Digital Photography School

82 Responses to “9 Crazy Cross Eye 3D Photography Images and How to Make Them”

• DKCN Says:

  WOW!! I saw it!!

• stacey Says:

  I can’t see them. Trying to cross my eyes makes my head hurt. Ow.

• Jess Says:

  I’m guessing that my short sight in one eye and long sight in the other won’t help me out much here. It’s like magic eye all over again! *sniff*

• Drew Says:

  Snap that’s awesome! I’ve even got that “relax your eye” thing down to really be able to see the 3D image.

• NB Says:

  I don’t come to DPS to see pornography. And I won’t be back again.

• ddkwh Says:

  i got a headache just tryin. damnn…

• taryn Says:

  amazing!! it took a while for my eyes to get used to it, but i saw the images in 3D! :o)

• taryn Says:

  ouch…i think i have a headache now. lol!!

• wingedphoto Says:

  Does anyone else remember the 90s-era 3D posters that used this same technique but looked like a jumble of nothing, then revealed “hidden” images?

• Durkin Says:

  thats crazy! love it though, cool post :)

• Nadine Says:

  Amazing! Took me a while to get it, but - Wow!

• Rivetgeek Says:

  @NB

  Pornography? If you think a woman in lingerie is offensive, don’t ever open the sears catalog…

• David Alpuche Says:

  Very nice post, I’ll try to do some 3D images now!

  … and sadly I have to comment on NB’s post:

  People like you disgust me, seriously.

• kristarella Says:

  Bummer that Neil’s blog has died and taken the instructions with it. I don’t know what to do :P
  I was never good at Magic Eye, if it’s like that, though.

• Klyn Says:

  It may not be “porn” but it definitely is unnecessary. That’s one thing I have always appreciated about this web-site, that it was ALWAYS clean, which is unusual for a lot of photo sites. I have recommended this site to many new photographers but will not do so if it has this kind of stuff.

• Neil Creek Says:

  @kristarella - My blog’s working for me. It’s been a bit unreliable lately, so if it seems down, try again in a few minutes.

  Congratulations to those who can see the effect, it really is worth the effort, isn’t it? I hope that you get inspired to try taking some yourselves, and submitting them to the 3D For Everyone project :)

  To those who can’t see. Don’t push it too hard. Doing so will only give you a headache, or make your eyes hurt, and that makes it even harder to do. Give it a rest and try again later. Most people can do it with practice, but it’s just impossible for some, so don’t feel too bad if it just doesn’t work. You could always buy a Pixi 3D viewer from Loreo, and turn these cross-eye images into parallel images with StereoPhoto Maker.

  @NB - Photography is partly about capturing beauty. As is art. If the human form offends you, don’t got to art galleries, and to be safe, stay away from mirrors.

• Charles Crowley Says:

  I’ve been playing with 3D photography for a few months now just for fun, see my Flickr page at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cdcrowley/ . I’m using 2 inexpensive cameras mounted side by side. Your work is very high quality, it’s good to see someone pursuing this technique in a serious way. I’ve been using the “parallel” method as opposed to “crosseyed”, are you aware of any reason that one is preferable?

• Teewinot Says:

  While it’s an interesting article, I have to agree with NB about the final image. I was pretty surprised to see it here on the blog…a little inappropriate in my opinion.

• Charles Crowley Says:

  Can’t seem to open 3D project page?

• Tyler Robbins Says:

  Oh my god, get over it. I liked the scantily clad woman, how about some 3d porn?

• Neil Creek Says:

  Allow me to justify my reason for including the last image:

  The human body is beautiful, and has been the inspiration for artists for millenia. Many of the most stuinning artworks have been of the naked body, from David, to the Venus DeMilo, to most of Rubens’ work.

  The human body is an excellent subject for 3D as there are many curves and details, it is a form we are hardwired to be familiar with, and it is incredibly dynamic.

  This particular photo was of a beautiful girl, and the clothing she wears is interesting for 3D because of the way it is partially translucent and hangs from her body, emphasising the 3D effect.

  The girl in this photo is wearing more than many people who legally wear swimwear at the beach.

  Frankly, if you have such a hard time accepting what nature made of us, the problem is with you, not the photo.

• SinnedCbu Says:

  awsome…im speechless, i enjoyed looking at the pictures.

