Lenticular prints display a different image depending upon the angle you look at them.
To form a lenticular print, two images are interlaced and then overlayed with a lenticular lens screen.
The problem with lenticular printing is the need for a lenticular lens screen. It'd be good if the same effect could be achieved without the need to overlay a screen.
I propose a simpler method of forming a lenticular effect. Basically this would involve an array of closely spaced coloured dimples pressed into a surface. The dimples would be coloured such that different images would be formed depending on the angle at which the surface is viewed. see illustration.
This could be manufactured with by colour debossing (the reverse of embossing).
Admittedly this is a pretty obvious invention, but I couldn't find an example on the internet.-- xaviergisz, Aug 21 2007 illustration http://imgur.com/a/d6m6c [xaviergisz, Aug 21 2007, last modified Dec 13 2011] Kind of like this https://gfycat.com/gracioustheseeeve-art [xaviergisz, Apr 23 2020] I've seen this with 2D arrays of embossed prisms, but not with dots.-- ldischler, Aug 21 2007 they dimple out, not in, huh? that is essentially what i imagined when you described this idea. hard to believe it's not baked. needs trying. i was thinking if you colored each peg (dimple) differently on different sides of its dimple you would get a different look as you moved 180 around the perimeter of the art. means you could view art not just from in front or below, but all around, up, down, side to side... fascinating.-- k_sra, Aug 21 2007 you will need a media that can be deformed sufficiently to make a dimple deep enough to allow multiple viewing angles which would mean some sort of plastic, also you would need some pretty small dimples(im thinking 1 dimple per pixel) Also what would it look like from strait on? if the dimples were hemispherical as opposed to cylindrical?
Another concern would be paralax errors depending on the viewing angle and distance.-- jhomrighaus, Aug 21 2007 Wouldn't a dome give more views because the convex arc would hide more angles?-- wjt, Apr 23 2020 All: While going through old ideas, something that's usually lots of fun, I had to flag the second post starting with (???), please don't click on it. It's been replaced by a creepy porn site. Notified the moderator. Not idischler's fault, this sort of thing happens.-- doctorremulac3, Apr 23 2020 Oooooh, show, show !-- 8th of 7, Apr 23 2020 // creepy porn site// When I clicked, i didn't look close enough to discern creepy.-- wjt, Apr 24 2020 Didn't look at it either, just closed the window, but any porn site that pops up when I don't expect it is creepy.
Many years ago I typed in "Yahoo.com" or so I thought. Left an O off or something. That was back in the age of the "popup window storm" and a very graphic popup would fill the screen, when I'd close it another, and another. I was at work and had to reboot the damn computer.
I'm not big on government interference with the web, but I'd support moving all pornography to an .XXX domain. Consenting adults should be free to look at stuff made by other consenting adults but people should be able to not have that stuff on their computers either. Very easy to have your computer block any .XXX site. I'd think the porn industry themselves should get behind that.
Anyway, thanks moderator for taking it down. Hate to sound prude but, well, sure you don't want that on your site either.
Was almost tempted to go to the Wayback machine to see what the link was originally, but thought.... naaa. Maybe it WAS a porn link originally. LOL.-- doctorremulac3, Apr 25 2020 The filtering will only get better. Soon we will be able to live in a supplied bubble, not needing the knowledge of looking away because it's all got that personal algorithm touch.-- wjt, Apr 27 2020 random, halfbakery