Re SL3D in 1600,s

[P3D Peter Homer <P.J.Homer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Actualy I have a book The Microscope by J.H. Wredden which mentions Cherubim=
 d'Orleans microscope and even reproduces an engraving of it.  But the text=
 states " This was a true binocular not only were two eyepieces provided but=
 also two objectives ". This if true would mean that the stereo would be=
 conventional not single lens as would be the case if a single objective=
 were split between two eyepieces . As is the case with modern "binocular"=
 as opposed to "stereo" microscopes which can give SL3D images. The extract=
 from the description given by Cherubim and quoted by William Carter does=
 not seem to clear up the point.
I should add that the angle of view of the illustration in Wredden does not=
 make it possible to see if there is one objective or two.
 My sources for Leonardo-Da-Vinci's "stereo" camera obscura are "The Camera=
 Obscura A Chronicle" by Hammond and "The Literary Works of=
 leonardo-Da-Vinci "
by Richter. Hammonds is taken from Richter but he adds the path of light=
 rays through the second pinhole which Richter and maybe Da-Vinci himself=
 did not.
Richer himself is edited from the notes of Da-Vinci.           P.J.Homer



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