Corresponding f.l. in Viewing & Taking Lenses

[P3D <Linnstaedt@xxxxxxx>]

In a message dated 96-05-13 21:59:12 EDT, you write:

> Therefore, was the Holmes sized image ever
>correctly matched to the Holmes viewer lenses?  (Be careful with the answer,
>we are dealing with the sacred beginnings of stereo photography here!) ;-)

In the Introduction to _Palestine through the Stereoscope_ , Hurlbut
(Underwood & Underwood, 1914, NY & London) p. xiii. writes:

"And when the focal length of the camera and that of the stereoscope
correspond, as they practically do in this series, the stereograph becomes
not only an actual space to the eyes, but a _life-size_ space, the object or
landscape being shown in natural perspective, natural size and at natural
distance.  That is, the two small, flat prints, 3x3 inches in size, about six
inches in front of the eyes,...."

The operative word is "practically" which IMHO indicates that it is not a
precise correspondence of focal lengths, but close enough for selling
stereographs.  BTW, this First Revised Edition of the book is in the TCU
(Fort Worth, TX) library.  A note inside reads, "2/1/28 Rec'd through Dean
Hall @ (?unsure of mark) 2.00  Brite College".

I collect views of the Holy Land (shoot them, too) and am searching for a
copy of Hurlbut's book to purchase.  Anyone out there wanting to sell one?


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