. One of the main reasons why qualitative research is suitable for this particular
research is that, as Tracy (2013) argues; qualitative research can uncover certain issues
that can be later studied using different, more structured, research methods. This means
that qualitative research can lead to uncover some completely unexpected data, which is
almost impossible to do with, for example, structured quantitative research. Because of
that, in contrast to quantitative research (which provides massive numbers of data),
qualitative research can in fact produce a more rich set of data, data that will be much
more useful in this type of research project.
5.1 Literature review
Literature review research method will be used at the very beginning of this
project in order to explore how humans perceive depth, how the effect of stereoscopy is
achieved and what are the current practices in stereoscopic imagery, but it will also be
used throughout the project to verify data acquired by other research methods. According
to Oliver (2012), literature review is one of the most important parts in any peace of
academic writing and it is a foundation upon everything else is built on. As Booth and
others (2012) argues, literature review is a method for identifying work that is produced

by the other researchers, scholars and practitioners and provides an overall look on
certain subject rather than just one part of it. At the very basis of this project it is crucial to
have an overall look at this subject, because that will provide a good starting point to go
deeper in research, and will lead to successful production of wanted artifact. Literature
review is also connecting the research subject to a broader context and related areas
(Oliver, 2012).
5.2 Pilot study
Based on the data gathered from literature review a pilot project will be made and
a pilot study will be conducted. Pilot project will address the most common issues in
stereoscopy. It will also provide a defined workflow for producing stereoscopic imagery.
Finished pilot test project will be then presented to 10 participants of different age and
sex. Participants will be males and females, age 20 to 30 years, with previous stereoscopic
experience. Some of them will be with strong understanding of 3D and stereoscopy, but
also some of them with not so great understanding of stereoscopy. This way, it is ensured
that data gathered from interviews (which will be conducted after presenting a test pilot
to the participants) will be unbiased and highly correct. If people without previous
stereoscopic experience were participating, results may be biased, because first time they
see it may be astonished by the 3D depth illusion, or maybe they would not like to see
anything in stereoscopic 3D and feedback from them would be in fact unusable.
5.3 Interviews
Participants will be interviewed while they are watching stereoscopic video to
ensure that answers really on what they are experiencing at the moment and not on
memory of what they saw. Interviews are chosen instead of surveys or questioners
because they provide opportunity for direct interaction between the researcher and the
participants (Matthews, 2010).
Kvale (1996) argues that interviews capture participant’s view on given subject,
and data gathered through interviews can be very broad. That is why interviews used in
this research will be semi-structured. According to Matthews (2010), semi-structured
interviews follow a common set of topics or questions for each interview (this is important
for comparison between the different participants), and they may introduce the topics or
questions in different way according to different participants while allowing the
participants to express their feelings, experiences with their own words (this is important
because some unexpected observations can arouse). This will provide a certain flow of
questions and answers which can be compared and used in generalization of some
assumptions. Questioners and surveys are not good choice for this project since a small
group of people is the focus of the research (questioners and surveys are more suitable for

larger groups), and usage of structured approach (set of structured questions in
questioners and surveys) may in fact degrade the quality of gathered data, since some
observations may not be included in the questions presented to participants. Also, a high
response rate is needed (because of the small number of participants) and therefore
interviews are the most suitable method for this research. Interviews will provide reach
set of participant’s feelings and experiences they got about presented test pilot
stereoscopic video, and will also allow researcher to observe reactions and body language
of participants right on the spot while they are watching the test pilot peace.
Semi-structured interviews will be guided with following set of questions:
1. For stereoscopic video with floating window problem, participants will be asked if
the video looks right and how they fell about object that is cut by the edge of the
screen (can they distinguish where is it positioned in depth)
2. For stereoscopic video with shallow depth of field, participants will be asked how
they feel about the video, is it pleasant to their eyes and is the depth easily
perceivable
3. For stereoscopic video with motion blur participants will be asked how they
perceive depth and motion in this video, and is anything causing any problems in
watching at this video
4. For stereoscopic video with reflections, participants will be asked about overall
impression of the video, and they will be asked to distinguish where the reflection
is positioned in depth.
5. For stereoscopic video with color, participants will be asked about the fell of
colors, how many colors they see and they will be asked to compare anaglyph and
shutter glasses system
Participants will be asked at the end to give an opinion on which system (anaglyph or
shutter glasses) was more pleasant to use.
All participants are given confidentiality, ethic forms stage one and stage two are
approved (Appendix C), but data gathered from the participants will not contain any
private data, only data regarding their opinions on presented stereoscopic peace. After the
data from the interviews and the literature review are combined, it will provide a clear
understanding of how stereoscopic visual effects should be produced, what are the main
problems, what the differences between certain techniques are and how to possibly solve
them to make visually pleasant stereoscopic experience.

5.4 Artefact production
At the end, research technique of artefact production will be used to justify and
verify all the findings and conclusions achieved with previously mentioned research
methods. The product which will emerge from this research technique will be evaluated
with the same process used in pilot study, by presenting the product to participants and
interviewing them afterwards. If interviews show that participants had a pleasant
stereoscopic experience, this research project can be considered successful. Otherwise, it
can be concluded that this research has some weak points and mistakes in data
processing.

