what end product do you want?

cards? slides?

online?

makes a difference

on the screen..not printed out


okay..well

there is two...no three kinds of 3d.. side by side..like with a leoro or kula or vintage pentax or contax split field adapter

then there is red - green.. one can probably make those with the above adapters too = with a bit of photoshopping

then there is interlaced - and those need special cameras and synchronized glasses


you wanted to know if there was a cheaper way than spending the 180 bucks for a loreo adapter..plus the glasses

no


unless you buy an old realist format stereo camera...shoot slide film... scan it and then arrange it for viewing on your monitor



btw..I have  an old viewmaster rig and make my own reels - every once in a while

I have the software to combine two images into 3DTV polarized images or blue/red interlaced. I wanted to create a means to split each image into two offset images and crop accordingly after.

I see


there are several 3d groups on flickr to check out

I think you will find though...that 150 bucks is REALLY cheap for the trouble it would be to make one yourself

You're paying for expertise.  The positioning and alignment of the two images (with the necessary slight built-in correction in angle), all in correct relation to each other and positioned properly on the frame.  In an item that is not produced in high volume.

If you're not concerned about the alignment, etc, and are not dealing with moving objects or people, then you can always resort to taking 2 separate pictures at the appropriate distances apart and with the appropriate angle correction, and do all the alignment and cropping, etc, in post.

Otherwise be prepared to spend a lot of time "fine tuning" all 4 mirrors in your self built version to get it reasonably useful (or close enough to spend your time aligning it all in post). How much that time is worth is something you'll have to decide.

However you do it, you'll find that you probably want to standardize your lens length and will get the most effective results within a specific distance range (minimum and maximum).  So do some testing to figure out where it works best and shoot accordingly..

Have fun!

(if you are going to use mirrors you would need FRONT (or FIRST) SURFACE mirrors otherwise you get distortions involving the glass thickness)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_surface_mirror
http://www.amazon.com/Front-First-Surfa … B006S23Z0G
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 cameras spaced apart on a bracket (distance depends on subject distance)
Remote trigger the cameras to get your 2 images ---- camera settings matched (manual) ---
                                                    -- combine as needed


PSRemote Multi-Camera
http://www.breezesys.com/MultiCamera/psr_index.htm   (end of life product)

DSLR Remote Pro Multi-Camera
http://www.breezesys.com/MultiCamera/index.htm       (controls as many as you want)

I can 3D print at a number of different angles and possibly make it adjustable. I'm not concerned with finding the appropriate angle. As for using two cameras I've already tried that setup. The cameras I have produce pictures that are characteristically too different and it is hard to adjust one on the tripod without messing up the other. Also the intervalometer doesn't consistently trigger them both causing one to have like 10 photos more than the other after a few hours. Using one camera seems like the best idea.

I will look into those mirrors however. Thanks for that input. I am wondering who cuts mirrors down to desired dimensions? Glass cutters?

Glass cutter ----   easy to use - practice on some old window glass to get the feel of doing it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/261114584674

A diamond tile saw would work too


How to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfdrgrOH50Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTHs2wLQpAs

When you're designing this, just keep in mind the basics.  You want to perfectly split the image on your sensor.  Each image (after going through 2 mirrors for each side) must be precisely aligned with each other in all aspects on the (split) sensor (top, bottom and both sides) except for the exact perspective difference / correction between the two image "eyes".

Typically you'll have the two outer mirrors (out of the 4 involved) at the same distance as the distance between your two eyes (there are alternatives but the math gets more involved).  They'll each be angled slightly in to exactly come together on the desired optimal focus point (otherwise the entire effect becomes a mess).

Your eyes may change the angles in relation to each other depending on the distance, but unless you're a real engineering pro, this adapter will not.  Your choice of angles here will affect the optimal 3D effect shooting range (minimum and maximum distance for a "workable" 3D effect).  Not to mention what lens length you're designing for.  If you do make it so that the angles can be modified for distance, then the trick is making sure that the angles of both outer mirrors change in a way that's perfectly synchronized.

Not making the appropriate design choices at each point (that affects the basics above), means that you'd just end up building a paperweight.  So don't be discouraged if you find that it's your 2nd or third version before you start getting somewhere.  Especially with the importance of making the right design decisions in advance and the levels of alignment precision that are required when implementing it.



Just so you solidly understand what you're tackling...

Then again you could just take Goofus's original advice:

goofus wrote:
I think you will find though...that 150 bucks is REALLY cheap for the trouble it would be to make one yourself

!!!


Sorry, I'm not trying to be flippant here. It's just that MANY have been down this road before you and there's a lot to be learned from them.   That does not mean it's impossible.  But practical...?