At around this time I'd been spending a lot of time thinking about vertical disparity, and had been awarded an MRC grant to study it. To begin with, I wasn't even entirely clear what vertical disparity was, and I had difficulty following some of the other papers on it. I realised that a lot of the confusion was occurring because there are actually several different definitions of "vertical disparity" in the literature -- I've identified at least four -- and to make matters worse, different papers aren't always clear about exactly which definition they have in mind. Unsurprisingly, this has caused a lot of confusion about what the properties of vertical disparity actually are. Part of the problem, I think, is that under some circumstances you obtain the same results regardless of whether you define the elevation coordinate as a latitude or a longitude on the retina, and this may have given the impression that it doesn't ever matter -- whereas in fact, under some circumstances, the two definitions give completely different results. So with my PhD student Graeme Phillipson and my old friend and colleague from back in Oxford, Andrew Glennerster, we decided to write a paper really getting into the nitty-gritty of vertical disparity, and laying out clearly what properties follow from different definitions. It may not be the most exciting paper ever, and like many of my papers, it has masses of Appendices filled with equations. But we hoped it would be a useful reference for anyone interested in vertical disparity -- and I did at least try hard to make the pictures pretty.