6 - Product development
Based on the findings derived from literature review, test pilot was made to
investigate the most common issues in presenting stereoscopic video: floating window
problem, motion blur, depth of field, reflections and color representation (important for
anaglyph systems). This test pilot project was used in a pilot study. Stereoscopic video was
presented to the participants, they were then interviewed and by processing the
interviews, certain conclusions are made. These conclusions about preparing stereoscopic
content, supports but also challenges some of the arguments found in literature research
and thus provides objective opinion on what are the things that one should have in mind
while producing stereoscopic content. These findings formed a firm base for producing the
artifact, proof of concept for stereoscopic visual effects production.
6.1 Pilot study (completed by help of the literature review)
Researching the literature a few key problems in preparing and presenting
stereoscopic content were highlighted.
So called Floating window problem is probably the most mentioned and most
serious problem in stereoscopy. Floating window problem (Figure 5) appears when the
object is positioned in front of the screen plane but comes to close to the edges and gets
occluded by the edge of the screen (so called proscenium arch). This problem is very
noticeable, breaks the illusion of 3D and can cause headache if it is persistent. Most
common situations of the floating window problem include framing a person (which needs
to be in front of the screen plane) with visible just upper body (for example). This presents
serious limitations to storytelling, framing a shot and depth positioning of objects in the
scene. This issue however cannot be resolved, because it is a part of technical limitation of
stereoscopic displays, it can be only avoided and minimized.
Figure 5 – Illustration of Floating Window problem

Next possible issue in presenting stereoscopic content can be an artificial blur that
camera produces associated with fast moving subjects. Literature review suggests that
motion blur (Figure 6) is degrading stereoscopic effect and therefore should be minimized
if not excluded at all (Quesnel and others, 2012). Motion blur is the phenomenon
happening with moving objects in the video, because shutter on the camera is exposing
each frame for certain period of time (in 24 fps that time is 2.5 milliseconds) and if object
is moving fast enough it will leave a trail on each frame (object will have a directional blur
on every frame because the object moved from one position to another during the
exposure of that single frame).
Figure 6 – Illustration of motion blur effect
Depth of field (Figure 7) is also unnatural blur that gives the video so called
“cinematic look”. Depth of field is product of light rays falling on sensor or film through a
camera lens. If light rays emitted from an object are crossing right on to the film or sensor
plane that object is in focus, and everything in front or behind that object will be blurred.
This technique is often used in video pieces when director wants to focus viewers’
attention to a specific part of the scene. Having in mind that usage of depth of field in 2D
movies is far beyond useful it is not yet clear if it helps or even is it usable in stereoscopic
3D cinematography.
Figure 7 – Illustration of cameras depth of field

Reflective surfaces are also one of the most noticed problems in stereoscopic 3D.
Problems with reflections in stereoscopic 3D is that reflected object seems to be emerged
into the screen the same distance that reflected object is from the reflective surface. This
can cause break of the illusion, and can be unpleasant and confusing to watch.
Color representation was included in this pilot test project just to compare the
results between older anaglyph systems and new shutter glasses system, in order to prove
superiority of newer technologies. Because anaglyph system uses complementary colors
to exclude certain colors from one eye and present it to the other eye, palate of visible
colors is significantly reduced, and some colors can’t be even visible in the video (see
section 7.1.5 of this paper).
6.2 Pilot study project development
The test pilot video was made from 5 different variations of the same animation.
Each variation addresses one of the mentioned issues in presenting stereoscopic content.
Stereoscopic animation was done in Autodesk’s Maya 2013. Cogs and gears are animated
by simple mathematical expressions, camera move was added and depending on what
specific problem video clip addresses changes are done accordingly. Autodesk’s Maya, but
also many other specialized 3D or compositing software, have some stereo camera rigs
implemented. Autodesk Maya is equipped with few different stereo camera rigs, from the
most simple one (using just 2 cameras) to a more complex ones (up to 10 cameras). It is
also possible to make your own custom stereo rig, but for the purpose of this project,
standard 3 cameras stereo rig was used (Figure 8).
Figure 8 – Autodesk Maya’s Stereo Rig(three camera setup)
Three cameras setup is the closest thing to the real world stereoscopic cameras.
There is only one camera more (real world stereoscopy needs only two different cameras
or lenses), but that camera is actually the controlling camera for the other two. It can be
thought of as a rig that holds the other two cameras together. This camera is positioned in
the center on the horizontal axis between left and right camera. This is the only camera
that can be animated, and the other two cameras are parented with some expressions by

default to that center camera so they move and rotate along with it. This center camera
also has properties for interaxial (interocular) separation (distance between left and right
camera), zero parallax (zero parallax presents where the screen plane is positioned) and it
also controls usual properties of every camera like angle of view, focal length, f-stop, depth
of field etc. By default interaxial separation in Autodesk Maya is 6.350 cm (based on
average distance between human eyes, mentioned earlier in this paper). This can be also
manually adjusted to provide desired stereoscopic effect (exaggerate it or make it less
noticeable). Left and right cameras in this stereo rig can also be parallel or converged.
Human eyes converge when they are focusing on some close objects, so if one was
following this natural behavior converged cameras will be used in 3D software as well.
However, usage of converging cameras presents potential problems. In real world, when
real cameras are used for shooting stereoscopic content, even two exactly same lenses are
never 100% identical. That’s why footage can have a lot of artifacts that can ruin the
stereoscopic effect. In 3D software, it is safe to say that virtual cameras and lenses used
are in fact 100% identical. Therefore no artifacts will be produced and stereoscopic
experience will be pleasant and immersive. But, if converged cameras are used, simple
geometry proves that stereoscopic effect will have potential problems due to introducing
vertical disparity (Figure 9). If it is known that stereoscopic experience is achieved only
through horizontal disparity (because our eyes are only separated on horizontal axis, but
vertically they are always on the same position) vertical disparity is not wanted. That’s
why converged cameras should be used with great care and only for some fast scenes, if
there is no other way to focus viewer’s attention to some part of the scene.
Figure 9 – Parallel camera setup without vertical disparity (top left and bottom left), converged
camera setup with introduced vertical disparity (top right and bottom right)

