Thursday, November 24, 2011

Skull-blogging: A Warning to the Carious

M.R. James was not in favour of bone-related optical devices:
Lawrence was up in the bedroom one day, and picked up a little mask covered with black velvet, and put it on in fun and went to look at himself in the glass. He hadn’t time for a proper look, for old Baxter shouted out to him from the bed: “Put it down, you fool! Do you want to look through a dead man’s eyes?” and it startled him so that he did put it down, and then he asked Baxter what he meant. And Baxter insisted on him handing it over, and said the man he bought it from was dead, or some such nonsense. But Lawrence felt it as he handed it over, and he declared he was sure it was made out of the front of a skull.
Wayne Belger's pin-hole camera project will not end well.



Stereo-camera version here.

9 comments:

vacuumslayer said...

That man has the strangest penis I've ever seen.

Substance McGravitas said...

Morning eye exercises dispensed with, now on to the toe exercises. And mind your eyeballs!

Rachel said...

^^^SPOILER ALERT^^^^
I think it's the tie end of the loin cloth.

Are the paired images supposed to be viewed in a way that melds them together? Otherwise, kind of a substandard version of "binocular," eh?

Smut Clyde said...

The eye-crossing to fuse the images is one of the morning exercises.
It seems to work; it's not a brilliant pair of photographs but not bad for a skull as a camera. What you're seeing as a penis is I think his left leg being knelt on, and what's off to the side looking like his leg is in fact part of the background.

tigris said...

It looks like the head of the person whose shoulders he's sitting on. Unless maybe we all got a different picture.

Rachel said...

You're right, that's a head! But what then is the vertical white limb to its immediate right?

tigris said...

I'm not sure what's going on there, it almost looks like a double exposure of the leg but everything else seems too clear.

Rachel said...

There's kind of a double-exposure fattening of the right arm too.

There's no WAY I can get one image out of these dual-pics by crossing me eyes... I can get three though.

Rachel said...

Plus, I though the beauty of the camera must be that it had a mechanism inside that aped the dynamics of binocular vision... so shouldn't the end photo be a single image? Huh?