3D Anaglyph Camera Attachment!

This device lets you take 3D anaglyph photos and movies with an ordinary camera. The parts cost about $30. It's pretty simple to build and you don't need any special software or camera equipment. Please let me know if you have any improvements on this design.

Newsflash! The photos below show a slide viewer that allows you to view a single slide with both eyes. It might have similar optics to the device in this Instructable. I suggest trying the following:

1. order a slide viewer on e-bay for $10-20.
2. cut the viewer in half along the slot for the slide.
3. cover the eye holes with the red and blue colored filters.
4. put your camera where the slide goes and take a photo.

Please let me know if this works.

Step 1: Before you start...

Before you start, take a look at the photos on the following website to get an idea of the steps. www.gibbondesign.com/anaglyph/index.htm

Comments

[ehrichweiss]

I just ordered the slide viewer from the article and in the process I learned that they, Sawyers, are apparently the *original* maker of the ViewMaster viewers. Ultra cool, I learn something new every day. Now to wait for my viewer....

[edong1]

1) about how much mat board do i need?
2) Do i have to change the size of the red and cyan panels if my beamsplitter and mirrors are smaller than yours

[hmms]

Awesome Work gibbon!
Check This Similiar Project out!! A 3d camera made with a Beagleboard! SUPER COOL! :D
http://bit.ly/wWU0SH

[jacko622]

Couldn't you do just a polarized thing for viewing on 3d tv with no red blue, just the images?

[ccreutzig]

No, since the camera won't record the polarization of incoming light.

[Tyramead]

it seems that one of the image will be further away by the measured distance between the two mirrors. A lens should be added to adjust for the distance to correct the image size inaccuracy.

[plopcow]

there is a way to do this easily with just word and any picture you want. ill post an instructable if anyone is interested

[TheMasterThingMaker]

 YES interested!

[Ghost Wolf]

Same here

[soeinegaudi]

me too !

[PriveX]

 I saw your Anaglyph foto's, but the thing was that dissapointed me is that it is poppin-in instead of poppin-out. It would be much cooler when it pops-out. 

[ratscratch]

Try turning your glasses around and see if it doesn't make the image look right. You might be getting the right eye / left eye signals crossed.

[Beduk]

I had to agree with you when i saw the image in 3d glasses

[Sandisk1duo]

Radical! you can make your own 3D movies!

[spike_douglas]

Opps, link doesn't show: http://www.steve-spicer.com/page5/page15/page15.html

[spike_douglas]

I described a device like this many years ago. There's a link here to where you can download a pdf of the article

[NobodyInParticular]

On a related note...

You can capture two polarizations with one camera by recording one polarization on the red sensors and the opposite polarization on the blue (or whichever). I have seen this done three ways:

• A specialized digital camera that has tiny polarizing filters on the chip instead of red/green/blue.
• A camera with a quickly-spinning polarization filter in front of the lens, which records which images were taken during which polarization
• A camera with a manually-adjusted polarization filter
  

I asked a question about a home-brew solution to capture this info with one shot on a regular camera (or your eyes), which I'm fairly sure is possible, but didn't get a good Answer yet. Could any of the people working on this project offer some further advice?

[Chris0000]

p.s. Does anybody know if the slide viewer method works at all yet? thanx

[Chris0000]

Hey Gibbon, Could you post on here when you do post that new instructable, I'm very interested!, thank-you very much. Chris

[gibbon]

Hi Chris, I do have a working slide viewer (see images). It was much easier to build but the mirrors are smaller so it only works well on brightly lit objects. I'll post another Instructable soon. Gibbon

[dparry]

after reading this, i searched for ages for a slide viewer, one came up on ebay, the exact same one... am 90% there, just need the make the cuts neater and fit the colours, am gonna be using it on a DSLR so am thinking of fitting a filter ring to it so it will attach easier

[junkandres]

 Can you take a picture of the inner structure of the slide viewer, that way we can thy to replicate it on a bigger scale to make make it more functional.

Plus i'm having a hard time finding a slide viewer li the one you have :3

[egw]

This is awesome! Do you have any sample images taken with the slide viewer version? Do you use a lens or try to align the bare sensor with the focal plane?

