Holmes Vs. The Freedom of Artistic Expression

[P3D Shab Levy <shab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear APEC Members,

I am sorry to hear that Carole and others who have chosen to remain
anonymous, are objecting to any other than the Holmes format. (A card whose
size is 3.5" x 7" with a stereo pair of prints which are about 3" x 3")

I can't speak for other members of this club, but I joined it knowing in
advance that the formats are going to be different and not only Holmes.
Indeed, this was one of the main reasons for joining. The optional format
was clearly stated at the early stages of forming the club. I participate
in numerous folio exchange groups, both slides and cards, with strict rules
about their format. It was so refreshing to find one forum where I could be
flexible about the size of the prints, allowing either the subject matter
or my individual desire for certain artistic expression, rather than an
arbitrary rule, determine the format of my presentation.

Rules that are too strict stifle creativity. Those that are flexible, open
up horizons and allow us to see with new eyes a world which we have not
seen before. 

I realize the practical consideration in all this, and I am not insensitive
to the fact that larger than Holmes formats may be more difficult to view
by some people, or may require other than a traditional Holmes stereoscope
to see them. I would like to suggest that members who cannot afford at
present another viewing device, think of the larger sizes they receive, as
an investment in a future adventure, and to a time when they will be able
and ready to afford the relatively inexpensive View-Magic or a similar
viewer. 

For those members who have trouble with the size of the stereocards that I
usually provide, I am willing to supplement my entries with a color
photocopy reduction to fit a Holmes viewer, or to reduce the width of the
photocopy image to a total of 7" if the prints are not square.

Having made the above offer, it is clear to me that this should not be a
requirement for other members to do the same, nor to endorse this policy. 

There are other options of course. Club members may decide to split into
the Holmes purists and the other "untouchable casts". That, in my opinion,
would be an unfortunate solution to the problem because it will eliminate
variety and the other good things it brings with it. Another option is to
vote and agree to the outcome. This of course may cause members who don't
like the outcome to drop out, but one cannot prevent members leaving the
club for any reason. There is always the option to do nothing and wait
until the natural course of events resolves the problem.

The above arguments are universal and probably of interest to the rest of
the stereo-photography community. In this respect, I am taking the liberty
to post my arguments also to the photo-3d list. For those readers who are
unfamiliar with APEC, this is a revival of the Amateur Photographic
Exchange Club formed in 1861 in NY. In the present club, members send to
each other as many identical copies as there are members and get in return
one original copy from each member. To learn more about the history of the
club, its few rules, and also to view past entries, point your browser to
Dan Shelley's excellent web site at:
http://www.dddesign.com/3dbydan/apec/default.htm


Respectfully,


Shab Levy
Portland, Oregon, USA


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