What Average People Really Want From Pictures

[P3D Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxx>]

3-D Dr Tee asks of my ramblings:

> I tried to tie these thoughts with stereo photography and concluded
> that consumers will pick an Argus (Loreo clone) over a Realist for
> convenience, but will still pick 3D over 2D for content.  What do you
> think?

I think a couple things. Imagining ourselves in a research or focus
group with real people and real pix and cameras in front of us talking
about this stuff, here's what I would guess (and what I've read) we'd
come up with:

1) By content, the cutomer means who or what is in the picture, and
digging deeper into some of the more essential (read: emotional) buyer
decision-making stuff, content is really what the customer's emotional
connection with the picture is. If you want a good general example of
the customer's distinctions between form, content, and their perceptual
adaption abilities, take a look at the baby pictures of any typical new
first-time parent/grandparent. As you examine their photos, you will
perceive a small, overexposed, out of focus blotch somewhere off to the
side of a mostly green (hospital flourescents) image. On the other hand,
the typical new parents and grandparents will perceive the most
beautiful child in the world in one of the nicest photographs they have
ever seen (at least until a "nicer" picture gets taken). Mono or stereo,
sharp or soft, light or dark, this is all form; what's in the picture
(and really, the emotional content of what's in the picture) is what
counts. That being said...

2) By content packaging/convenience, the customer means: Can I push the
button and get a picture in the overwhelming majority of picture-taking
circumstances? Does the camera autoload? Autowind? Autorewind? Can I
zoom in and get close up? Can I shoot on cloudy days or dark places just
as easily as sunny days? Does the flash come on automatically? Will the
flash "go far"? Etc. If the customer can't get the picture, the camera
is useless. And their purchasing decisions tell us that they are
unwilling to "work" at getting the picture. The Argus/Loreo would not do
well here...

3) Another aspect of content packaging/convenience: Can the customer get
the picture back quickly, inexpensively and conveniently? Can they put
the pictures in their albums? Can they easily copy them and show them to
others? Desciptive of how average customers might relate to the Argus or
Loreo: Do I have to make pictures that are so skinny? Can I turn the
camera sideways and make more "normal-looking" pictures? How could I
take scenery pictures if everything comes out so skinny? You mean I have
to put every picture in a viewer to see it? You mean I can't send
pictures to other people unless they have a viewer? You mean I have to
carry a viewer around with me to show people my pictures? Why do the
people look "frozen" sometimes? Why do people sometimes look like
cardboard cut-outs? Why do the pictures look so weird in my picture
albums? Why do the scenery pictures look so flat? Why do the close ups
hurt my eyes when I look at them? Etc...

Maybe a hypothetical RBT "point and shoot" model would overcome the
average customer's stereo picture taking obsticles, but the viewing
obsticles remain. And the likely value equation (read: How much does
this stuff cost!?!?!?!) still puts 3D in the land of videodisc and CD
when it first came out.

My opinions/experiences...


Eric G.


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