• Billy Thomas Says:

  Hi Neil, I totally agree with you about the final picture. People can be so uptight sometimes.

• rivetgeek Says:

  Seriously, that model isn’t wearing anything you wouldn’t see on prime time tv. Its not even particularly suggestive.

• Tom Says:

  I did not come to DPS to see pornography, but I’ll be coming around a lot more often now!

• cpk Says:

  awesome! I was gonna give up.. but suddenly it jumped out at me… awesome…

• Chlobo Says:

  I don’t get it.. I don’t see it..

  Dammit.

  Is it like those books where you have to go cross eyed to see the picture?
  I could practically never do those…

• selle Says:

  I like this!! at first I can’t see them because I can’t cross my eyes all the way even while holding my finger near my nose bridge.. so I tried to close my eyes, and let it rest for a while. Then I tried to put 2 of my fingers on my nose bridge.. then slowly opened my eyes (tying to cross them of course).. and there it is!!! a little more blinks and I see beauty!!

  about the last image :
  I am from a very conservative country but I didn’t find the last image offensive at all!! I mean, the girl’s smiling and NOT trying to seduce. And the clothes are not that revealing!! Is it considered pornography to wear a 2-piece swimwear (bikini)?! I just asked because it’s more revealing than what this model is wearing. I don’t know.. but that’s just my own opinion.. Maybe they should try looking at sexy magazines to see the big difference.

• Lissykeeper Says:

  Awesome! I loved those posters wingedphoto was talking about from the 90’s and this just takes it a step further. For those of you still having trouble. Try squinting rather than crossing your eyes. That is what works for me.

• Kevin Price Says:

  You might like some of this too:
  http://worldsbest3d.com

• Leif Says:

  Um - the pictures are all backwards! If I take the left/right pairs and swap them around in a paint program, then they work fine.

  Or is it just my brain??

• PhotogMatt Says:

  “I don’t come to DPS to see pornography. And I won’t be back again.”

  Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. You see more at a beach in the summer than you just saw there. If your kindergarten level mind can’t handle such exposed skin as arms, legs, and stomachs, please go back to taking pictures of junior playing on a slide that nobody gives a crap about anyway.

• Brian Moriarty Says:

  Er … I hate to break the bad news, but EVERY SINGLE ONE of the stereo pairs shown on this blog post has the left and right eye views SWITCHED.

  If you attempt to fuse them these images by free-viewing, the image appears pseudoscopic — things that are far away appear closer, and vice versa.

  Don’t believe me? Take apart an image with any image editor, switch the two views and look again. Beautiful 3-D!

  So if you’re having trouble seeing the 3-D, don’t blame your eyes. The photos need to be repaired and re-posted.

• Kabe Says:

  So where do you go for pornography?

• one more Says:

  just thought i would weigh in too. i consider myself a conservative christian. dont look at porn, no sex before marriage…all of that. but that picture doesnt offend me. its a girl. with clothes. whoever said it was absolutely right that it is perfectly ok to wear less than that if the person is swimming. if they put some water in the next picture would you be more accepting?

• powjana Says:

  I actually couldn’t get it at first, and the instructions wouldn’t open, so after reading the comments, I decided to try again. Actually, it’s exactly like those jumble 3-d poster things from the 90’s! For those like me who couldn’t get the site to open, I’ll put up the simplest instructions I can and hope they work for everyone else, too!

  Put the picture at perfect eye-level, and focus on the very center line b/t the two shots. Now remember when you were a kid and people tried the “floating finger” thing? (put your two index fingers as close as you can, and unfocus your eyes –so what’s behind your hands are in focus– and look at your fingers (without focusing on them!) and it appears that you have a little floating finger b/t the tips of your index fingers. Now try the same thing with the pictures. If you look at/focus on the center line, then unfocus your eyes so what’s behind your monitor (your wall?) is more in focus than the screen, you should see the center of the two images converge in the middle and “create” a third image between… if you can manage that, just wait a few seconds and let your eyes adjust to the image in the middle.

  Some of these were easier than others, and definitely worth the effort!

• Hank Fox Says:

  I don’t like that “crossed eye” title. It’s the OPPOSITE of crossed eyes, don’t you think?

