Steven, I meant more that it would be interesting to see a shot which displayed some 3D in a larger form. In your first shot, I don\'t expect the larger format to rescue the 3D-ness. In the second shot, there is just a hint in the part of the rope coming over her arm, and in the larger shot, there is a touch more, I think. Hard to say. It might be easier to see the difference if the larger shot was twice as large in each dimension (which probably rather means that the smaller shot should be a bit smaller).
I do get the sense that a larger image might contain 3D more easily though. That would also have helped the Ansel Adams prints mentioned earlier. I have his calendars perhaps 8 years back, and I see no 3D in them, but I have never seen a full-sized Ansel Adams print.
Jan 23, 2010 at 09:47 AM
Previous versions of carstenw's message #8040936 « what is '3d' ? »
