Re: 3d Camara - Need Advice

[P3D Gregory J. Wageman <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Duane writes:

>It is a big mistake for a newcomer to start with a Realist UNLESS THEY ARE
>ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH MANUAL CAMERAS.  Most are used to modern day,
>ergonomic cameras with automatic settings.  The manual features of the
>camera are a BIG turn-off.

It's funny, until very recently I had the same attitude towards point-'n-
shoots.  I thought they were the spawn of the devil and the end of
photography on earth as we know it. ;-)

Of course in reality what they have really done is make it possible for
the photographically challenged to get decent, even excellent, pictures,
just by aiming and pressing a button.  They even offer the flexibility
and some of the features of interchangeable-lens cameras.  Compared
to the simple cameras of yesterday (e.g. the "Instamatic") they offer
infinitely more features with the same one-button ease-of-use.

Unfortunately what they don't do is encourage anyone to learn anything
more about the basics of photography-- aperture, shutter speed, lens focal
lengths, depth-of-field, etc., and this is why I feel they are not a Good
Thing.  Since the results can be so good with practically no knowlege, they
remove the incentive to get more advanced.

I didn't even bother to shoot film in my stereo cameras until I had
acquired a light meter.  I knew from my SLR experience that slide film
doesn't have a lot of lattitude, and since there's no printing step, you
don't get a chance to fix things later.  I've found that as little as 
a half-stop can mean the difference between a so-so slide and a *great*
slide.  Sure, one can use some rules-of-thumb to get correctly-exposed
slides in full daylight, but when you get into more "interesting"
lighting situations, such as deep shadows AND bright sun, I find a light
meter to be an indispensible tool.  The eye is just too easily fooled.

So, I *would* start a beginner with a manual stereo camera, and use
the opportunity to train them on the basics of *artistic* photography, as
opposed to "snapshot" photography.  Whole generations are being deprived
of the knowlege of trading off depth-of-field to "freeze" the action, and
the artistic *choice* of selective focus by a program.

With this comes also the question, "Would someone who could be happy
with a snapshot camera *really* be interested in the extra hassles of
stereography?"  The Nimslo and Nishika already failed to capture that
market.  I think stereography is always going to be something of
a niche, attracting the experienced photographer (as well as the willing
beginner) who wants to add an extra dimension to their work.

        -Greg


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