Re: new lamps for old...

[michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)]

> And with cheap digital cameras that have the resolution of film just
> around the corner, the whole issue is even less relevant. Like George

Yes I wholeheartedly agree.  Those who buy or collect stereo cameras for
"investment" purposes will be blown way longterm *if* the value of
these cameras are indeed user-driven (as I think they currently are).
Might be a good short term investment, but may not long term.

As I've suggested before, the computer world will eventually graduate
from 2D representations of 3D to "real" 3D -- and be in the consumer market.
This will then graduate to digital cameras going 3D too -- probably with
a standard dictated by Microsoft.  :-(

If you recall the "answer" I gave for the "perfect viewer survey" that
was posted (it was one I did in only semi-jest) -- most of those wild
features *are* doable in the digital domain, just spendy right now,
especially in low volumes.  Note that ten years ago, 16-Mhz 386's were
"hot spendy stuff", and now are considered dead frozen slugs one can't
give away.

It's reasonable to expect that there will be digital stereo cameras
within the next decade or so that will be inexpensive and blow away
"current" stereo cameras in terms of performance.  Realists will be
dead weight, and users will be delighted about it.  Collector/investors
may not be.

Of course, supply of 50's stereo cameras may balloon then as they are 
dumped by former users moving on.

Mike K.




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