Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1350

[P3D William Carter <wc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Marvin Jones writes:

>"I'm not sure how the "two strip Technicolor camera" got into a 
>discussion of anaglyph."

In the origional post, a question was raised about the ability of 
anaglyph to get "normal" color. I used the "two strip Technicolor 
camera" to show that it could. A "two chip CCD" would have have been an 
example of an extant device producing "normal" color from "two colors".

>"And the camera used to shoot Mary Poppins was outfitted with a second 
>roll of film that reacted to a special sodium background light and 
>created a travelling matte "on the fly" for special effects. It had 
>nothing to do with anaglyph."

That is why I said "not counting Mary Poppins". Although it used a "two 
strip Technicolor" camera, the camera did not, as Marvin points out, 
employ the normal red and cyan color dichroics. 

There may be an interesting misunderstanding here. The anaglyphs that 
I've shot, the anaglyphs shot by Paul Klein and others, the anaglyphic 
method referenced in the origional posting, are full color processes. 
The anaglyphs projected in the '50s, or printed in comic books etc. are 
all "black and white". That is they are meant only to separate left and 
right grey scale values. For a "black and white" type stereo anaglyph, 
any pair of colored filters can be used as long as each color minimally 
transmits the spectra of the other. Fuchia and salmon for example. For a 
natural looking full color anaglyph, the filter selection is far more 
critical.

And finally, Marvin writes:

>"...(and despite his apparent offense at being included in that 
>category, I consider Mr. Carter's unique lens an experiment)..." 

Single lens stereoscopy has been around since at least the mid 1600's, a 
full 250 years before Wheatstone. No, I consider SL3-D to be less 
experimental than whether your Realist will advance to the next frame or 
not :-).



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