[MF3D.FORUM:654] Re: Art vs Math

[Tom Deering <smile@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

re: "art vs. math"

I have never understood the "versus" part.  It seems obvious to me 
that stereography is "art AND science", inseparably intertwined.

I will admit that most people seem comfortable with either art _or_ 
science, but usually not both.  Most folks tend to define the medium 
in the language they understand.  Hence the phrase "3 D cannot be put 
into words", etc.

Tom

On 6/2/00, Sam wrote:
>At 11:16 AM 6/2/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>so far it seems to me that  the M.F. is bogged down by useless MTF ,RMS LPmm
>>and does not pertain to the real wold of 3 D How does one take a sharp
>>picture of watter? Incidentaly Fuji RMS at 400does quite well but the color
>>is a bit dull when compaired with my favorite film Velvia. I am of the
>>opinion that 3 D cannot be put into words and I much prefer to see the real
>>thing via follio etc.As in 2D photography  an excellent photomay be
>>technically imperfect but the imperfections are usually ignored by all but
>>the nit-pickers. Don.
>
>Spoken by a true artist. There does seem to be an awful lot of 
>theory as of late. Nothing wrong with that in general, but it does 
>tend to discourage those who just love the medium and want to get on 
>with taking pictures. No theory in the world is as good as seeing a 
>great 3d shot, and to accomplish that basically takes a lot of 
>physical practice and testing. So put down the pens Guys and 
>Gals,get out there and take pictures  !!!!!!
>
>I'll be out there in the Rockies tomorrow with my Stereo Pro!
>
>Sam

---
tmd@xxxxxxxxxxx    http://www.deering.org