For this project, parallel cameras in stereo rig were used to ensure that vertical
disparity artifacts are not a potential threat to final output of this stereoscopic test pilot.
Animation is done in the way that can successfully present each problem and
hopefully help spectators to give an honest, true opinion about what they are looking at
(Figure 10, Figure 11 and Figure 12).
Figure 10 – Renders from test pilot project, floating window problem (left), shallow depth of field,
right
Figure 11 – renders from test pilot project, motion blur (left), reflective surfaces (right)
Figure 12 – Render from test pilot project, colored objects
Some of the objects in the scene are positioned on the screen plane, some of them
are in front of the screen plane and some of them are emerged into the screen. This covers
all of the possible depth positions, so participants who will be interviewed have complete
depth experience. Images from the left and right cameras (images that will be presented to

the left and right eye) were exported separately as .PNG sequences with resolution of
1920x1080 progressive, and then composited with two different methods. First method
used is anaglyph method, for viewing on every screen with anaglyph glasses without need
of any specialized software or hardware. Left and right images are overlaid one on top of
another with slight color (red/cyan) shift according to the depth of the scene. Second
method used was over/under method for viewing with shutter glasses on 120 Hz screen.
System used for viewing this was nVidia Vision glasses and nVidia powered Asus G74SX
notebook with 120 Hz compatible screen. Over/under method was used instead of side by
side method because 1:1 pixel ratio was used. If the video was side by side the resolution
will be 2560 x 720 pixels, which is to wide, and can cause problems in reproduction.
Putting the two streams from left and right camera with over/under method final picture
has dimensions of 1280 x 1440 which is closer to the proportions of the square and
therefore reproduction of that video is much easier. Videos that use side by side method
are often squeezed on a horizontal axis (pixel ratio is changed) so they look like
anamorphic videos. This is also done just to bring the video in more square proportions
for easier reproduction.
Composited video was then exported to .MOV files with H264 compression to
ensure that it will be easily playable and the file size will be relatively small. The big
downside of exporting to .MOV container and H264 codec is that it is limited to 2000 x
2000 pixels in size. Nothing over that can be exported from composting software (except
of using different codec like .mp4 H264), so for the shutter glasses if side by side video was
chosen it needed to be reduced in width to fit maximally 2000 pixels. It was however
possible to use Half Side by Side method (see Figure 4), by squeezing the video by half of
its width, but this was avoided because it may introduce artifacts in decoding process, and
therefore jeopardize final test results.
Production of the test pilot project proved that chosen stereoscopic workflow is in
fact working, and that same workflow can be used for producing the final stereoscopic
piece. When test pilot was rendered out in stereoscopic format and it was ready for
presenting, a group of participants were tested, both on anaglyph and shutter glasses
systems, and interviewed about this stereoscopic video. Manuscript of the interviews can
be read in Appendix A.

6.3 Final product development
Final product is presented as a set of different stereoscopic videos with
composited visual effects. Development of these stereoscopic videos was based on the
workflow used for the production of the pilot study. Process of development was also
influenced by the results of the pilot study. This set of stereoscopic videos present
different situations in which visual effects may be applied in stereoscopic environment.
Purpose of final product is to verify findings and conclusions derived from the test pilot,
but also to present real life situations, and that is why visual effects were applied on to a
native stereoscopic video (that means that video is recorded with stereoscopic camera).
Stereoscopic video used was captured by Panasonic HDC-SDT750 digital camera
with Panasonic VW-CLT1 stereoscopic conversion lens. This conversion lens consists of
two smaller parallel lenses with horizontal distance of 1.25 mm. Footage shoot with this
camera was not of great quality, but since the purpose was to just verify findings of the
research it was good enough. Footage recorded and visual effects applied are not intended
to be broadcasted and therefore aesthetic value of shots and effects were not the focus
during the production. Main focus was on aesthetic and technical value of the stereoscopic
effect and depth illusion in the shots. Because of the small sensor size of the camera there
is a lot of noise present in the stereoscopic video. Stereoscopic footage is packed in camera
on 1920x1080 pixels, side by side, squeezed to fit the frame (see Figure 4). Because of that
footage needed to be stretched to by 200% in width in order to get the video with normal
aspect ratio which is suitable for postproduction. By scaling it in width, picture quality also
degrades. After process of stretching was done, images for the right and the left eye were
separated and then combined again in stereoscopic composition in Adobe After Effects.
Having separate images for separate eyes in stereoscopic composition was crucial for
compositing visual effects. By having it separated, interaxial distance could be easily
adjusted in postproduction (to specify what should be on the screen plane, behind or in
front of the screen plane, since camera did not have the possibility to precisely determine
that), and therefore depth for composited elements is easily acquired. Having images for
each eye separated also assures that each eye can be treated in case of introduction of
vertical disparity, brightness or color disparity, but also for using masks, track data
(camera or object movement) or any other technique used for standard non-stereoscopic
compositing. Every stereoscopic visual effect has the same workflow as non-stereoscopic
equivalent, with the exception that the effect needs to be treated for each eye separately.
This means that if the computer generated image is composited into the shoot it needs to
be masked separately for each eye, and of course the computer generated element should
be positioned in depth according to the depth in the shot.

Figure 13 – Sample frames from composited stereoscopic visual effects
Presented in Red/Cyan anaglyph method
Images above (Figure 13), presents static frames from some of the shots with
stereoscopic visual effects applied in Red/Cyan Anaglyph Method (viewable with supplied
paper glasses).
Each visual effect production was based on the findings and conclusions from this
research paper in order to provide pleasant stereoscopic experience. Motion blur, depth of
field, reflections, floating window problem, etc. were properly used or avoided as the
findings suggested. At the end, footage was prepared for viewing on any type of
stereoscopic system, rendered as 1920x1080 progressive, 25 frames per second, side by
side with half width (see Figure 4) to match the source of captured video. In order to
determine if research project was successful, this set of stereoscopic visual effect was then
presented to few participants (different than ones used for test pilot study, but with
similar profiles) with nVidia Vision shutter glasses system and theirs interviews can be
read in Appendix B.
Different participants were used to ensure that results are not biased. Participants
used in test pilot study already knew specifically what to look for in the videos, since they
were presented with the most common, exaggerated problems that stereoscopy can suffer
from. By presenting this set of stereoscopic visual effects to people not included in pilot
test study, objective feedback with powerful first impressions is achieved. Participants
were also people from 20-30 years, with previous experience of watching stereoscopic
content.

