RE: Module naming -- processing 3D JPEG files...

> 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

-- 
-------------------------------[ [email protected] ]--
  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. ]--