Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D
|
|
Notice |
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
|
|
re: Viewing slides backwards
- From: P3D <PTWW@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: re: Viewing slides backwards
- Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 00:17:43 -0500
>Have you tried to switch a slide and view it backwards to see if it looks
>better? (This will only reverse the scene left to right and will not make
>it pseudo!) There are exceptions, but most times I find that the way the
>slide was originally viewed tends to be preferred. Now, one might say that
>this is because we remember the original scene. But that's not the case
>when I accidentally first view a slide backwards and then try to view it
>straight, I still find the first wrong impression to be the best!
>
>I have this theory that "first impression counts".
>
>Any serious arguments, explanations, conflicting observations, etc.?
>
>George, oops, coffee break is over!
How funny you should bring this up...I was just trying this less than
an hour before downloading the digest containing your post. I was
playing with a couple of my aerial hypers, wondering what the effect
would be (largely because I don't know that I've ever seen pseudo and
wanted to try to figure out what the effect is.) The aerials are twin
2x2s, so I can swap them any which way. (BTW, what *do* I need to
do to see a pseudo pair? I've heard references to "left/right swapped"
and "left/right swapped and backwards," which Dr. T now says is wrong.)
With the aerials, I don't think the memory of the original scene plays
a significant role in the effect you describe. I certainly have no
conscious memory of the left/right layout of the scene, and am relying
strictly on the markings on the slide mount for proper orientation.
Nevertheless, I did notice a strong preference for the arrangement I
saw first, and which I can only *presume* is the "correct" relationship
between the pairs. I think there is some merit to your "first
impression counts" theory.
Paul Talbot
------------------------------
|