3D-NEOTEK-NOFLAME

[P3D Ole Hansen <olejohan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gabriel Jacob <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> ....the point of discussion was on DVD video in a DVD
> movie player, I didn't think I had to elaborate on the
> point. There IS a format for that type. So the question,
> still begs an answer, why is this format, which is lossy,
> acceptable but jps isn't???
I guess it is a matter of individual preference, or of a (maybe)
coming industry standard for movies on CD-ROM, but my
knowledge of the video and movie industry is so limited,
that I cannot answer your question.

> Bill's succes is owed mostly to selling his FAT to IBM,
> which is an open system. Would he have been as succesful
> with Macintosh?
Maybe, but then the Mac computer would have been a PC,
and IBM would still use CP/M ;-)

>> All cameras use lossy technology. If you want to see reality,
>> take your one eye away from the viewfinder, and open both eyes.
>> Maybe its a good idea to turn your head a little too.
>I think there are options to use non-lossy storage. But in any
>case, what is your point. I don't refute your comments made about
>one's eyes.
My point is simple. We all (stereographers) engage in an attempt
to reproduce the visible part of reality on film, paper or monitor.
We know its a futile attempt, as we can never reproduce what we
see with two open eyes, but in the heat of the encounter this
knowledge is often forgotten.

> I recently had a chance to play with a Fuji digital camera for
> a week and it was a blast (lot of fun). Didn't think it would
> have been as much fun as I anticipated. It does fill a niche
> between videocameras and traditional film cameras. I will put
> up some 3D examples in the future.
That is a good idea, but where will you put them up ?

Since my last writing, I tried out different types of motives
for the Kodak DC 20. The contrast of the camera is high, higher
than Kodacrome II used to be. The best results so far has been
portraits with very soft lightning and landscapes.
Its strange, that a portrait of 493x373 pixels printet on A4 paper
with a picture size of 170 x 230 mm can be so acceptable.
Architecture and interior is more problematic (not very good).
BTW - The printer is a HP with PrintSmart drivers for Win95.
Stereograms are OK on the monitor - reversed for X-eyed viewing.
regards - Ole Hansen - olejohan@xxxxxxxxxxx


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