Re: Wedding photography cont.

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

First, let me say that the issue of wedding photography is not as
narrow or specialized as some people might think.  For me, it might
be the best way to increase the public's awareness about 3-d.  The
targeted audience is young people with a good pair of eyes.  (My apologies
to older fellows in the list, but I have found the good pair of
eyes to get a better first-sight appreciation of a 3-d slide on a
Realist viewer.)

The guy whose wedding I shot a few months ago, already has a Realist stereo
camera and he is shooting his first roll.  He is very excited and is
talking to all his young friends about it.  He is extremely pleased with
his 3-d wedding slides and is ready to start taking his own...

Eric says:

>In just about all aspects of commercial/professional photography, customers
>demand prints...
>That's why I'm trying to research getting a practical, maneuverable
>twin-rig going. I think we've got to shoot the 24 x 36 mm format to make
>prints practical (economical), and twin SLRs are not usable location rigs.

I understand your point of view, but Alan Lewis is doing this work mostly
with classic cameras or a Nimslo.  24x36 is more practical and economical
but for a professional photographer better control is more important than
cost.  The issue of viewing the 3-d images is of major concern.  Even if
you decide to work with prints, how are these prints going to be viewed? 
The View-Magic system is one solution but has its own problems.  Lewis'
stereosocope approach is appealing to me because of its simplicity and
association with traditional stereoscopy.  It is a classic system that will
never lose its appeal.


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