> > I find that depth-cue/fog is a sufficient cue for me to determine the > "3-dimensionality" of what I am viewing on my 2-dimensional monitor, > and I find that most 3D systems tend to give me a headache long before > I would get one without them. >
Even when the depth-cue/fog isn't enough, simply rotating the view slightly with the mouse often makes the 3D arrangement very obvious. For those of us who drink too much coffee, this is already a constant process. When I've tried to use 3D stereo in the past, I found myself reflexively spinning the molecules around anyway. Fake 3D is no substitute for multiple perspectives, IMHO. (And I can't even interpret the cross-eyed stereo images in older crystallography papers.) Since I was one of Steve's survey-takers, I can confirm that this is almost entirely a generational difference (and . One factor he left out is that those of us who came of age (technologically speaking) in an era of ubiquitous bright, high-contrast (and increasingly massive) LCD screens can't bear to look at a CRT display any more. Using a Linux workstation with a CRT increasingly feels like stepping back in time; imagine how much worse this felt around 2004, before we got rid of the Octanes. Thanks to other software and hardware improvements, many of us aren't used to routinely building entire models from scratch either, so in theory we don't have to spend as much time squinting at electron density. (Disclaimer: I don't work on RNA or nucleosomes or low-resolution structures, so I'm spoiled.) Even the P.I.s who swear by stereo for building usually end up doing much of the paper preparation on their Macs anyway. I haven't seen any evidence to support the idea that stereo is "necessary" (the way use of R-free is necessary) for good crystallography or paper-writing except as a matter of personal preference. I'm also inclined to think that the superiority of the Mac vs. Linux in nearly every other aspect - and the convenience of laptops, of course - more than compensates for the lack of stereo. I do think we'd benefit from better input devices - I like the Griffin Powermate, but it's too simple to be a complete solution. If Apple ever introduces tablets or iMacs with iPhone-like multi-touch screens, I'll be in heaven. -Nat
