Re: Next Question

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

>I suspect most competitors have hand viewers at home rather than
>projectors for scanning which slides to select for competition.  
>I would think that gives projector owners a decided advantage in club
>competitions.  

Most *serious* competitors own a projector and use it to select their 
competition entries.  Those who don't have a projector will have to 
learn what works in projection and what does not.  Beginners do get 
disappointed when their fantastic viewer-viewed slides look bad in 
projection.  Dr. T says: "Hey, that's life"...

>If it's the slides themselves that are being contested, perhaps there 
>should be two categories:  "projection slides" and "viewer slides."  

Then the question will be which viewer?  A Dr. T one or just any viewer? 
I am not kidding.  The choice of viewer will affect the outcome.  A $3 
viewer will not give the same results are a Dr. T red button.  Even a 
Kodaslide II viewer will not give the same results are a halogenized Dr. 
T viewer.  Gets complicated, doesn't it? 

What I don't understand, is some PSA competitions that will judge all 
stereo images (slides, prints, whatever) together.  It really puzzles 
me.  Here is what Dr. T wrote on a related subject:

"One of the problems that I had with expo1 was that I could not compare 
the stereoscopic images of different formats.  Comparing a "Realist 
slide" with a lenticular print was for me equivalent to comparing apples 
with oranges.  I just could not do it... I could not even compare the 
"Realist slides" with the 2x2 slides because of the difference in 
quality of the viewers used to view each one.  It would have been better 
if all the images were converted to one presentation technique or if 
there was a different voting scheme for the different formats."

As I said:  "Judging varies... I try and do my best and hope that the 
law of averages applies"  -- George Themelis


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