Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1305-tabletop lenticular 3d

[P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>2- The quality of the images(depending on the camera) can be of 
>>professional quality.
>
>I have never seen a lenticular print that I felt was the equal of or better
>than a stereo pair of transparencies.

Greg, let me give you a piece of advice here... You start sounding a lot like
Dr. T.  That cannot be good for your helth... You can be exposed to all
kind of flames... ;) (JUST KIDDING!)

But I do agree with Greg's synopsis and will like to hear the answers to
the same questions... Also, the original poster mentioned something along
the lines that lenticular companies like Nishika (and Nimslo I may add)
failed because the public rejected lenticular prints.  Since, in his
opinion, lenticular prints offer some distinct advantage (the most
important being the ease of viewing) what is the explanation for this
rejection?  Also, let's not forget that even Realist failed, but after
generating considerable more public interest.  I am curious to hear what is
in the future for lenticular photography...

George Themelis

--
Please note my new email address: DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply to this address as I am trying to shift all my correspondence there!


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