What a pair is for
Depth is a reciprocal
Two eyes measure a shift in the picture, and depth is that shift divided into a constant. So a fixed error in what is read maps to an interval in what is reported that is not centred on the answer, and at forty metres runs sixteen metres nearer and eighty-six further.
The range a pair cannot see past
A stereo rig has a distance beyond which it cannot say "no further than", and the distance is fixed before anything is built. It is the focal length times the baseline divided by the reading precision, and for a human pair of eyes it is fifty-eight and a half metres.
Two rays that do not meet
Triangulation is described everywhere as the intersection of two rays, and two rays in space do not intersect. Read the same two marks to a whole pixel and they miss by 2.77 mm at seven metres, which is a real length and is the part a residual will not report.
A turn of the head is not a step sideways
The textbook says a short baseline makes reconstruction ill-conditioned. Measured, the algebra does not notice — a two-millimetre baseline recovers the courtyard to nine digits from exact marks. What fails is the ratio of baseline to reading error, and it fails without refusing.
A wrong match is not a small error
Move one correspondence of forty-four by thirty pixels and the recovered geometry is wrong for every other point — the typical one by half a pixel, from a fit that was exact to a part in ten trillion. Least squares has nowhere to put a bad row except across all of them.
The depth a pair calls zero
Two eyes verged on a point agree — the same coordinate in both pictures — not on a plane at the fixation distance but on a circle through both eyes and that point. Found by bisection along 121 azimuths and fitted rather than assumed, it is a circle to 0.0000 cm; at 26° off centre it lies 23 cm nearer than a flat wall does.
The midpoint is a choice of ruler
Two photographs do not change when the world is measured with a different ruler, so an answer that belongs to the photographs cannot change either. The midpoint of two skew rays does: a threefold stretch moves it 0.203 mm and a projective frame 1.503 mm, while the point that minimises reprojection error stays put to 10⁻¹⁵ m. Both are 15.5 mm from the truth, which is the part a choice of route does not touch.
Whole pixels cut space into shells
A disparity read to whole pixels can report only the depths fB/k, so a stereo pair does not measure distance on a scale — it chooses among 113 shells between half a metre and twelve, 6.7 cm apart at two metres and 1.39 m apart at ten. A level floor comes back as 35 standing plates. And a finer step and a better reading are different purchases: at a quarter pixel with a quarter pixel of matcher error the pair prints 449 depths and can tell 149 apart.
Both coordinates agree on a circle and a line
Two eyes fixating a point straight ahead see their horizontal image coordinates agree on a whole vertical cylinder over the Vieth–Müller circle, the same radius at every height to the last bit. Their vertical coordinates agree on almost none of it — 7.35 px apart at 26° aside and 30 cm up, 29.26 px when the fixation is brought to 60 cm. The points where both agree are the circle and one vertical line, and the line is the axis of the motion that carries one eye onto the other.
Raise the gaze, and the line is gone
Turn two eyes 20° aside in the plane they share and the horopter keeps its vertical line — but the line stays in the median plane, 1.277 m ahead, not at the point being looked at. Raise the gaze as well and the rule by which each eye rolls decides the rest: Helmholtz's rule keeps a line; Listing's law and Fick's rule make the eyes' relative motion slide 3.93 mm and 7.09 mm along its axis, no point stays put, and the horopter becomes one curve.
A mismatch on its own line needs a third eye
Slide one mark of a correspondence 30 px along the epipolar line the other mark fixes, and every test two photographs can run stays at the arithmetic floor — epipolar distance 2.2e-14 px, the two rays meeting to 1.5e-15 m, reprojection 1.1e-13 px — while the point is reported half a metre too near. A third picture exposes it by 21.4 px from a third eye two metres off the first line of sight, and by exactly nothing from an eye on that line.
A third ray is worth what its picture is worth
Three eyes on one point, two at seven metres and one walked back to seventy. The point nearest all three rays in metres is 132 millimetres from the truth and the point of least reprojection error is 34 — the same 34 the near pair gives alone — and the first is pulled 12 millimetres along the line to the distant eye. And arrangement beats count outright — two rays spread over fifty-five degrees beat eight rays inside four, by a factor of 4.4.
Vergence moves the shells and does not respace them
Turn two eyes inward and the depths a whole-pixel reading can report stop being planes and become a family of near-circles through both eyes — the twenty-pixel shell standing at 0.74 m forty degrees aside where a parallel pair puts it at 3.82. The spacing between consecutive shells is the same to 0.07 per cent across the whole field, so vergence relabels the rays and does not sharpen them, and the resolution argument for turning the eyes in does not exist.
A third eye that lands on the next post
Match one post of a railing to its neighbour and the pair reports it at 19.8 metres instead of 9.0, with every test two photographs can run at the arithmetic floor. A third picture usually exposes that by hundreds of pixels — but at five azimuths in seventy-eight degrees the wrong point lands within three pixels of another post, and the third view confirms the mistake. Narrow the railing to twenty centimetres and those places cover 28 per cent of the arc.
The second disparity cuts cells
A point off the plane of the eyes has a vertical disparity as well as a horizontal one, and quantising both, on an 86,400-point lattice of a room, gives 7,663 labels where one coordinate gives 179 — a count that belongs to the lattice rather than the room, as the essay after this one found. The gain is entirely vergence's — two eyes looking straight ahead have no vertical disparity at all, exactly — and it is largest where the first reading is already finest: 60.8 in the near metre and 3.7 in the far band.
Rectifying a pair spends what its epipolar lines lean
Counted from the two disparities alone, rectifying a verged pair looks as if it throws away at least 99.7 per cent of what the pair can tell apart. That cannot be true of a warp that loses no ray, and it is not: once the place in the picture is counted, the vertical disparity adds 4.1 per cent for eyes verged at 1.2 m, and rectifying at the same focal length gives back all but 4.0 of it.
A sliding pair keeps its line only near the middle
Two eyes that roll by Listing's law lose the horopter's straight line as soon as they look up and aside, and the question worth a number is whether they lose it by much. Measured along the line they nearly keep, the disparity is exactly the slide seen by one eye — 3.20 px at 20° aside and 20° up, a metre and a bit away — and the slide does not shrink with distance. At arm's length the line survives to within a pixel only in a narrow cross through the middle of the field.
A rectification's free shift is free only near the pair
Sliding a rectified pair's principal points apart adds a constant to every disparity, and a constant changes nothing about where points are — on paper. A whole-pixel reading is not paper. The same slide moves every depth the reading can report, and for a wall ten metres away the choice between the best shift and the worst is 1.71 metres. Near the pair it is millimetres. A matcher with half a pixel of its own error erases the choice, and pays more than the worst shift did.