Pulfrich - motion direction?, Anaglyph - red where?, and Stereo Frisco

[P3D Adam L. Beckerman <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am new to 3D and have some questions about Pulfrich, Anaglyph, and =
Stereo cameras/viewing media.  I have sub-divided this message into 3 =
sections for ease of reading -- feel free to jump to the section of =
interest/expertise:

***Pulfrich questions:***
I had previously been unaware of how Pulfrich really worked until =
reading the current thread on it.  Realizing that it=20
...utilizes a colored or shaded lens over one eye to delay the signal =
from that eye to the brain..., I discovered why I was able to see some =
3D effect when watching 3rD Rock with Anaglyph glasses (the Little =
Ceasar's near me ran out).  In any case, my first question is:

Does Pulfrich have a greater effect when objects (or the camera) are =
moving in a certain direction?  (Mention has been made about motion to =
the left (or is it right?) and the ER shot being counter-clockwise when =
viewed from above)?

***Anaglyph questions:***
My very first (and very recent) 3D experiment was a shot of my house =
taken w/an instamatic (not stereoscopic), and my moving it to the right =
a few inches (total approximation w/o tripod or anything).  I was =
pleasantly surprised at the results:

http://users.apexinc.com/~adam/3dhouse.html

I followed Bob Mannle's tutorial and manipulated the scanned photos in =
Photoshop by replacing the red channed of the left image with the red =
channel of the right image.  He says to view the images with the red on =
the left.  However, I see greater depth when the glasses are Red right.  =
Is this correct?  I thought I should view it properly with red left =
since the red filter is 'eliminating' the right image and only allowing =
the left eye to see the left image.  Why do I see greater depth with red =
right?

***Stereo Camera/Viewing media questions:***
I will be taking a week and a half vacation to San Francisco and =
northern California in less than a month, and based on the 3D method =
used in the above paragraph (I know I should be shot!), I'd like to take =
some reliable (good) pictures while there. So, I'd like to buy my =
_FIRST_ stereo camera.  My primary goal is to get one cheap and easy!!  =
This being my first stereo camera purchase, I'm mainly interested in =
getting good effects with very little effort/expense, and build up from =
there.

My viewing medium may ultimately be computer manipulated anaglyph images =
produced using Bob Mannle's Photoshop method on scans from the resulting =
prints.  Sooooo, can someone recommend one that I could either find at a =
local pawn/thrift store or camera store that is cheap.  What sort of =
price range is good for those recommended?  Also, if I buy from a pawn =
shop/thrift store, what should I look for in terms of possible defects =
if it is an old model?

Since I'm fairly new to all of this, would I buy normal print film and =
just be using up twice as many rolls as I normally would (since the =
number of pix on a roll is essentially halved)?  Finally, is there some =
other cheap, quick, and easy medium I should consider for viewing them =
(e.g. slides -- w/o special projectors, screens, etc.)?  I have an old =
Viewmaster from my not-so-long-ago youth that could be of use?  I know =
there has been much discussion of whether print or slide viewing is =
better, but even though I may be sacrificing some quality, I just want a =
viewing medium that is (again) quick, cheap, and easy.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated,

TIA,

Adam
Very, very, very amateur 3Der and convert (from 2D) and soon (hopefully) =
to be novice...


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