I was watching the documentary Burt's Buzz and I figured out that there was an incidental stereophotograph in cross-view format and took a screenshot (second image). I edited the image to make it parallel-view (first image).

This is a conversion of this original post from r/crossview by fuzzyedges1974.

They said:

These shots were set up using photo mode in the game The Crew: Motorfest

Visit the original post for more information or to leave enthusiastic comments for the original poster.

I'm a bot. I exist to create a bridge between people with different viewing preferences and abilities. Message KRA2008 if you have questions or comments about this bot.

The most recent image conversion may be found at the link below. It was cross-posted to several other Reddit fora.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ParallelView/comments/1v1taz1/2d_image_of_mountain_scenery_upgraded_to_dramatic/

The post spawned interest. At least 39 upvotes. Some comments such as "Works beautifully!", and "Lovely!", with similar remarks about other recent 2D→3D conversions.

However, the comments are dominated by negative opinions of varying vehemence, some being downright rude. Condemnation varies from the images seeming identical with no 3D effect, to lack of sufficient depth and variations in depth of foreground and background. Some, the most ungracious remarks, arise from people with a seemingly irrational antipathy toward AI enhancement of photographs, indeed AI generally.

Setting aside the last mentioned group, it's puzzling why responses vary so much. May this, in part relate to how people engage with the parallel viewing process? Do some people have an optical cortex resistant to processing image pairs created in this manner?

Does anyone deny that flat photographic images, and many paintings, contain implicit information about perspective/parallax? Are algorithms, the type used here, incapable of aiding depth perception by rendering an attempt to make the information explicit via two images? Please explain your stance.

My posts on this topic have acknowledged the inferiority (sometimes marked, and at others not evident) of these image conversions to genuine simultaneous two-lens camera produced works. Yet, I remain to be convinced that in the absence of perfect stereoscopy, converted images can't add insight about and cause for appreciation of the original monoscopic image.

Displayed below is a selection of image conversions, each of which adds a touch of new interest to the original image.

This is a conversion of this original post from r/crossview by Material_Vanilla_479. Visit the original post for more information or to leave enthusiastic comments for the original poster.

I'm a bot. I exist to create a bridge between people with different viewing preferences and abilities. Message KRA2008 if you have questions or comments about this bot.

The image pair were constructed from a photo presented by someone else somewhere else on Reddit, viz https://www.reddit.com/r/scenery/comments/1v0yros/this_scenery/

Unfortunately, the original used here was removed by "Reddit's filters" for an unstated reason. So, if you like this 3D version download a copy lest it too arbitrarily is removed.

Two 3D versions are posted. They differ only in that the depth parameter was increased for the second image pair.

The title refers to the original image being "upgraded". In this instance, the term is justified. The monoscopic version is an excellent photo in its own right, but the conversion to 3D makes the image truly remarkable.

The quality of the combined (in one's brain) image pairs is outstanding respecting features additional to aesthetics.

When parallel viewing any image pair it is helpful to begin with the images small on the screen of a laptop device, and slowly to enlarge them until maximum comfortable dimensions. Generally, the limit, i.e. components beginning to diverge, is reached well before the maximum. This instance is remarkable because the limit is not quite reached even when the image pair exceed the size of the screen. That is, one may continue viewing a section in 3D so long as both components of the overall image are visible. Furthermore, the second image pair gives a little greater latitude.

Why is this 3D image so technically excellent? One may surmise fine detail in the 2D version contributed.

This is a conversion of this original post from r/crossview by Material_Vanilla_479. Visit the original post for more information or to leave enthusiastic comments for the original poster.

I'm a bot. I exist to create a bridge between people with different viewing preferences and abilities. Message KRA2008 if you have questions or comments about this bot.

This is a conversion of this original post from r/crossview by laolao72. Visit the original post for more information or to leave enthusiastic comments for the original poster.

I'm a bot. I exist to create a bridge between people with different viewing preferences and abilities. Message KRA2008 if you have questions or comments about this bot.