Re: Stereo Difficulty

[P3D Gregory J. Wageman <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>You don't know me personally so how can you talk about my "obvious 
>fanaticism"?  From my postings in the net?  In real life I am very 
>calm about it when I show stereo pictures to friends and relatives 
>and don't try to push anyone and don't show much excitement or 
>passion when I talk about it.

Well, let's look at some facts, George.  You are willing, by your own
admission, to drive from Cleveland to Detroit and back in a single night
just to attend a stereo club meeting.  You have organized and formed
your own stereo club.  In one sell-3d posting you frequently offer
for sale more stereo items than I have ever *seen*, let alone actually
owned.  You run a stereo viewer repair business.  You have had articles
published in "Stereo World" and Dahlia's magazine.  You have frequently
commented about how your basement is overflowing with stereoscopic items.
And so on.  I think any *objective* observer would agree that your
involvement with things stereoscopic is way beyond the norm.  If this
doesn't define "fanatic", George, then I don't know what does.  No value
judgements are implied or should be inferred from the preceeding, I think
it is a fair statement of fact, assuming your own words are accurate.

>So, what's your point?  Everyone you've met has an equally positive
>reaction towards 3d?  You have not met people that just don't care
>for stereo?

My point, George, is that your observations are just one data point.
I have met exactly one person whose reaction when told about
stereography and shown an example was, "Why? What's the point?".  Most
people have been thrilled, and this includes more total strangers than
I can count who start a conversation because the see me with my camera.
But I readily admit I haven't been at it as long as you have, and
perhaps over time I will meet more of the "don't cares".

>I've taken my stereo viewer and slides to work to show them to a
>"neutral" environment where people are not even aware of my interest
>in 3d and still get the same wildly different reactions... Some could
>not care less, others (few) just love them.

I've done the same.  Everyone so far has been intrigued, some to the
point of asking when I'd bring in more.  Of course it may have helped
that the first example I showed them was a late-night time exposure
of the building we work in.  Even in a $3 viewer, several people
couldn't resist picking it up and looking at it again and again.

>I find this variation in reactions very interesting and I am looking
>for an explanation for it.

I can't help you there.  My admittedly self-selecting sample sure seem
to have found it fascinating, as did the audience at Bob Bloomburg's
recent stereo exhibition at the Exploratorium, again a self-selecting
sample.  The ones that don't "get it" definitely exist, but I've not
met enough to draw any conclusions as to why not.  Nevertheless, in
spite of their interest, I don't believe I've inspired anyone to go
out of their way to take up stereography themselves.  Yet. :-)

	-Greg W.


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

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2236
***************************
***************************
 Trouble? Send e-mail to 
 wier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 To unsubscribe select one of the following,
 place it in the BODY of a message and send it to:
 listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   unsubscribe photo-3d
   unsubscribe sell-3d
   unsubscribe overland-trails
   unsubscribe icom
 ***************************