Holmes Viewers

[P3D <koganlee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

George,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

>I am a bit puzzled by David Lee's definition of an antique viewer... Is a
>1930's Keystone viewer NOT considered antique?  Apparently David puts the
>Keystone viewers in the "modern viewer" category.  Is Keystone STILL making
>stereo viewers for eye testing???

Yes, they are still made. The company is now called Mast/Keystone and is 
located in Reno.

>>A viewer is simply a tool for viewing a stereo card. 
>
>Well... sort of... A stereo viewer is a tool for viewing stereo images just
>like a stereo camera is a tool for recording stereo images.  Viewers are
>simpler than cameras but equally important, IMO.

You are correct, I was oversimplifying. 

>Just a minute... Ideally, for me, a viewer should have a tight hood to
>disconnect the environment so I can be absorbed and concentrated in my
>viewing.  I do not wear glasses.  Why should I define the ideal viewer as
>one that better serves those who wear glasses?

Again you are correct. I should not have said "ideally." From a practical 
standpoint I prefer hoodless since I wear glasses and the Redwing viewer is 
the only one I've seen with a hood that goes over them.

>[Off topic comment:  My highly unscientific (hi Greg!) and informal polls
>and observations indicate that those who do not wear glasses *appear to
>enjoy* viewing stereo images with a viewer *more* than those who do.]

Sounds like observer bias to me.

>There are more requirements in the lenses in terms of size, focal length,
>matching optical characteristics, etc.  Also, you did not mention anything
>about light source.  Ideally, a viewer should have internal illumination,
>which should have certain characteristics (bright, uniform, white color,
>etc.) depending on what is being viewed.

Certainly, and that is why I designed and manufacture my own viewer, since I 
haven't been able to find anything which totally pleases me otherwise. It is 
not for stereo cards, though, but for larger prints (10" wide).

>What is your definition of antique viewer?  19th century?

For the purpose of this discussion, any flimsy wooden viewer.


Both 
>>Keystone and the Stereo Optical Company also make eye testing viewers in 
the 
>>$1000 range. 
>
>Is Keystone still making these viewers today???  Most of the Keystone
>viewers that I see must be 30 to 60 years old and I would not classify
>those as "modern".  I don't think that Keystone is still making viewers...

They still make them, but now they have plastic in them.

>1.  An antique (in my dictionary, at least) tabletop Keystone viewer with
>achromatic lenses and a large (& heavy) pedestal base, adjustable height
>and internal illumination.

I have one of these, too, but I don't call it an antique. 

>2. A modern portable achromatic viewer with fine wood finish and a custom
>made tight and long hood and card holder made by the master of modern
>stereo viewer construction, Alan Lewis.

Didn't know this was available. Thanks for mentioning it.

 >So, if someone wants to buy a
>NEW modern "Holmes" viewer, what is your recommendation?  In many cases a
>$50 antique viewer is a good place to start.

I would recommend the Bioptor (available from Reel 3D) or the Keystone from 
Mast/Keystone in Reno. 
					David Lee





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