Re: Question & Answer

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

>My question: I find I prefer the 3D prints but my antique viewers are not all
>that perfect optically, and the hoods prevent the wearing of reading glasses,
>so I am wondering if anyone can recommend a more modern version of a
>3D print viewer?

As we have discussed a number of times in the past, the best (optically)
stereo viewer is the Keystone achromatic viewer but it is not portable. 
Allan Lewis in this list is making a line of modern stereoscopes and I am
sure will be happy to send you a brochure.

>My answer is regarding the Stereo Realist f 2.8 exposure problems discussed
>in previous Digests.  Yes, mine also underexposes by at least one stop, 
>if I follow the "Sunny 16" rule or use a light meter.  I use an ISO 200 film
>(either Sensia 200, Elite 200, or Kodacolor 200,) but I treat them as ISO
>100, setting the exposures accordingly.  No problem!  

I think the question was regarding the Sensia film not the camera.  I have
been using the Sensia 100 lately and have not noticed any problem with
exposures.  (Only the Fuji Velvia film needs more exposure than the 50 ASA
rating but this is a generally accepted fact).  Regarding the Realist, I
usually shoot at 1/100 or 1/50 and exposures are working well.  Of course,
there is always the issue of "what is a good exposure"?  Maybe because my
viewers are brighter than average my choice of exposures might look a bit
in the dark side by other viewers or in dimmer projection.

George Themelis


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