Starship Asterisk*

by **neufer** » Wed Feb 05, 2014 5:35 pm

geckzilla wrote:
Red, blue... the poo shaped asteroid is back.

http://www.universetoday.com/108971/ast ... irst-time/

The shmoo shaped asteroid is back.

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 79#p121055

by **geckzilla** » Wed Feb 05, 2014 5:20 pm

Red, blue... the poo shaped asteroid is back.
http://www.universetoday.com/108971/ast ... irst-time/

by **Beyond** » Sun Jun 27, 2010 9:02 pm

I've got windows 7 and I've found out that if you look at the fireworks display that happens after you win at Majong Titans, with 3-D glasses, it looks neat. Then try it by covering the left eye (red) and then by covering the right eye(blue/green). My fireworks comes up on a red felt background. I do not remember if it does that by default or i set to. I guess you could call it "Beyond 3-D."

by **Beyond** » Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:56 am

I just got my 3-D glasses. WOW! It looks like its sticking out of the monitor and if i move a little side to side it moves also. I got the ones with the magenta on the left and the blue-green on the right so i don't (or at least shouldn't) have to have different kinds of glasses hanging around. these should take care of most of the 3-D. The package i got also included two carboard pair that has the left clear and the right side dark. I forget what they are for. I already have a pair of polerized ones that came in a T.V. Guide one day a long while back. So i seem to be allset.

by **neufer** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 7:23 pm

rstevenson wrote:
hughhyatt wrote:Two or three times, I've sought out online vendors of cheap—like $5 a pair—red/blue viewing glasses, sent money and gotten nothing in return. Can anyone point me to a vendor that will actually send me glasses when I purchase them? Or any national retail chains that sell them?
Berezin Stereo Photography Products is where I got mine.

They shipped them quickly and they arrived in good order and on time. No problem.

I too will vouch for them.

I bought both the red/blue & red/cyan clip-ons for my reading glasses and love them

by **geckzilla** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 7:12 pm

Prizzeldfitzgerald wrote:Is this Itokawa also known as the "Potatoe Asteroid"?

Pootato, maybe.

by **owlice** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:48 pm

3D Glasses

Magenta Green Proview (Green/Magenta)

Same as above but specifically for Magenta Green anaglyph applications. These include DVD versions of Coraline, Journey to the Center of the Earth, My Bloody Valentine, Monsters vs. Aliens and the 3 Stooges.

Oh, the horror! The 3 Stooges in 3D!

by **rstevenson** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:11 pm

hughhyatt wrote:Two or three times, I've sought out online vendors of cheap—like $5 a pair—red/blue viewing glasses, sent money and gotten nothing in return. Can anyone point me to a vendor that will actually send me glasses when I purchase them? Or any national retail chains that sell them?

Berezin Stereo Photography Products is where I got mine.

They shipped them quickly and they arrived in good order and on time. No problem.

Rob

by **Prizzeldfitzgerald** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:24 pm

Is this Itokawa also known as the "Potatoe Asteroid"?

by **hughhyatt** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:46 pm

Two or three times, I've sought out online vendors of cheap—like $5 a pair—red/blue viewing glasses, sent money and gotten nothing in return. Can anyone point me to a vendor that will actually send me glasses when I purchase them? Or any national retail chains that sell them?

Thanks!
Hugh

by **Howie Glatter** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:24 am

Has anyone else noticed the similarity in shape to the native Australian boomerang? Maybe those Aboriginees knew something more about the design of cyclically recurring objects than modern science does.

by **Beyond** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:47 pm

AH, ok, thanks. i didn't see it mentioned that the middle one would be the one in stereo.

by **Chris Peterson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:27 pm

beyond wrote:Chris -- could you define "cross eyed". If i "cross" my eyes on the picture that was shown for that - I get 3 images. So it must be something other than just crossing your eyes :?:

There are two ways of viewing stereo pairs. Cross-eyed means you cross your eyes so that your right eye is pointing at the left image, and vice versa. You are basically telling your eyes to view something close, but keep their focus distant. Parallel-eyed means your right eye sees the right image, and your left sees the left image. You are positioning your eyes for something very distant, but focusing them closer. It's easier to do than to describe. Either way, it's normal to see three images- just direct your mind towards the center one, which will be stereo.

by **Beyond** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:19 pm

Chris -- could you define "cross eyed". If i "cross" my eyes on the picture that was shown for that - I get 3 images. So it must be something other than just crossing your eyes

by **Chris Peterson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:01 pm

rstevenson wrote:Unfortunately, cross-eyed viewing often doesn't work when the viewer is wearing reading glasses. I'm not sure why. The best I could manage this time was four overlapping images. I always keep a good pair of red-blue glasses at the ready, so I prefer that sort of stereo image.