[Chris0000]

hey, can you send me the things I need to make this unassembled and I can assemble them>? I've got no time to do anything..heheheh...and I have no problem paying... thanx Chris

[gerritgroot]

Hi, I'm new to this and I am wondering: 1). Why did you use such big mirrors and beamsplitters of more than 76x100mm in size? Can't this be done with smaller mirrors and beamsplitters? Like e.g. 35x35mm or so 2). I understand that you need the beamsplitter from a specialised store like anchor (found similar things at www.edmundoptics.com btw), but is it really necessary to have these professional mirrors? Is a normal do-it-yourself-store mirror cut into pieces not good enough? 3). Would there be any reason to use a cube beam splitter instead? Hope someone anwers, this item seems to be old, Gerrit

[gibbon]

Hi Gerrit, 1) I just ordered the largest possible optics to capture the most light. You could use smaller mirrors and beamsplitters. Dimly lit images might not look that good. 2) You should use a first surface mirror. Regular mirrors are coated with reflective paint on the back side of the mirror. You will get a double reflection (one reflection of the front of the glass and one reflection off the reflective paint) if you use a regular mirror. 3) I don't see why a cube beam splitter wouldn't work. Good Luck!

[Jestersage]

I am curious: why is it that you cannot use two different polarization filters (one vertical, one horizontal) for anaglyph? For anaglyph, must it be red and blue, or can it be something else, such as green and blue?

[gerritgroot]

I'm not sure, but it seems to me that polarised images don't merge properly. Once recorded with only one camera you loose the polarisation when you reproduce it. To do that I think you need 2 recorders, and 2 players to see it.

[tailortrik]

The way that the Polarization works is that one eye is blinded to one direction of the polarization. once this is photographed, it can no longer be visualized. a camera can only capture the polarize effect not replicate it. make sense? in order to have Polarized 3d Images you need to project them with polarized filters.

[gtoal]

What I don't follow is that if you're going to the bother of building a box with mirrors to separate the images, why use anaglyph??? You can build a mirror box that will let you see full colour stereo pairs.

These were first designed in the Victorian era when stereoscopy was far more popular - so they should be patent-free now :-) (A quick Google found this example: http://www.toutfait.com/issues/issue_3/Multimedia/Shearer/Shearer10.html - there are more...)

Personally I prefer the Holmes Card viewer which uses prisms to converge the images and lenses to refocus your eyes at infinity for (slightly) more comfortable viewing. (My own examples are here: http://www.gtoal.com/stereo/ )

Regards

Graham

[HuggyBear]

Your method is perfectly fine for viewing stills, but the anaglyph allows for more convenient viewing, and the added benefit of video compatibility. The stereo image can only be viewed by one person at a time, but you get a cleaner image, and real color.

[gibbon]

Hi Graham, Take another look at what this optic arrangement is doing. It's NOT separating the image into stereo pairs. Instead, it automatically creates a red/cyan anaglyph. The beauty of this simple device is that you can take 3D photos and movies with your digital camera and view them on your computer with ordinary 3D glasses.

[Junkernaut]

will this work for digital images?

[Joanassie]

ANY images.

[Kay-Oh]

I have a question... My college yearbook photo was in 3-D. When I had it taken they had a camera on a tripod attachment that was a 4 inch bar. They took two photos. One left and one Right. I'm guessing they combined them digitally? If anyone knows anything about this process please share. I realize that combining 2 photos like this will only work well for still shots. for my purposes I am looking for precision. Anyway, I hate to ask questions without doing any of my own research, but my curiosity has been sparked. -KO

[gibbon]

Hi Kay-Oh, Thanks for the question. You're talking about traditional stereo photography. You can get gobs of information about those tools and techniques on other websites. I was trying to get away from the post-production hassles. This device automatically takes 3D anaglyph photos and video. Try to make one. Peas!

[codongolev]

I saw something like that. actually, it was like from 1920 or something so that stuff's really old. I just made one, and it was sweet. let's party like it's 1929! (wait, that was the depression. never mind.)

[Craig 444]

okey dokey, I have made it! I works great but if you r going to make photos with it remember to turn the auto focus off

[jamesmonster]

those jerks no longer carry the beam splitter you speak of. any suggestions?

[Lotus14]

I can't say for sure, but look at Edmund Scientific, they carry a bunch of optics, and may have a 50/50 beam splitter.