Re: What can you do in 2d that cannot do in 3d

[P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sat, 13 Sep 1997 05:26:12 -0500
>From: P3D Larry Berlin  <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: What can you do in 2d that cannot do in 3d

>******  I have no argument with 2D being easier, but I have to ask why would
>anyone want to waste the opportunities with 2D if they already know about
>and love 3D?

Larry, this post and your post before this one (limitations of 3D) come
across an inspirational essay on why the realm of 3D should be extended -
which I think is great, and a major contribution.

But it sounds like you're using this line of reasoning as an admonishment
to *never* take 2D pictures, and I don't agree with that. I take photographs
for a variety of reasons - artistic effects, recreation of reality,
seeing phenomena I couldn't see without taking a photograph, etc., and the
balance of priorities is different for different photographs. Any kind of
photography involves constraints, tradeoffs, and compromises, and 3D
photography imposes more of certain kinds of constraints than 2D
photography. If satisfying those additional constraints requires compromises
that cause a particular photograph to be less effective for the purpose for
which I intended it, then I would do better in that particular case to take
a 2D photograph.

Example: if I set up a camera and a telescope with a motor drive, I can take
a nice 2D photograph of the M31 galaxy. Getting a baseline of 60000 light
years or so for depth within the galaxy is not practical at this time.
I could use the "Realist at the Grand Canyon" technique and take a 3D
photograph with the galaxy in the background and a statue of Herbert Hoover
in the foreground to add depth, but really I'd rather just have the
photograph of the galaxy. It's possible to use astronomical information
to create a 3D computer model and generate a 3D image from that - but that
would probably take me a year or more to do. I'd be happy if someone else
does it, and I'd be happy to view the result, but I don't see any reason
to deliberately refrain from taking 2D galaxy photographs in the meantime.

John R


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