  You allow both eyes to look straight ahead, as if you’re looking at a DISTANT object (not crossing, as you would if you were trying to look at a fly on your nose), but you FOCUS them for CLOSE objects.

  The left one focuses on the left image, the right one on the right, and your brain combines them for the illusion of depth, just as it does all day long in the real world.

• BobbyTheShat Says:

  Hmmmm, the blog still appears to be malfunctioning. I’m presented with a completely blank page. Hopefully I will be able to view it later.

  And not to harp on the subject of the pretty girl but, ah forget it.

• Digg user Says:

  I don’t see it…
  What a shame.
  The comments suggest you should be able to see pornography?

• Digg user Says:

  Wait a minute…
  I do see it!
  Still no pornography though :)

• wtf Says:

  It may not be pornography, but when viewing this website at work, it could be viewed as such by others in the office. So I don’t care if YOU or so called Artists think the human body is artistic, it should not be shown on websites such as this. YES the human body is “beautiful” but that doesn’t mean we show 3rd graders naked human bodies. The same thinking applies to this website. It is disappointing to see you have taken the “artist” approach and think it is ok just because it is beautiful. Do u want your kids seeing that image?

• Tony C Says:

  Your project page and your blog (other website) seem to be down? Cool stuff though!

• Cody Says:

  Wow! That is so cool!

  I’m amazed at how easy it is to create them too! I made 2 already and I’m loving it.

  Thanks for a super-interesting post!

• Moxypox Says:

  Pornography? Hahaha, wow. You are clearly an idiot.

• chris. Says:

  Neil, the blog is definitely down. more likely because of bandwith issues.

  ive been doing film photography for a long time. i really just enjoy black and whites more. its also less expensive because i was able to get all of my supplies from my highschool, and now college. I dont have the money to shell out on a decent DSLR, but as soon as i do, im definitely going to put some time into making three dimensional pictures like this. they are awesome. ill try it this weekend and take some nice stuff on my point and shoot.

• Deb Says:

  Very cool! But are you sure my grandma was full of beans when she said, “Don’t do that, do you want your eyes to stay that Way!?”

• Canadian Mum Says:

  That is amazing!
  I wasn’t sure it was working for me with the first one… then on the second… all of a sudden the bowls on the table stood right up!! AMAZING!!
  It took a while to get the one with the trees to focus… but was totally worth it… to see the tips of the trees like that!!
  This is definitely a technique that I would love to try!!

• saima Says:

  Wowwwwwwwww! .. thats really cool .. thanx alot! :D

• Hax Or Says:

  Klyn and NB:

  If you can’t tell lingerie from porn you won’t be able to handle the internet. Get off the internet, now.

  Please find something else to do besides exposing other people to your vast ignorance.

• Mark Jaquith Says:

  That’s incredible. It makes my eyes tired, but it sure is a trip when it kicks in and the image all of a sudden pops into 3D.

• kristarella Says:

  Neil - your blog did come back online after a few hours for me.

  Everyone else - people are different, have different opinions, different levels that they find acceptable. Believe it or not, some people do have problems with the lack of clothing a the beach.

  I’m numb to images like the last one these days since they seem so prevalent; NB’s comment surprised me, but I accepted it because people are different.

  Everyone attacking those who are more sensitive to certain things should be ashamed. You think just because you think something is okay that you should kick people out of their comfort zone? What makes you more correct than them? Just because the internet is faceless doesn’t give you the right to be rude to others – or maybe you think it does? Whatever, show a little sensitivity.

  For those that have a problem with those images, I guess you will have to decide whether to stay or go. I hope your decision isn’t met with cheers and jeers by “free thinkers” among us.

• kristarella Says:

  Re: my last comment. If you weren’t attacking and merely stating your opinion, then it doesn’t apply to you ;)

• Mark Says:

  WTF (I find it funny that your handle is the common acronym for “What The F*ck”?)

  If you are worried about kids seeing anything remotely close to this - then keep them off the web and away from the television.

  Oh, and you probably don’t want to take them to any art galleries either.

  You might also want to hide any magazines laying around.

  And NEVER take them to Europe unless you are prepared to blindfold them 24/7.

  God forbid, they ever go to a beach…where you would find humans wearing much less than in this photo.