7 - Findings and conclusions
Pilot project was successfully tested with 10 participants. Findings that emerged
from interviews are mostly expected and they are correlating with thesis and arguments
found in literature review. However, there are some findings that are not directly
correlating to literature review and even contradictory to some arguments found in
literature review.
7.1 Findings
Anaglyph and shutter glasses tests produced the following results for the 5 tested
possible problems (floating window, depth of field, motion blur, reflections and color).
7.1.1 Floating window
All participants were able to perceive depth both on shutter glasses and anaglyph
systems with noticeable improvement in depth perception with shutter glasses system
(nVidia Vision). None of the 10 participants had the total break of 3D illusion, but when
asked if something is bothering them 9 out of 10 participants answered positively. Only
one participant felt like everything is ok. When asked to say where are the two vertical
lines (which present the floating window problem) positioned in space, 8 out of 10
participants said that they are at the same time in front and in the back, that that is
confusing and it also looks weird. One participant clearly stated that they are in front and
did not have confusion or any discomfort about floating window problem. One participant
said that there is no confusion or discomfort and that the verticals are positioned behind
the screen (which is untrue).
Literature suggests that floating window problem always breaks the illusion
(Autodesk, 2008), but this example actually shows that floating window can be partially
solved (make it less noticeable) by employing another object which is not cut by the edge
of the screen and make it a bit in front the one that gets occluded by the screen. That is
why none of the 10 participants had break of the illusion, and as some of them said, the
gears and cogs in the middle helped to sell the effect. The gears and cogs in the middle
were positioned closer to the viewer in –Z axis (z is depth axis, where negative values are
positioned in front of the screen plane) than cage whose one part was in front of the
screen plane but at the same time occluded by the edge of the screen. It is therefore easy to
explain why one of the participants didn’t have any discomfort even if focused on the
object occluded by the edge of the screen. However, even if test showed that one can get
away with occluding the popped out object with the edge of the screen, it is highly
recommended to avoid this. If there is no other solution to solve the shot, one should place

one smaller object closer to the spectator to minimize break of the illusion and this can be
only done for short intervals (Figure 14).
Figure 14 – Proposed solution for minimizing floating window problem
Top view with details (Left , Anaglyph stereo picture viewable with supplied glasses (Right)
7.1.2 Depth of field
All participants were able to perceive depth. There is again noticeable
improvement in perceiving stereoscopic content with nVidia Vision shutter glasses than
anaglyph system. 4 out of 10 participants said that the footage looks all right, that it is
interesting to watch and that it does not break the illusion. However, 4 out of 10
participants said that their eyes want to explore the scene which is too blurred. They felt
discomfort and slight degradation of depth while watching this stereoscopic video. 2 out of
10 participants were undetermined about how they feel. One interesting thing is that 8 out
of 10 participant’s discomfort was a cylinder moving fast and popping out of the screen.
This cylinder was not in focus, it was blurred. Cause for that may be, as reviewed in journal
article by Harris and others (2008), how the human brain prioritizes what to focus on.
Brain is naturally programmed to focus on fast approaching objects (Harris and others,
2008), because they present potential imminent danger. This is why it is unpleasant to
look at the fast approaching object but being unable to focus on it. It can be concluded
from this test that shallow depth of field has some negative effects on stereoscopic
experience, as proposed by the reviewed literature. On the other hand it can be used as
creative tool to focus attention of the viewer on some part of the scene, but the object that
pops out of the screen should always be in focus to avoid visual discomfort.

7.1.3 Motion blur
All participants were able to perceive depth. Again, nVidia vision system was
better than anaglyph system. 10 out of 10 participants said that footage looks right, that
everything is pleasant to view and that they perceive the depth perfectly. All participants
said that this footage is far better than previous ones. They said that movement looks nice;
it is detailed and sharp and provides a really enjoyable experience. 10 out of 10
participants did not feel any discomfort or any visual fatigue produced by motion blur.
These results are contradictory to some literature, like journals written by Lambooij and
others (2011) or Quesnel and others (2012), that describes usage of motion blur as bad
thing to incorporate in stereoscopic imagery. These results show that motion blur actually
helps selling the effect and makes the footage more pleasant and immersive. Cause for this
results might be human persistence of vision (phenomenon where every picture
presented to the eyes stays on retina for a 1/8 to 1/10 of a second (Judge, 1935)). This
way, persistence of vision phenomenon in combination with motion blur makes the
movement smoother and provides more pleasant reception of that movement. Having in
mind that presented stereoscopic video has a lot of moving parts and a moving camera it
can be concluded that motion blur (in some reasonable limits) helped this shot to be
experienced as perfect, without flaws. This test also supports earlier mentioned claims,
(section 4.2 of this paper) of some people after watching Peter Jackson’s Hobbit (2012),
that they felt more discomfort with this release of 48 fps than standard 24 fps. In 48
frames per second video, shutter speed is higher than in 24 frames per second video and
therefore motion blur is not visible. This provides much cleaner and sharper video but as
this test proved, motion blur is actually desirable. It was recently announced that Sky-
Scan’s short stereoscopic documentary To Space & Back, will be presented in 8K resolution
with 60 fps, which is even higher than Peter Jackson’s Hobbit (2012). (The World’s First
Stereoscopic 8K 60 fps Movie, 2013)
7.1.4 Reflections
All participants were able to perceive depth. In this case nVidia’s Vision shutter
glasses system was proven to be highly more accurate in presenting the stereoscopic
content and way more pleasant to view. 7 out of 10 participants stated that they were
perceiving reflections well and they didn’t bother them. 3 of 10 participants felt
discomfort and confusion with the reflections in the video. However 10 of 10 participants
answered those reflections are emerged back into the screen when asked to determine
their position in space. This is not true and can be misleading in perceiving depth. That is
why some of the participants said that reflections looks transparent (they actually
perceived reflected objects as different object emerged back in to the scene but occluded

