Re: Wedding photography cont.

[Stephen Kearney <neff123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Goldstein wrote:
>Unfortunately, I have a long way to go on this front. As Bob Manle 
>communicated to me last week, and I agree, an typical automatic 
>rig just doesn't give you the control over DOF that 3-D demands. 
>This is also a major problem with the FED cameras. Anything we 
>come up with would have to have some aperture control, and some 
>ability to lock in a workable hyperfocus setting. If we can't get 
>the rig set for f/16 focused from 5 feet - infinity (at a 
>minimum), then it is useless.

I'm not sure I agree with this. DOF control is certainly very useful -- but
I'm not convinced you want f/16 for every shot. Sometimes a smaller DOF can
help 'pop' your foreground subject away from the background.

My goal is making a twin P&S rig was to have something I shoot quickly
with, in a rectangular format, with hyperstereo ability. The automatic
exposure system, light weight, power film winding, and built-in flash make
put the rig on the oppposite end of the convenience vs. control scale from
the Realist. Perhaps you are looking for something more in the middle. I
believe the Olympus XA-2 has aperature control. Mike Watters' twinned XA-2
rig might be the thing for you.

p.s. First results from my rig are good, aside from a problem I was having
with the interconnect cable. I really like the 24x30 format; a shot looking
up an empty beach in the early morning looks great in the rectangular
format; I don't think a square would do it justice.

_____________________________________________
Stephen Kearney : neff123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    http://garnet.berkeley.edu/~neff123


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