Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1284/Stereoviews

[P3D AMUNDSON_MICHAEL_A. <amunmich@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would like to add to the discussion on stereo views.  Of late, several 
people have noted that there is much more interest in the collection and 
study of 19th century views than usually appears in this group.  I would 
like to add that I agree with this point.  Many early photographers 
carried stereo cameras because of the popularity of print sales and also 
because they were handy because of their smaller format.  Oftentimes 
views we see today are merely one-half of a stereo view.
	Moreover, as a professional historian, I would like to add that 
too often this group forgets about the importance of stereoviews, 
photographers in American cultural history.  History is, after all, not 
the collection of data, artifacts, and ideas, but the interpretation of 
that material.  Antiquarians (collectors) too often do lose sight of the 
importance of somethings over others and fall into the trap where 
everything seems to have equal importance.  
	Do not get me wrong.  Collecting is an important part of the 
historical equation.  But so is interpretation.  What does stereo add to 
our knowledge of history that flat photographs do not?  Why has flat 
photography grown while stereo has not grown at the same rate?  What can 
we learn from the study of historical stereophotographers?  For instance, 
did WH Jackson use his stereo camera differently than his 8x10?  Did he 
take full advantage of stereo's effects?  Were stereo photographers 
trained differently?  What has been the significance of stereo in 19th 
America?  Why did stereo lose popularity?  
	I look forward to response and thanks to this group for some 
great past discussions!

Mike Amundson
Department of History
Idaho State University
amunmich@xxxxxxx




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