Do we really only see one perspective in each eye? The answer is NO and that is one of the many flaws inherent in 3D cinema and 3D televisions. We see multiple perspectives because we move our head and body as we breath. Watching 3D content with only two perspectives inherently creates perception conflicts as you move your head because the perspectives do not change with that movement. It is very weird and unnatural to see objects in 3D space move as your head moves. In real life, the world does not move with your head. You are able to look around objects and use motion parallax to clarify ambiguities that can’t be rectified with stereovision alone.
I read a great deal about the concern regarding focus and convergence being separated, but very little with regard to the lack of multiple perspectives.
Last night while walking the dog and looking at the trees I saw a perfect example of what motion parallax and multiple perspectives provide. As it got darker, the tree branches became less detailed and more like dark silhouettes. They would appear as cutouts against the dark sky would it not be for motion parallax, which provided the added depth cues for my brain to latch on to and interpret the space between the branches.
The above is certainly good reason for 3D cinema photographers to include dolly shots whenever possible, as some motion parallax, even if separated from head movement, is better than a static shot which obviates the benefits of motion parallax.
I am now shooting 36 perspective whenever possible to provide, with my AMPED 3D process, the ability to see a different perspective with subtle movements of the head. I’d like to have even more perspectives as I have discovered that more is better! However, artificially constructed “tweened” perspectives are NOT the solution in my humble opinion. Too much information is lost, and the imagery is simply artificial. The current solutions are more cameras or lens array cameras (plenoptic). We are still a ways away from an elegant solution.