with some transparent object). Some of them did not feel discomfort or confusion because
test pilot video did not have back boundaries (like wall, rock, and mountain) and to them
reflected areas did not felt weird and strange emerged in the screen like that. This
however can be a problem in defined scene where reflective area is positioned in front of
some impenetrable surface. This test also showed that flat reflected surface causes much
more confusing than curved surface (4 of 10 people clearly stated that), and this is
probably because on curved surface, reflections are distorted and therefore can be
perceived as reflection or refractions of an object rather than instance of that same object
back in depth. These findings are completely agreeing with literature statements found in
literature review.
7.1.5 Color
All participants were able to perceive depth. Difference noticed between nVidia
Vision shutter glasses system and anaglyph system for this particular test was huge. 0 out
of 10 participants perceived all four colors while watching with anaglyph system. 8 of
them perceived 3 colors and 1 of them perceived only 2 colors. One participant was unable
to watch the video with anaglyph system. Almost all of the participants gave different
answers to what colors are they seeing (Figure 15).
Participant 2 Participant 3 Participant 4 Participant 5 Participant 6 Participant 7 Participant 8 Participant 9 Participant 10
Yellow Green Green Blue Gray-
purple
Purple Purple Blue Orange
Blue Orange Goldish Green Green Green Green Yellow Green
X Red Blue Red Yellow-
green
White Orange Green Red-Blue
Figure 15 – Table of colors that participants saw with anaglyph system
Some of the participants at some times had troubles to perceive depth clearly while
watching this stereoscopic video with anaglyph glasses. They said that color fringing and
ghosting is higher than on monochrome videos before and this ruins the stereoscopic
effect. On the other hand, while the same video was watched on nVidia’s Vision shutter
glasses system 10 out of 10 participants perceived all 4 colors and they were able to
clearly identify them. Using this system none of the participants had color fringing or
ghosting and therefore no difficulties to perceive depth. These results were also expected
since shutter glasses system is much advanced then simple anaglyph system, and it was
expected that the color is the weak spot in anaglyph system since it uses complementary
colors to separate the image for left and right eye. Looking through red/cyan glasses

definitely changes the perception of many colors in the video and that’s why new systems
(based on polarization or shutter glasses) are far better in dealing with colored picture.
These test results are also supporting the claims found in the literature.
All participants experienced loss of brightness when they looked at the screen
trough the glasses. One of ten participants was not able to use anaglyph system at all. It
caused extreme discomfort and pain for that participant. This participant did not
experience any discomfort while using nVidia Vision shutter glasses.
7.1.6 Participants feedback on set of final stereoscopic visual effects
Final product, set of stereoscopic visual effects, was presented to 5 participants.
Feedback they provided throughout interviews (Appendix B) proves that findings
obtained in pilot study were in fact true, because none of the participants had visual
discomfort, break of the illusion, eye strain or any other negative experience. They were all
fully immersed into the stereoscopic visual effects. Researcher can also note that the body
movement of the participants was correlating with the action on the screen. That means
that participants acted as they are in the same world with presented visual effects. With
these observations it can be concluded that research was successful.
7.2 Conclusions, recommendations and further research
Research done on this project was carried out through four objectives (section 3 of
this paper). All objectives were successfully met.
First objective was exploration of binocular disparity and stereoscopy
phenomenon, and this objective was met by successfully reviewing literature (section 4 of
this paper), and successfully implementing gained knowledge into production of test pilot
project (section 6.2 of this paper).
Second objective was production of pilot test project. This objective was met by
successfully producing 5 different stereoscopic animations (section 6.2 of this paper) and
making them viewable on two different stereoscopic systems, Anaglyph and nVidia Vision
system.
Third objective was to investigate possible problems in presenting stereoscopic
content and this objective was met by research method of interviewing 10 participants
(Appendix A) and processing that data (section 7.1 of this paper).
Fourth objective was to apply all the findings and conclusions from previous
objectives and produce proof of concept stereoscopic visual effects video piece. This
objective was met by producing the set of different stereoscopic visual effects (video file
on supplied CD, and section 6.3 in this paper), verifying its quality by interviewing 5
participants (Appendix B) and processing the gathered data (section 7.1.6 of this paper).

