May 2004 Hello, Peter. Sad to report, my plans for a world-wide 3D revolution have hit a disheartening snag. So far, I've been unable to locate anyone who can supply 3D glasses. This is, of course, a bit of a long shot, but I wondered if there is any chance of obtaining supplies from your school suppliers. However, they may, understandably, only supply schools, and I haven't got room for one. Today's Fresco being sent under separate cover. Felicitations, Jack. I'm thrilled to enclose a pulse-pounding picture in dynamic DuoVision©. Grab your 3D glasses and follow the following instructions for a mind- blowing interactive experience! INSTRUCTIONS: Hold 3D glasses making sure that the RED lens is over your LEFT eye. CLOSE your LEFT EYE to view the illustration. Now CLOSE your RIGHT eye and OPEN your LEFT eye. Prepare to be shocked! WARNING: Do not attempt to view picture by closing BOTH eyes simultaneously. ~ Jack.
Evening, all. Here's a JEO trivia question for you. Which was the only episode (as far as I know) of E. C. Ryder or J. Edward Oliver that didn't include the episode number in the bottom right corner? In fact, as far as I can tell, it didn't appear anywhere in the cartoon. ANSWER: It was Episode 48 (DISC, 15 May, 1971). The reason for its non-appearance is that it would have mucked up the DiscVision 3D picture of The Frankenswine Songster. Having the newly-acquired technology, I thought it would be useful to attempt to convert this 33-year-old illustration from the mirror-dependent 3D system to an easier-to-view red/green anaglyph (although my spell-checker is not happy about this). We pointed out to Jack that there were many other episodes which did not have the number, Episode 1, for example... Here it is, at last, an ultra-rare collector's item... The DiscVision© picture I drew in 1971, converted to OliveramA© in 2004! Only a limited success, I fear, but enough to show that my 3D drawing is now feasible. I think you'll find it works better smaller and on a white background. Hence the accompanying card. The type of 3D glasses makes a difference, too. Sorry about the delay with this week's Invisible Man, Peter: I've just had to scan another batch. It should be with you in mere moments. Well, at least, by the time you're up. Meanwhile, here, under separate cover, is the next item in my 3D gallery. This one is of my late father (when he wasn't quite so late). I'm still exploring the subtleties of the 3D program, hence the two versions attached. Which, if either, do you prefer? They both look pretty good on my monitors (viewed with Spy Kids glasses). If you should happen to print out the pictures, they seem to be better when not too large.
June 2004 Thank you for the pages, Peter, received today. Strange but interesting (or vice versa). The pictures certainly look like 3D but, equally certainly, aren't. I can only deduce that either (a) they were set up by someone who doesn't understand the principle of 3D - a surprising number of people think that a stereo pair could be two identical pictures - or (b) (and I think this is more likely) the page designer thought it would look more modern and trendy. Or maybe just different. (The pages were a 3D article from Amateur Photographer magazine)