Re: Lenticular image: detailed description

[P3D mail.inland.net <sean@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>In my previous post I mentioned finding a lenticular enlargement at
>a flea market last weekend.  The quality of this example of the
>lenticular format far exceeds anything in my previous (limited)
>experience with lenticulars, which is why I was first attracted to
>it.  Stereoscopically, the image composition would certainly receive
>at least one demerit from the average P3D subscriber (probably more
>from Dr. T's sharp eyes!), but I am intrigued by the "how'd they do
>that?" nature of the image itself.
>
>The main subject of the image is a large bird, which I believe to
>be an immature bald eagle (sorry, I'm not a birder, so I'm not
>completely sure!)  It is a profile view, but the eagle's head is
>turned about 45 degrees toward the camera so that one eye is looking
>straight at the lens.  The setting is a mountaintop, with a large,
>rocky mountain in the lower 1/3 of the left background and a slightly
>lower mountainridge in the right background.  In the upper 1/6 of
>the image the background is mostly blue sky speckled with white
>clouds.  The bird is standing on a knarly limb (or very bent over
>trunk!) of a tree with very little visible green growth; the tree is
>perhaps a bristlecone pine (sorry, not a botanist, either, but it is
>certainly a tree from an alpine/sub-alpine environment).  The bird's
>wings are outstretched, but not completely as they would be in flight;
>it is either just landing on the tree limb, or about to take off again.
>The entire underside of the near wing is clearly visible, and the far
>wing points toward the sky at about a 60 degree angle from horizontal.
>The near wing gives the appearance of extending quite high above the
>surface of the print.  The extreme tip of the near wing, a rock
>formation in the right foreground and some of the tiny green growth of
>the tree in the left foreground, are all just enough out of focus to be
>mildly distracting.  The depth of field also does not quite extend to
>infinity, but I do not find that objectionable in this image. The
>photographer must have been a master at fill-flash calculations, as
>the bird, including the underside of the near wing, is perfectly
>exposed with nary a hint of a flash bright spot, while the distant
>mountainside is just ever-so-slightly overexposed.  The picture has
>a very large percentage of brownish-grey, with the blue sky and small
>amount of green from the tree the only other non-white colors, so it
>does not provide any insight into the color reproduction potential of
>lenticulars (but see my next post.)
>
>So, how'd they do that?  The eagle is almost eyeball-to-eyeball with
>the camera.  How could such a close shot have been taken?  Is there
>such a thing as lenticular telephotos?  That sounds like it would
>be unimaginably expensive!  At first glance the remnants of my flattie
>photo mind said there was depth compression from a large camera-to-
>subject distance, but then I realized I was misinterpreting the
>effect of limited depth resolution, presumably attributable to the
>lenticular format; now I don't believe telephoto lenses were used.
>Perhaps a remote or automatic triggering device could have been used to
>fire the camera?  Or perhaps the bird is not alive?  But would someone
>(other than a museum) really have a stuffed bald eagle?!  And if they
>did, would they really lug it to the top of a mountain to compose this
>shot?  Or is the background fake?  My (totally subjective) impression is
>it is likely the background is real.  I don't know how to intelligently
>judge whether the bird might be stuffed, but certain aspects of it seem
>inconsistent with that notion.  The part of the tree on which the bird
>stands slopes upward at about 45 degrees.  The near leg is straight, but
>the far leg looks like it is bent at the knee.  The far foot is higher
>than the near foot due to the slope of the tree; if the stuffed eagle
>were standing on a flat table, it would be significantly leaning to
>one side.  The talons appear to be clutching the tree in an entirely
>natural manner; they are not extended in the classic attack position
>that one would expect if the bird had been stuffed for a non-standing
>postion.  If it is stuffed, it seems most likely it is actually mounted
>to the tree it is on, which would make the job of getting the bird to
>the mountaintop even more difficult!
>
>Well, thanks for bearing with my attempt to describe this picture I
>find so fascinating and puzzling.  Anyone have any ideas?
>
>Paul Talbot
BEYOND THE THIRD DIMENSION
21653 Appaloosa Court
Canyon Lake, California
92587
Subject:  Lenticular Photo

Dear Paul,

We build a 8x10 lenticular scanning camera capable of taking a picture with
the quality that you have described. Our computer generated image also have
this quality provided you use a quality lenticular screen to play back the
image.  Most commercail product seen on the market use a thin 75 L.P.I.
lenticular screen due to costs and printing capabilites.
PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGING
1.  The PRO-3D-VIEW takes an instant 3D or Animated picture without any
special processing for the film.   We currently lease two versions of the
PRO-3D-VIEW,  starting at $22,500 for the TRI-POD version and $25,000 for
the PANTOGRAPH.

2.  The PRO-3D-AUTOTRAC will take 3D or Animated pictures using the
photographers existing camera equipment.  We currently lease three
different tracks,  starting at $6,500 for the 15 inch and $8,500 for the 22
inch and $25,000 for the 20 foot for five years.

3.  The PRO-3D-BURDLO  will take an instant 3D or Animated pictures.  This
camera is extremely compact and designed to take effortless pictures,
simply frame and shoot.  The cost to purchase the eight lens is $4,000 and
$5,000 for the twelve lens version.

4. The PRO-3D-TURNTABLE is used to produce a repeatable and controlled
Animated (rotation of a set or object) sequence when using the PRO-3D-VIEW.
We currently lease this system for $7,500 for five years.

5. The PRO-3D- STAGE is used to produce a repeatable and controlled
Animated (multi-directional movement of a set or object) sequence when
using the PRO-3D-VIEW.  We currently lease this system for $7,500 for five
years.



Thank you again.

Sincerely,


Sean McDonald
President

Phone: (909) 244-8449
Fax: (909) 244-8164

E mail: sean@xxxxxxxxxx








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