With all of the four objectives successfully met, based on the literature review,
cross checked with results gathered from pilot test study and final project, certain set of
rules can be pointed out for production of stereoscopic visual effects.
In order to successfully implement visual effects in stereoscopic video, one should
be completely aware of what type of lenses were used for filming this stereoscopic video
and what was the distance between the center of lenses (interaxial distance). It should be
also known if cameras were converged or parallel. If converged cameras were used, visual
effects artist should expect much pronounced distortion and vertical disparity, and
therefore before any visual effects can be applied to that footage, vertical disparity and
lens distortion should be eliminated. Usage of parallel cameras can reduce lens distortion
and can be without, or with just slight vertical disparity, which makes the footage much
easier to work with. While working with stereoscopic footage visual effects artist should
always have one view, so called “master eye”, which will be used for all the color
corrections and compositing purposes.
When applying visual effects one should be careful that effects happening in front
of the screen do not get cut by the edge of the screen because this can cause breaking of
the depth illusion. For example, if explosion is happening in the scene and some objects
from that scene needs to fly out towards a viewer, to pop out from the screen, those
objects should be positioned in way that they don’t come close to neither of the four edges
of the screen. If for some reason it is impossible to avoid cutting the objects, which are in
front of the screen plane, with edges of the screen, visual effects artist should introduce
one center object which is popping even more than those objects in order to keep the
viewer’s attention on that object and let him experience the depth of the others by
peripheral view. Using this method will ensure that illusion of depth is not broken.
However it can only work for short period of time, and it should be noted that maximum
distance for object to pop out is half the distance between camera and screen plane. As
noticed with the pilot project, cylinder was popping out slightly above the imaginary
boundary of half the distance between camera and screen, and the moment it crosses this
boundary it is not easily perceivable, it causes eye strain. So this should be used with great
care.
If visual effects need to have shallow depth of field, visual effect artist should know
that that can flatten the scene and make the depth illusion less noticeable. However if such
thing is necessary, it should be pointed out that every effect composited in the scene
should follow the depth of field present on original footage. Also, action happening in front
of the screen must always be in focus, because otherwise it can cause visual fatigue and
can make viewers uncomfortable. Shallow depth of field can be used to introduce some

object in to the scene, for example objects which are in front of the screen plane. By
making them blurry and entering into the scene away from the user, visual effects artist
can make them less noticeable until the moment when they go into the screen and into the
focus area. This way floating window problem is partially solved and illusion of depth is
not broken.
Compositing any visual effect on to the real footage should follow the properties of
that footage. But it should be mentioned that if the footage is not suitable for pleasant
stereoscopic experience, visual effects artist should transform it and make it better. One of
the possible situations can be lack of motion blur. For example sometimes when green
screen footage is shot, people on set are trying to reduce motion blur in order to provide
better keying. The same thing is happening with footage that needs to be tracked.
Reduction of motion blur in the footage that needs to be tracked can be essential to quality
of the track. However, research done in this project (section 7.1.3 of this paper), shows
that viewers perceived footage with motion blur much better than footage without motion
blur. Video with motion blur is much more pleasant to view in stereo than one without
motion blur. That is why visual effects artist should use motion blur whenever they
composite any kind of animations or motion into the stereoscopic piece.
Visual effects artists should be very careful with reflective areas in the scene they
are working on. It is proved in this research (section 7.1.4), that viewers can perceive
reflection as instances of the same objects emerged deeper in space, and this can be very
problematic in perceiving the scene in the right way. Flat reflective surfaces should be
avoided most of the time; curved surfaces can be used with great care. It is however
possible to reduce bad effects of reflected areas by slightly distorting them, changing the
color or blurring the reflection. It is also helpful if reflected areas are positioned back in
the scene and there is no impenetrable barrier behind those reflective surfaces. This can
help the brain to process the reflection without much confusion.
Another important thing, that visual effects artist should know, is what type of
system they are preparing the footage for. This is crucial because of different results one
can get from different systems. It is proved in this research that usage of anaglyph system
has a restriction of colors that can be used. Some colors are not visible at all, and others
are perceived differently. If visual effects are prepared for anaglyph systems, certain pallet
of color should be used which avoids mixture of colors used in the glasses. Every system
which uses glasses, reduces the overall brightness of the video, so visual effects artists
should make the video slightly brighter (around 2 f stops).
Once composited stereoscopic visual effects cannot be changed easily but they can
be presented on any type of different stereoscopic systems as long as left eye view and

right eye view are separated. With anaglyph method left and right eye view are combined,
so video produced this way can be only perceived with anaglyph system.
Further work and research directions should be oriented towards glasses free
stereoscopic displays and multi viewpoint video, which will be the next step in evolution
for presenting life like video. Glasses free displays will enable viewers to enjoy
stereoscopic content in groups, without any light loss, and without need for wearing some
accessory in order to see the depth illusion. This will definitely be a fuel towards more
rapid development of stereoscopic television and stereoscopic visual effects for TV shows,
commercials, and TV Series. With parallel development of glasses free stereoscopic
displays, multi-viewpoint displays are emerging as well. Stereoscopic displays are actually
multi-viewpoint displays but just with 2 fixed views. Other multi-viewpoint displays can
supply much more than 2 fixed views so in near future, it will be possible to look around
the object if the viewer changes his position in front of the screen. This can be the most
acceptable technology for holographic like system that can be made in near future, and it
will definitely change the way people perceive depth on the screen. However because this
multi-viewpoint video is still based in stereoscopy it is expected that it will suffer from
similar restrictions like stereoscopic systems, like research showed in this project. That’s
why stereoscopic research can be used as a base for developing these new multi-
viewpoint systems.

8 - Project management and ethics
This research project was divided in 4 main stages:
1. Literature review (December 2012 - July 2013)
2. Test pilot production (July 2013)
3. Testing with participants and interviewing the participants (July 2013 –
August 2013)
4. Proof of concept stereoscopic visual effects production (August 2013 –
September 2013)
Before or after successful finish of every stage, supervisor was met in order to
ensure the right flow of the project. First initial meeting with supervisor was on 13th
December 2012. On that meeting supervisor was informed about research topic and some
useful comments were received from supervisor about properly conducting the research,
evaluating the work and writing the dissertation. On 12th March 2013 supervisor was
supplied with poster presentation of research plan, aims and objectives, and proposed
methodology. Based on the feedback from this presentation another meeting was
arranged on 22th May 2013, where the main topic was including participants in the
research, signing ethic forms and supervisor presented video of some kind of 3D multi-
viewpoint system. Another meeting was on 2nd August where the main topic was the
dissertation writing. Final meeting with supervisor was on 3rd September. On that meeting
supervisor gave brief on read chapter and suggested some slight changes in order to make
the paper more easily readable. Between these meetings in person, supervisor was also
contacted regularly by email to keep track on the research.
Because participants were used in this research, ethics forms stage II needed to be
signed. Signed ethic forms Stage I and Stage II can be found in Appendix C.

