Re: Hyper experience

[P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Larry Berlin writes:

>to say that those with *experience with stereo* will tire of hyper stereo 
>is kind of misplaced. It's inexperience with stereo that makes hypers 
>unnacceptable, not experience. 

Sorry, but I disagree with this statement.  Hyperstereo at first is
very appealing because it is a new visual experience, a novelty.
Like any other novelty, it wears out.  The experienced stereo worker
learns when to use hyperstereo and where.  The inexperienced worker
can easily over-hyper-do-it, putting hyper in every shot.

Hyperstereo has it's place in stereo, but not in every picture.
Especially, not in "regular" scenes = scenes experienced and enjoyed
with our eyes, like a walk in the part, scenes with people, etc.
People photography is especially ortho-demanding.

The great danger is when shooting with twins SLRs side by side.
The 6" separation in my side-by-side Minolta X-700s is too much
and excludes regular photography.  I use my Realist for the normal
pictures and my Minolta twin SLR for special projects only.
I have witnessed stereo shows shot with twin SLRs and got sick
at the end from the hyper effect in every single shot.  I suspect
that 3Discover workers are using twin SLRs that's why even
normal scenery looks hyper.

>The more I experience strictly ortho stereo images, the more I 
>appreciate the greater information contained in hypers that are 
>carefully done. 

Who is shooting stereo for the information?  If you are a scientist
an engineer, an investigator, I understand that.  I take SEM pairs
with excessive parallax so I can make better measurements.  But in
"real life" I pretend to be a photographer.  I want visual appeal,
not information.  And I find many *ortho* views with less than
optimum depth more visually appealing than hyper views.

Note that the viewing medium can make a different.  When I view
slides in a stereo slide viewer I can accept even pictures that are
practically flat.  These pictures, while they look good in the viewer
they appear hopelessly flat in projection, in prints and in computer
monitors.  I believe this is happening because viewing in a stereo
slide viewer is a better simulation of "reality" than the other
methods.  When reality is "diffused", depth needs to be amplified.

Long live the Realist! ;) ;) ;)

George Themelis


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