Is there a more general term than "Stereo", which implies 2: left and right?
Well as it would apply to stereographic imaging, that would be "binocular", which is definitely two and only two. But there is a very strong association of that term with the paired telescopes commonly called binoculars.
Not my field, obviously. But I do wonder if taking a second level namespace for this is the best choice...
Your point about trying to narrow it down to image pairs is well taken. Referring to the images themselves as 'stereo pairs' or '3D pairs' is very common in the stereographic community.
What about other composite views that make an image appear to have depth/perspective?
There are indeed other stereographic formats that can involve more than two images. For example 3D lenticulars are best done with arrays of at least 3 or more images and there have been many 3D cameras that have been purpose-built for the technique: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Nimslonew.jpg/300px-Nimslonew.jpg http://www.3dham.com/stereo_cameras/Nishikacamera320.jpg And of course static 3D VR images, and 3D panoramic images can also involve using an array of images beyond single pairs.
E.g. Hologram (Holo?) Is there a term that covers the space of all composite views and/or related images?
It sometimes gets applied that way, but a hologram is a unique and different process that yields a true 3 dimensional image of an object not a scene. You can think of VR as an image that surrounds the viewer, where with holography the viewer can surround an object. And of course, 3D images can also be generated from 3D computer modeling, and capturing depth maps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_map https://phys.org/news/2016-06-imaging-technique-image-depth-monocular.html As for the 2nd level, the term stereographic is certainly the least ambiguous, since 'stereo' by itself is even more commonly used to mean stereophonic. So you could do: Image::Stereographic::Pairs::MPO Image::Stereographic::Pairs::JPS Image::Stereographic::Pairs::JPG Image::Stereographic::Lenticular Image::Stereographic::VR Image::Stereographic::Holo Image::Stereographic::DepthMap But this feels like something out of the Department of Redundancy Dept. since what you are saying is "image-solid-image". (Stereo is the Greek word for solid.) So alternatively, the more concise: Image::Stereo::Pairs::MPO Image::Stereo::Pairs::JPS Image::Stereo::Pairs::JPG Image::Stereo::Lenticular Image::Stereo::VR Image::Stereo::Holo Image::Stereo::DepthMap Some would consider the following to be even more general and thus better: Image::3D::Pairs::MPO Image::3D::Pairs::JPS Image::3D::Pairs::JPG Image::3D::Lenticular Image::3D::VR Image::3D::Holo Image::3D::DepthMap But wouldn't this break the rule for an uppercase letter as the first character? So I'm thinking the "stereo" 2nd level namespace proposal would be a good balance between descriptiveness and brevity, and taxonomically I think you can argue that "Image::Stereo" is unambiguous. But "3D" looks good to me too, if it is allowed. ...BC -- -------------------------------[ bill.co...@alumni.unh.edu ]-- Bill Costa New Hampshire, USA http://pubpages.unh.edu/~wfc WORK: +1-603-862-3056 HOME: +1-603-435-8526 ------------------------[ No good deed... Goes unpunished. ]--