9 - References
Autodesk, (2008) The Business and Technology of Stereoscopic Filmmaking. [Online]
<http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/stereoscopic_whitepaper_final08.pdf> [Accessed
16 December 2012].
Booth, A., Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A. (2012). Systematic Approaches to a Successful
Literature Review. London: Sage.
Brown, W., (2012) Avatar: Stereoscopic Cinema, Gaseous Perception and Darkness.
Animation: An Interdisciplinary Journal [Online] 7 (3), pp. 259-271. Available from:
<http://anm.sagepub.com/content/7/3/259> [Accessed on 23 February 2013]
Cable, S., (2013) 'You've got to find your glasses first': BBC shelves 'hassly' 3D broadcasts
as no one bothers to watch them. Daily Mail [Online], 5. July. Available from: <
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2356906/BBC-shelves-hassly-3D-broadcasts-
bothers-watch-them.html> [Accessed on 03.August 2013]
Civanlar, M.R., Ostermann, J., Ozaktas, H.M., Smolic, A., Watson, J., (2007) Special issue on
three-dimensional video and television. Signal Processing: Image Communication
[Online] 22, pp. 103–107. Available from:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk
/science/article/pii/S0923596506001378>[ Accessed on 01 January 2013]
Flick, U., Kardoff, E., Steinke, I., (2004) A Companion to Qualitative Research. 1 Edition.
London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Froner, B., Holliman, N.S., Liversedge, S.P., (2008) A comparative study of fine depth
perception on two-view 3D displays. Displays [Online] 29, pp. 440–450. Available from: <
http://www.sciencedirect.com ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk
/science/article/pii/S0141938208000206> [Accessed on 01 January 2013]
Harris, M., J., Nefs, T., H., Grafton, E., C., (2008) Binocular vision and motion-in-depth.
Spatial Vision, 21 (6) July, pp. 531-547
Hayes, R.M., (1989) A History and Filmography of Stereoscopic Cinema. Jefferson,
North Carolina: MacFarland & Company , Inc.
Howard, I. P. and Rogers, B. J. (1995). Binocular Vision and Stereopsis. Oxford University
Press,
Oxford, UK. Available from: <
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/97
80195084764.001.0001/acprof-9780195084764> [Accessed 10 August 2013].
Hummel, R. (2008) 3D Cinematography. American Cinematographer, April, pp. 52-62.
Jared Newman, (2013) What Happened to Glasses-Free 3D TV [Online] The Time
Magazine. Available from: <http://techland.time.com/2013/01/16/what-happened-to-
glasses-free-3d-tv/> [Accessed on 14 August 2013]
Judge, A. (1935) Stereoscopic Photography, its application to science. industry and
education. 2nd rev. ed. London: Chapman and Hall ld
Keegan, S., (2009) Qualitative research: good decision making through
understanding people, cultures and markets [Online]. London: Kogan Page. Available
from: <http://library.leedsmet.ac.uk.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/uhtbin/cgisirsi/x/INFO-

CNTR/0/57/5?&searchdata1=514380%7bCKEY%7d&user_id=WEBSERVER&password=g
uest>[Accessed on 15 August 2013]
Kroeker, K. L., (2010) Looking Beyond Stereoscopic 3D’s Revival. Communications of the
ACM, August, p. 14-16. Available from: <http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2010/8/96625-
looking-beyond-stereoscopic-3ds-revival/fulltext> [Accessed 10 August 2013].
Kvale, S. (1996) InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. 1
Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Lambooij, M., IJsselsteijn, W.A., Heynderickx, I., (2011) Visual discomfort of 3D TV:
Assessment methods and modeling. Displays [Online] 32 October, 209–218. Available
from:
< http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141938211000564> [Accessed 12
January 2013].
Lambooij, M., Murdoch, M.J., IJsselsteijn, W.A., Heynderickx, I., (2012) The impact of video
characteristics and subtitles on visual comfort of 3D TV. Displays [Online] 34 November,
pp. 8-16. Available from:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141938212000807> [Accessed 12
January 2013].
Matthews, B., (2010) Research methods: a practical guide for the social sciences
[Online] Harlow: Longman. Available from: < https://www-dawsonera-
com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/readonline/9781408226186> [Accessed on 15 August 2013]
Oliver, P., (2012) Succeeding with your literature review: a handbook for students
[Online] Maidenhead: Mcgraw-Hill Open University Press. Available from:
<http://lib.myilibrary.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/Open.aspx?id=352490>[Acessed on 14
August 2013]
Pastoor, S., Wöpking, M., (1997) 3-D displays: A review of current technologies. Displays
[Online] 17, pp. 100–110. Available from: <
http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk
/science/article/pii/S0141938296010402> [Accessed on 01 January 2013]
Puri, A., Kollarits, R.V., Haskell, B.G., (1997) Basics of stereoscopic video, new compression
results with MPEG-2 and a proposal for MPEG-4. Signal Processing: Image
Communication [Online]10, 201–234. Available from:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S092359659
7000258> [Accessed on 01 January 2013]
Quesnel, D., Goldman, A., Lantin, M., Arden, S., (2012) High Frame Rate (HFR) white
paper. S3D centre, Emily Carr University of Art and Design. [Online] <
http://www.s3dcentre.ca/sites/s3dcentre.ca/files/S3DCentre-
VFR_WhiteSheet_print.pdf>
Robinett, W., Rolland, P., J., (1991)A Computational Model for the Stereoscopic Optics of a
Head-Mounted Display. Presence, 1 (1) January, pp. 45-62.
StereoGraphics Corporation (1997) StereoGraphics Developers’ Handbook,
background on Creating Images for Crystaleyes and SimulEyes
Tenniswood, R., Safonova, L., Drake, M., (2011) 3D’s effect on a Film’s Box Office and
Profitability. False Creek White Paper

