philip_pj wrote:
It's very common to see people say 3D is mostly due to light conditions, and there is certainly enough truth in the idea to give it some validity. It has the happy advantage of absolving flat lenses of not delivering 3D because 'we are only dealing with light conditions' so all lenses will work if only we have good light. We have 'golden hour' for landscapes and heavy slanting light for much else in photography, the cinematic look.
I used to agree with this, before doing a lot of mountain travel that forced a lot of middle of the day shooting - vertical light! Below are two images shot around noon that you might agree show great 3D in the absence of optical tricks like strong longitudinal elements like paths, roads etc. Mountains are very hard to photograph to show image depth, but I'm happy with these. They get there on the basis of excellent tonal separation (both luminance and color) and mid-tone dominance. They should be flat but they are not. F8, no bokeh, no real focus fade, but a lot of micro-contrast.
Did you post those photos with the intent to demonstrate so-called lens-caused “3D pop?” Call me “little boy remarking on the emperor’s new clothes,” but I’m not seeing it.
Feb 02, 2026 at 11:26 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #16979403 « which lens has the most 3D POP? »
