That's my opinion too. I love 3D. I've made lots of 3D images, classic LR pairs, and SIS, but I'm not enamored of RSIS. One thing about the random stereograms commonly produced, including the demos here, is that having too many horizontal repeats makes the image harder to fuse at usual viewing range.
I'd suggest limiting vertical panels to 7 or so, which would make it easier to see in 3D on a small screen. That goes for any SIS, whether random or bitmap slice "surface". To my sensibilities, the random dot type, as opposed to a normal bitmap image slice used as the vertical panel, is much less visually interesting and gives the viewing eyes much less to grab onto.
IMO a carefully chosen bitmap thematically or visually coordinated with an elegant carefully drawn depth map creates a work of art that can be appreciated for its interesting shape and color even by viewers who can't grok the 3D effect.
Besides, looking at something beautiful can motivate people to keep trying to see the 3D part come into focus, and eventually some do succeed. When that happens it really is like "magic".
I'd suggest limiting vertical panels to 7 or so, which would make it easier to see in 3D on a small screen. That goes for any SIS, whether random or bitmap slice "surface". To my sensibilities, the random dot type, as opposed to a normal bitmap image slice used as the vertical panel, is much less visually interesting and gives the viewing eyes much less to grab onto.
IMO a carefully chosen bitmap thematically or visually coordinated with an elegant carefully drawn depth map creates a work of art that can be appreciated for its interesting shape and color even by viewers who can't grok the 3D effect.
Besides, looking at something beautiful can motivate people to keep trying to see the 3D part come into focus, and eventually some do succeed. When that happens it really is like "magic".