REAL cost of GOOD 3-d photography

[fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Dr. George A. Themelis)]

Robert Linnstaedt presented us with an interesting analysis of the 
expense associated with taking stereo slide pairs with a classic 
stereo camera.  I am sure that those photo-3d members who do not have 
a stereo camera and are thinking of getting one and starting with 
slide film, are sufficiently discouraged and have decided to settle 
with the Loreo or the tapped disposables or other systems that produce 
equally inferior results.

For the benefit of the beginners in this list, I will now give my 
numbers and opinions.

Robert says that in order to *start* with a Realist, you need a $500+ 
investment to buy (and service) camera, buy case, lightmeter, flash, 
adapter, bracket, viewer, film cutter, alignment gauge, etc., etc.  My 
personal experience, and that of many photo-3d members, is different.  
I started with an $85 Realist, $3 viewer, no lightmeter, adapters, 
gauges, etc.  You have to differentiate between what's essential and 
what's convenient.  The camera and viewer are essential.  The rest are 
not.

Once you get started, you might want to invest in better tools, like a 
better viewer, good cutter, light meter, projector, whatever.  I went 
for half a year before I got a $40 lightmeter and $60 viewer, 
fascinated by the results and wanting to learn more and to take more 
pictures.  The process of acquiring your tools, piece by piece, and 
building up your system, is an equally exciting part of this hobby.

In a steady state, seven years later, I have calculated that the cost 
of buying, shooting and mounting a 36 exp. roll is under $15:  $5 for 
film, $5 for processing and $5 for mounting supplies.  I use Albion 
mounts.  Even if I keep 20 pictures out of the roll, it still costs me 
under $5 to mount.  Using print film would not be much cheaper.

Two more points where Robert and I disagree:

- Camera service:  90% of the Realist cameras that have gone through 
my hands worked fine in the first place and the other 10% needed minor 
service which I was able to do myself.  That's not a "marketing 
claim".  It is a fact.

- You don't need to fully mount a slide to see it.  Just place it in 
the Albion mask (or RBT, EMDE, cardboard, whatever) to see it.  Don't 
like it?  Throw it away and put the next in.  It's that simple.

- Robert is making a point regarding the number of pictures that come 
out of a roll.  I happen to value quality more than quantity.  It does 
not bother me that I keep only about 10 pictures per roll.  I am sure 
that just one of those ten is better than a dozen Loreo prints.

Other things that Robert did not take into consideration:

- Investment:  The classic system is an investment.  My $85 Realist 
camera is worth $120 and the $60 viewer is worth $100 today.  How much
do you think you can get for a used Loreo?  I cannot even guess... 
$60, $40?  Even my Realist slides (personal or not) are certainly 
worth much more than any Loreo print and will be worth even more in 
the future.  My projector and other equipment have, at least, retained 
their value.  If I ever decide to get out of this, I will recover my 
investment in equipment or even make money.  That's something to think 
about if you are worried about costs.

- Personal satisfaction:  I have this theory that the more time and 
effort you put into something, the more personal satisfaction you get 
out of it.  Robert puts a lot of emphasis on the difficulty and time 
for mounting 3-d slides.  Even though there is the option of sending 
your film to Kodak to mount for a very reasonable fee, I recommend 
that people try their own mounting not only for accuracy and better 
control, but also for the personal satisfaction of doing it.  I 
personally always found mounting to be a breeze, but it might be 
because of my higher education, intelligence, or something ;).

- Quality of results:  Robert agrees that the classic stereo camera 
and slide film will give you much better results that the Loreo.  
Isn't it fair to expect something that is better to cost more or have 
more difficulty or inconvenience associated with it?

To conclude, I would like to send a message to those who have been 
turned off by the (rumored) expenses associated with doing good stereo 
photography:  Go ahead and try it!  Buy or borrow a stereo camera, try 
it and see if you can work with it. Most probably, you will end up 
with a life-lasting and fascinating hobby.  In the worse case, you 
made an investment and can get out of it without much financial harm 
later.

This is my opinion which, I believe, is shared by others in photo-3d.  
In the past, I have let people borrow my cameras (also viewers and 
slides) to try at no cost.  Most people who took advantage of this 
offer ended up buying their own cameras and are going strong into 3-d 
today.  What stops most people from trying it, is the thought of the 
difficulty or expense associated with it, a thought that, 
unfortunately, Robert did his best to reinforce.  After trying a 
Realist camera, most people can see that it is not as difficult as 
they first imagined and the results certainly justify the effort.

Even though I cannot lend cameras anymore (especially since after my 
Jan. 30th sale I will end up with only one stereo camera and one 
viewer), I am sure that other people in this list have more equipment 
and time than I do and could do it.  It is a service worth providing.  

I am always available to answer any questions, share slides and assist 
beginners in any way I can.

Stereoscopically yours -- George Themelis


------------------------------