  Yep, it’s a good idea to keep them sheltered from the human art form so they can grow up sexually repressed and thinking that this is wrong.

  Go back to your convent and repent - you saw a partially clothed human on an ART site.

  WTF?

• Stephen Says:

  simply amazing!

• Bruno Says:

  notice that you don’t need to refocus your eyes on each images if you want, since they are all the same size, you can actually quickly jump image to image once your eyes are focused correctly, its amazing.

• Neil Creek Says:

  For those who were unable to access my blog to read the “how to see” instructions, please accept my apologies. My host has been giving me a really hard time lately, with the blog going up and down for the last week. In this case the blog was down for about an hour. If it happens again, please try and visit the site again at a later time. My apologies for the inconveience.

  @Chlobo - It’s similar to hidden image stereograms only inasmuch as you need to cause your eyes to converge and focus at different points. In the case of these photos, you look closer to your face, while focusing on the screen. These image should be easier to do than hidden images, because you have two clear, visible shapes that you are merging together, rather than looking for a hidden 3D form among random patterns.

  @Lissykeeper - Crossing your eyes is still necessary, but squinting may help to relax your eyes and bring the image into focus more easily. I’m glad you have found a technique that works for you :)

  @Leif & @Brian Moriarty & @Hank Fox - It seems you’re not the only ones experiencing the 3D effect reversed. The images are definately designed to look correct 3D when crossing your eyes, but a handful of people are reporting that they see the effect reversed, and swapping the images fixes it. I suspect that maybe it’s an “optical illusion” that flips it in the brain, similar to the wireframe box that can appear to be viewed from the top or the bottom. Very interesting! If you need to flip the sides, you can use StereoPhoto Maker (linked to in my “How to Make 3D Photos” page). Load the 3D image into it and click the “swap” button at the top.

  @wft I would love my (hypothetical) kids to look at that image, and appreciate it the same way I do. I’m sure each of us can decide for ourselves whether to show children or not.

• Windle Says:

  Unfortunately, those of us with amblyopia will never be able to enjoy this. Or at least from my experience, I have never been able to see 3D images. Same thing with the old school 3D glasses. They just never have worked for me. Anyone else with this condition ever have any luck?

• Katami Says:

  When you make a posting, you should really be ‘on it’ so that all of your viewers can look at your material. Hosting images on ‘free image hosting’ like Flickr or TinyPic, etc are usually blocked in corporation networks from the normal readers. Quit being so cheap and put the images on your own hosting.

• John M Dean Says:

  :o I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed that they’re the wrong way round.
  I noticed it as the lamp hanging in the photo with the layed out table appeared to be behind the hanging things (excellent description I know!), I had to check the ‘2D’ image to see if I was right.

  The bone also sinks into the red background.

  I wonder why this is? Surely it’s a bizarre phenomena that most eyes will arrange it into a realistic 3D image and some will read it ‘backwards’

  Just a note; I am a self-confessed professor of the Magic-Eye pictures so popular in the 90’s, I think I still have 4 or 5 books full of them - and I used exactly the same technique here - staring into a distant spot ‘through’ my monitor until the 2 images converge

• Roelski Says:

  Great! For the first time ever I experienced a 3D pic without the funny goggles.

  I’m shortsighted (-2,5 dioptries) and colorblind, but it works.

  Here’s some advice:
  - wear your glasses (sounds silly, but some people take’m off however you need the ability to focus!)
  - make sure your glasses are christal clear - otherwhise you’ll see the swipes on your glasses in 3D too
  - start up real close and don’t cross your eyes too much. I see the image appearing when I’m about 10-15 cm from the screen.
  - you’ll first see the 2 images, and then a third one starts to form in the middle, which is in 3D.
  - the most obvious one to start with is the jaw bone.
  - you can even keep the (de-)focus and scroll your sceen to the next image.

  Absolutely amazing! (and no pornography - just a beautiful lady!) :-)

  Enjoy!

  Roelski

• Subrata Bose Says:

  That’s the most innovative thing I have learnt, this is amazing, thanks a lot.

• DaBayer Says:

  Reversal of Dimension:
  If you are seeing the 3D effect in reverse, the cause is most likely the method used for combining the photos.

