Hi-res Stereo Views of Cydonia Face -large images!

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but seeing the Cydonia face all of a sudden in 3D throws a whole new light on it. It almost gives it a "personality." This adds significantly to the artificiality hypothesis for Mars. This demonstration ought to be circulated as widely as is possible.

Neil

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>
<br />It almost gives it a "personality." <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">One of the things that always bothered me was that I couldn't really tell where the nose or the area between the nose and the upper lip was.

Now, not only can you clearly see the nose and nostrils, but you can see the "columella" (the wall of flesh that divides the nostrils), and a faint hint of the "philtrum" (The philtrum is the midline groove in the upper lip that runs from the top of the lip to the nose).

rd

Here's a cross-eye version of the stereo pair, which some people will find easier to view than the "stare through" kind. It was produced by <b>Boris Starosta</b> and has retained most of the resolution in the original ESA anaglyph.

One method to view is to hold a finger about six inches in front of your face with the fingertip just below the stereo pair on your background monitor. Focus on the finger. This causes the right-eye and left-eye images of the stereo pair to shift in your visual background. Without losing focus on the finger, adjust its distance so that the four background images (a pair from each eye) overlap exactly in the center so that you see only three images.

This allows the two overlapping center images to fuse and pop out in 3-D. Give it time for the fusing to occur, then to lock in so you don't lose it as you slowly shift your eyes from the finder to the middle image. Allow still more time for the depth effect to intensify.

If you have image processing software, you can download and magnify these images or extract any portion of them for close-up study. -|Tom|-

Boris Starosta writes:<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I'm sending you a better graphic. Notice how the center of the circle is in the left nostril for the one viewpoint, and in the right nostril for the other viewpoint.

...not content to wonder, I dug out an old physics test to review simple trigonometry, then measured the parallax apparent on that hi-res. face anaglyph at ESA.

The result is pretty amazing. If [Rich DeRosa is] correct about the six degrees imaging convergence, I figure that tan(theta)=(theta) (for small angles) and that means about 0.1 ratio of height to parallax in the image. The max parallax (when the "ground" is aligned properly) is around the nose and is about 55 pixels. That means a height of 550 pixels. To relate this to the "plan" size of the face, I drew a circle around it, thus measuring it's longest dimension as over 800 pixels. So the height is indeed very much on the order of the width, which seems unnatural. Then I noticed how nicely the circle traces the curve of the crown, and how this circle is neatly centered on the nose, i.e. on the center of the face. That does seem strange, too.

Here's the graphic, with red channel shifted to better align the ground features.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br />If [Rich DeRosa is] correct about the six degrees imaging convergence, I figure that tan(theta)=(theta) (for small angles) and that means about 0.1 ratio of height to parallax in the image.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I did some checking and found an experiment where we used a 10 degree difference in tilt angle on the specimen. My interpupillary distance is roughly 2.75 inches, so if I view a point that is 16 inches away, the half angle at that point would be 5 degrees, so that's where the 10 degrees comes from. That's probably why I remembered 6 degrees, which is probably the half angle for a Rubic's Cube from about 12 inches away.

So, I think that means that if we viewed the previous full res Face from a distance that made it appear to be as big as it is on this page, then the 10 degree angle would apply. Also, the same would apply to any picture that was taken of it. If 100% makes it appear this big to me from 16 inches, then the 10 degree angle would apply.

Here's the SEM Micrograph where we used with a 10 degree tilt difference. If you view this from 16 inches, and fuse the 3D of the left two images by the divergent (stare-through or "wall-view") method, or the right two by the convergent (cross-eyed) method, assuming roughly a 2.75 inch interpupillary distance, that would be exactly the same as sitting in front of the microscope, looking at it on the image screen at 80x.

Lead Granules Stereo Pairs. View from 16" away. Use left pair for divergent viewing, and right pair for convergent viewing:



********
Instructions for making a "poor man's stereo viewer" (for divergent viewing).

Cut the roll from an empty paper towel roll in half, so that you have two roughly six inch tubes.

Sit about 16 inches from the screen and hold each half up to the eyes and look through them. Center the left circle at the far end of the tube over the left image, and right circle over the right image.

Slowly stare into the distance and try to make the two circles at the end of the tubes merge into one circle like when you use binoculars.

Every once in a while close each eye separately so that you can double check that you're still centered over each image.

When the two circles merge into one, shift your view to the image, and it will be in full 3D.

That's basically how a $500 stereo viewer works.

rd

Jeff Williams [jewill3@comcast.net] writes:

Here are a couple of anaglyphs I did of the face on Mars.
They're better and clearer than the one created by ESA,
thought you might like to see them. The original images
are both from the MOC: E0300824 and E1701041. BTW,
red/cyan glasses are by far the best ones for anaglyphs.

438K .gif -


18 meg .bmp -
http://marsunearthed.com/Anaglyphs/3D149/CydoniaFace5a_3D.BMP

Thanks,
Jeff Williams