Teulade, V., Bothun, K., D., (2010) 3D Here and Now . . . A goose that lays a golden egg?.
PricewaterhouseCoopers White Paper
The World’s First Stereoscopic 8K 60 fps Movie (2013) [Online] Available from:
<http://www.stereoscopynews.com/hotnews/3d-movies/documentary/3301-the-world-
s-first-stereoscopic-8k-60-fps-movie.html> [Accessed on 21. August 2013].
Tracy, J., S., (2013) Qualitative research methods: collecting evidence, crafting
analysis, communicating impact [Online]. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
Available from:
<http://library.leedsmet.ac.uk.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/uhtbin/cgisirsi/x/INFO-
CNTR/0/57/5?&searchdata1=514380%7bCKEY%7d&user_id=WEBSERVER&password=g
uest>[Accessed on 15 August 2013]
White, M., (2013) Future of 3D TV dims as ESPN yanks in-your-face channel. NBC NEWS
[Online], 14. June. Available from: < http://www.nbcnews.com/business/future-3d-tv-
dims-espn-yanks-your-face-channel-6C10312930> [Accessed on 03. August 2013]
Verrier, R. (2009) 3D technology firm RealD has starring role at movie theaters. Los
Angeles Times [Online], 26 March. Available from:
<http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/26/business/fi-cotown-reald26> [Accessed on 02.
August 2013]
Yano, S., Ide, S., Mitsuhashi, T., Thwaites, H., (2002) A study of visual fatigue and visual
comfort for 3D HDTV/HDTV images. Displays [Online] 23 September, pp.191–201.
Available from:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.leedsmet.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S014193820
2000380> [Accessed 25 May 2013].
Zone, R. (2007) Stereoscopic cinema and the origins of 3D film, 1838-1952. Lexington:
University Press of Kentucky.

Appendix A
(Manuscript of the interviews conducted with participants about test pilot project)
Specific
Problem
Interviewer Interviewee 1
Anaglyph nVidia Vision
Floating
Window
How do you feel
about this video? Is
anything bothering
you? Can you
distinguish where
the vertical lines of
the cage are
positioned in depth?
X I can perceive depth, but the
things that pop out of the
screen doesn’t look like they
are really popping out.
Objects in the back look very
good and realistic. The
vertical lines breaks the
illusion, it is hard to
distinguish where they are
positioned.
Depth of field How do you fell
about this video?
Is it comfortable to
look at it? Are you
noticing any
problems?
X It’s very blurred. I feel like it
breaks the illusion of depth.
It’s not so comfortable to
look at because my eyes
want to roll and explore the
scene. Things that pop out
should be sharper.
Motion Blur How do you feel
about this video?
Are you
experiencing any
confusion or any
problems?
X This one is quite pleasant to
watch. Nothing really bothers
me.
Reflections How do you feel
about the
reflections in this
video? Is something
causing confusion?
Can you distinguish
where are the
reflection positioned
in depth?
X Reflections on this video are
confusing. They look
transparent. It’s feels like
they are emerged deeper in
the screen.
Color What colors can you
see in this video? Do
you have any
troubles watching
this video? Can you
compare different
systems used for
this video?
X Colors are bright, clear, I can
distinguish blue, golden
color, purple and green.
Note: This participant was unable to use Anaglyph system because of pain in the eyes.

Specific
Problem
Interviewer Interviewee 2
Anaglyph nVidia Vision
Floating
Window
How do you feel
about this
video? Is
anything
bothering you?
Can you
distinguish
where the
vertical lines of
the cage are
positioned in
depth?
At some points this video
is confusing. The image
looks like it’s not really
fitted into the screen. I
think that verticals on the
cage are .. in front, no
behind… it’s confusing…
This video is now better. The
verticals on the cage are cut
but it’s not a big problem
since gears in the middle are
popping out and I am
concentrating on that.
Depth of field How do you fell
about this
video?
Is it comfortable
to look at it? Are
you noticing any
problems?
This one is fine, nothing
really bothers me. Except
maybe the cylinder that
pops out. It’s making me
uncomfortable.
It looks fine. It is out of focus
but that doesn’t bother me.
Still I am not sure about the
cylinder popping out.
Motion Blur How do you feel
about this
video? Are you
experiencing
any confusion or
any problems?
It looks really well.
Especially the moving
parts inside the cage.
They are looking real god.
I cannot notice any
problems.
It’s a bit confusing at the
start, in maybe first second,
but it’s perfectly fine after.
No problems.
Reflections How do you feel
about the
reflections in
this video? Is
something
causing
confusion? Can
you distinguish
where are the
reflection
positioned in
depth?
I am confused by the
reflective areas. I am
seeing a lot of different
images. The reflective
area in the center is a bit
better but still confusing.
Can’t really say where in
depth they are
positioned.
Reflections look much better
now. I don’t have any
confusion now. They are
positioned...hm… back,
behind these objects.
Color What colors can
you see in this
video? Do you
have any
troubles
watching this
video? Can you
compare
different
systems used
for this video?
The colors look washed
out and looking almost
the same. I can only see
yellow and blue.
It’s quite better now, than
previous system. I totally
could not see purple. Now I
see blue, yellow, green and
purple.

DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071

DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (12)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071

Similar to DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071 (20)

DISSERTATION - Bratislav Vidanovic, 77122071