Re: Stereo's Future

[P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 10:46:23 -0500
>From: P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Stereo's Future

>>From: P3D Michael Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

>>It's a bit off of thread, but was the Holmes format ever "popular"
>>(vs other contemporary formats) for amateurs, or were most cranked
>>out by Keystone (etc)?

>I don't usually spend much time in antique stores, but all the stereoscopes
>I've ever seen there are (generically) Holmes format, and I think both of
>my parents' families had one.

Oops! I misread the question, and thought it concerned the *viewers* (versus
competing formats), not the *prints*.

I don't believe I have ever seen an antique, amateur-made Holmes-format
stereoscopic print. They mainly seem to have been made for mass production.
It would be interesting to find out whether stereo photographers ever offered
Holmes-format stereo portraits as a service - I seem to recall something
about that.

Many months ago, some quotes were posted to P3D which seemed to indicate
that the immediate predecessor to slides for amateur stereo photography
was glass plates.

John R


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