Sure, I'm not suggesting just one kind of view is best. When I make 3D images, I normally make three: stereo pairs for both cross-eyed and parallel-eyed viewing, and an anaglyph. It's almost no extra work to do all of them, and this accommodates nearly everybody capable of viewing 3D images at all.

by **Beyond** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 8:25 pm

Dag-nab-it, rstevenson - every time you post i start to get hungry

by **rstevenson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 8:12 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:More than once with an interesting object presented as an anaglyph, I've gone back to the source to get the individual channels, or separated the frames in Photoshop so they could be properly viewed as a stereo pair. Here is the original APOD image just split by color channels. I set up this one for cross-eyed viewing.

Unfortunately, cross-eyed viewing often doesn't work when the viewer is wearing reading glasses. I'm not sure why. The best I could manage this time was four overlapping images. I always keep a good pair of red-blue glasses at the ready, so I prefer that sort of stereo image.

I understand that asteroids are often piles of rubble, but in this case I can see what appear to be layers. The left part of the 'roid has them most obviously, and the right part's layers -- less clearly -- may be roughly at a right angle to the left's. It would be odd for accreted rocks to line up so nicely.

Rob

by **Beyond** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:25 pm

Ok neufer, i see you've been to THAT dimension again. It took me a couple of seconds to get your last post as i've only seen the red/green once a long time ago.

by **neufer** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:20 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
Red/blue is more common than red/cyan,
and red/green used to be popular.

by **Chris Peterson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:46 pm

bystander wrote:Even among the colored lense type 3D glasses, there are at least three varieties, red/cyan, amber/blue, and magenta/green. The colors chosen are diametrically opposed on the RGB color wheel.

They don't need to be diametrically opposed. You just need a scheme that allows for the channels to be separated by filters. That simply means that you need to isolate the image across the red, green, and blue pixels (phosphor or LCD filters). Red/cyan works because one channel is pure red, and the other is split across green and blue. But red/blue, red/green, green/blue single channel combinations work well, too. Red/blue is more common than red/cyan, and red/green used to be popular. By using red/cyan, three common types of glasses are supported, however.

by **Chris Peterson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:40 pm

hobobill wrote:how about a regular photo so the visually impared that can't see 3D have a better understanding of this space rock?

There's no reason for somebody submitting an anaglyph like this to not also include a stereo pair. I wish that were a condition of even considering these images. The anaglyphys are just too poor quality, with the 3D effect weak and a lot of detail lost. To make this image in the first place required having the individual two frames as separate shots- there's no reason not to offer that presentation.

More than once with an interesting object presented as an anaglyph, I've gone back to the source to get the individual channels, or separated the frames in Photoshop so they could be properly viewed as a stereo pair. Here is the original APOD image just split by color channels. I set up this one for cross-eyed viewing.

by **bystander** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:35 pm

: RGB Color Star (Credit: DanPMK/Wikipedia)

Even among the colored lense type 3D glasses, there are at least three varieties, red/cyan, amber/blue, and magenta/green. The colors chosen are diametrically opposed on the RGB color wheel.

I'm not sure how the different color combinations affect perception, but it seems to me that it should have some effect. It seems to me the anaglyphs would have to be colored with the appropriate colors for effect to show properly.

by **Chris Peterson** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:17 pm

León wrote:The question obviously arises, the asteroid is the remnant of a larger body that has been severed or as a result of claims is the collection of material added by gravity. I personally tend towards the first alternative.

There is good evidence strongly suggesting that many asteroids, including this one, are just loose piles of rock and dust. That doesn't exclude it being formed from another body, however. Simulations of asteroidal collisions show that you can end up with one or more rubble piles that simply re-coalesce under self gravity quite quickly after the collision.

by **León** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:14 pm

The question obviously arises, the asteroid is the remnant of a larger body that has been severed or as a result of claims is the collection of material added by gravity. I personally tend towards the first alternative.

by **Beyond** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 12:51 pm

Actually i have the polarized kind which of course do not work on this Apod picture. But thanks to neufer's exploits into the Turd dimension, i now know there's more than one kind of 3-D and thanks to neufer's regular photo of the astroid, i think that it is basicly smooth and has collected a lot of stone somewhere along the line. Being covered with rubble is a lot different than being Rubble. Just ask Fred Flintstone. And as to neufer's journey's into the Turd Dimension -- lets hope more of that dimension does not rub off on him - too much

Starship Asterisk*

APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)

Re: APOD: Stereo Itokawa (2010 Jun 19)