  If you look past the photos and combine them by allowing the left eye to focus on the left photo while allowing the right eye to focus on the right photo (the same method for viewing “Magic Eye” compositions), the third dimension will be inverted causing objects intended to be farther away to appear closer.

  If you cross your eyes allowing the left eye to focus on the right photo and vice versa, the dimensioning will be correct.

  I also noted that none of the trees in photo 3 are adorned with brightly-colored balls, garlands, or a toppers. I, too, am offended by this pornographic image.

• Q dub Says:

  Wow! My eyes hurt but had no idea it’s possible without special glasses…

• murr Says:

  Now my eyes are stuck cross-eyed, and I still can’t see. My lawyers will be contacting your lawyers. lol.

• Lina Says:

  Amazing. I really loved the light in the forest canopy.

  I agree with what the people above had said: Don’t try crossing your eyes excessively. I tried that at first and it got me nowhere. Instead, just cross them a little until a third image forms in between the first and the second and concentrate (with eyes slightly crossed) on the new picture the moment it appears.

• dawid Says:

  Can I make 3d image only if i have 1 image
  Ex. i lake to make 3d image to my blog that in abut anime
  i have lot of pictures bat only in one example . :)

• Johnny Photon Says:

  Nice pics! I’ve got one of the Loreo lenses but I also have built a sliding track which I use when the subject isn’t moving. I shoot one and slide the camera and shoot another with the same settings.I’ve had the best results doing computer generated pictures. For those of you who are seeing the inverse depth, you are parallel viewing not cross viewing. If you swap the pictures they would be right for parallel viewing. I also have a 3D gallery and a tutorial which includes a really easy to see computer generated training picture. To see the tutorial, go to the 3D gallery and follow the link.
  Johnny Photon
  http://www.johnnyphoton.com

• merlyn Says:

  Nice images. To those who think they are reversed: you are partly right. There are two ways to view 3D pairs like these - by diverging your eyes (relaxing and focussing on infinity) or by converging them (going cross-eyed). These are set up for the latter - if you use the former method (as I generally do) then they are indeed reversed.

  I find the best way to view 3D pairs like this is this: Converge (or diverge) your eyes until you see double (drink may help!). You should find you can, with a small effort, control the spacing of the double images. When they are far apart, you would be able to see two complete pairs of images (four images in total). You need to adjust the spacing so that two of the four images are overlapping exactly. You then have three images, and the central one is 3D. When this happens your brain will lock on and you should be able to relax a bit, and even scroll the page, without losing the effect. Note that you may need to rotate your head a bit to make sure the line between your eye centres is precisely parallel to the line between the image centres on the screen or you won’t be able to get an accurate overlap. Once you have double vision, rotate your head around a bit and it should be obvious when the alignment is correct and it will be possible to adjust the spacing to get a precise overlap. If you can’t get the spacing right try adjusting the distance you are from the screen.

  Oh and if you have amblyopia you’ll never see these, or any other static images, in 3D. Seeing things in 3D needs two or more viewpoints. If you don’t have the ability to move your viewpoint around the actual 3D object, e.g. because it’s really a couple of 2D static photos, then you’re going to need two working eyes to acquire the two images simultaneously. If you have the means, you might like to try putting a pair of these images in the same physical location and arranging to flip back and forth between them quite quickly (a few times a second) - that would probably get you close enough to simultaneous vision to see the 3D effect.

• John M Dean Says:

  I have never cross-viewed before, I now know why so many people found it harder to see an ‘image’ in the Magic Eye pictures! If they were using the cross-eyed technique, for me at least the picture is much more blurry. I’d be interested to know if anyone gets a truly in focus image with the cross-viewing method!

• powjana Says:

  I agree with Kristarella. Everybody with a problem with someone else’s views–get the heck over it.

• powjana Says:

  Oh, and thanks for the “Cross-eyed” explanation! I tried it and it actually worked better than the “Focusing past it” method I had used before. And it really helped knowing that I could just scroll down once I was already focused! Thanks for the tips, guys! This technique is really cool :)

• Rob F Says:

  For those of you that are having difficulty “seeing” the image in 3D… I wanted to pass on a tip that a friend gave me.

