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.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

Re: terminology


  • From: P3D Michael Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: terminology
  • Date: Mon, 17 Feb 97 13:46:08 PST

> >The single camera, when used with a slidebar or even used "cha-cha"
> >style also is a stereo camera because it takes stereo photographs.
> 
> It is getting complicated, isn't it? ;)  Every camera has the potential to
> take stereo pictures but does that make it a stereo camera? 

Yes, every camera has the potential to be a stereo camera.  It isn't one
until it is used in that manner, but when you do, then it *is* one.
It's a device that takes stereo photographs!  What can you call a
camera that takes stereo photographs other than a stereo camera?

> How about a
> "real" stereo camera?

One can put a lens cover over one lens of a realist camera and take a 2D
photograph (switching to the other lens before advancing the film)
but does that make the stereo realist a real-2D camera? (My opinion, is 
"yes, when used that way").

> 
> The subject is not as stupid as it sounds... Suppose we go to Nikon etc.
> and ask them to make a stereo camera and their reply is: "why do you need a
> dedicated stereo camera when pairs of existing cameras can be used for
> stereo photography?"  What is our response?

"It's too big, expensive, ... of a stereo camera that doesn't <whatever>".

Recall that I had said: 
 
    'Some may be better than others or easier to use than others, but they
     all "are one".'


You ask Nikon for a better solution from your point of view.  The dual
Nikons already are a solution.  They may just suggest that RBT use 
Nikons.  :-)

> A "real" or dedicated stereo camera in my mind is one that is designed to
> be used as a stereo camera which makes it easy and friendly to use.  It is
> also part of a stereo system that includes a viewer to view the results.  

To me, the word "real" is a misnomer.  I'd substitute the word "integrated" in 
its place.  This is the most technically correct term I can think of off-hand
for what I think you mean when you use the word "real". 

As to being part of a system, if Nikon didn't make slide projectors or slide
viewers, would the Nikon F5 not be a "real" 2D slide camera?

I suggest "integrated stereo photography (ISP)" and "integrated
stereo photography system (ISPS)".

Unless, of course, those are existing Trademarks, in which case, I implore
forgiveness for my suggested transgression!

Mike K.


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