  “I use a piece of dark coloured card with a small square cut out of the middle to view them even clearer.
  The hole in the card is 45cm wide by 60+cm high approx. I
  hold it about 4 inches infront of my nose and do the cross
  eyed thing. It helps by not letting me see 3 pictures, but
  just the middle picture. Therefore my eyes can focus much
  better on the 3D image…”

  If you adjust your distance from the card and from the monitor you will be able to obscure the two additional view entirely.

  I hope that this helps!

• ZinY Says:

  The jaw bone sinks into the red background if I use parallel-eye method. Of course, it appears as proper 3D if I use cross-eye method because it is meant for viewing cross-eyed.
  Parallel-eye method (looking away / gazing at infinity) is more relaxing to me than crossing the eye.
  Parallel-eye method gives me the same size as the original, while I get a slighter smaller image if I use cross-eye method.
  But, I cannot converge the third picture in the middle as the picture get bigger when using parallel method. I have to reduce the size to view that parallel-viewing picture. No problem with big pictures for cross-eye method.
  How about you all? I would like to hear from everyone else.

• Rusty Says:

  Awesome !! I was never able to really see the old 3D posters with the hidden objects but after going through the how to with you post Neil the images just jumped out at me. A great article.

  Please put back the last picture as I would like to see it for myself and not be censored. Those who have a problem with the picture can excersise their right not to look at it and the rest of us can enjoy the fine work. :)

• Robert Says:

  This is cool. I’ve taken a few cha cha 3D pix and posted them to my Flickr stream. You can see them at:

  http://www.flickr.com/photos/72822401@N00/sets/72157605246923772/

  I processed the pix in Photoshop and after a couple of false starts, I think I’ve developed a pretty good workflow for doing them.

  This whets my appetite and now I want a Loreo lens for my RebelXt

• Adam Says:

  Your link under 3D Photography Links for the Flickr Stereophotography Group actually goes to the Fisheye group. The correct link is this:
  http://flickr.com/groups/stereo/

  However, there are many stereoscopic-related groups on flickr that you can see if you do this search:
  http://flickr.com/search/groups/?w=all&q=stereophotography&m=names

• Kerryn Says:

  Wow, I never knew that every catalogue with lingerie advertised in it was actually pornography. How do the public allow this to happen?? They are delivered to every home and guess what?? I don’t hear any outrage from anyone because guess what?? Women in lingerie is NOT pornography.

• zippy6234 Says:

  ZinY,
  Parallel viewing does not strain your eyes, as long as the image is small enough. Too larger image for parallel viewing, means that both your eyes would have to lok outwards, and away from each other. I can’t do that, and don’t no anyone that can.
  I told Rob F about the piece of card trick, he has written rough dimensions on it here. The darker the card, the better, because if you use white or light card, your eyes catch any light reflected from in the room. This strains your eyes too.
  Most of my images are made to fit a 1024 x 768 screen res, but i have tried even larger at 1900 x 1200. That was for someones wide screen monitor. They told me that it was perfect to view Cross Eyed.
  I don’t think there is a limit on size when viewing Cross eyed, you may just have to stand back from the screen more.
  I started with Anaglyph version 3D, (Red/Cyan glasses), but soon went over to Cross View type, mainly to get the full colour and not to have to buy more anaglyph glasses.

• rsl56 Says:

  The images are backwards, just look at the forest tree, the picture that is slightly to the right should be the right eye, but it is placed on the left…

• glen Says:

  Nice pics. I can’t do cross-eyed or staring at finger methods, what works for me is ‘wobbling’ my eyes left-right very quickly - after some practice, it only takes less than a second and my vision locks right on to the 3d. I can even scroll the page up and down to look at the diff pics without losing the 3d image, like viewing a 3d website! cool!

  i really want to see the ‘porn’ photo now that there has been so much fuss! Partly because I like to see non-pornographic pics of beautiful girls (I love sites that refuse to show tacky porn stuff) but mainly because I want to see how ridiculously over the top (or not!) some of these reactions have been…

  maybe the following assumption says more about me than you but NB, do you come from bible-belt hicksville, USA? You crazy Americans you.

• tom Says:

  when i pulled a face, as a kid, my mother always said “if the wind changes, you’ll stay like that!” thats my concern.
  Does it make you go blind??!

• sunil Says:

  thats amazing, i could see that i wish if i could see some videos like this