P3D Re: Belplasca?

[Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxx>]

Cghon wrote:
> 
> In our latest APEC card exchange, one of the members had a most
> remarkable print pair -- sharp, clear, and close-up -- which he said he
> took with a Belplasca.

George T. (and others in the past) comment that they haven't seen the
superiority of Belplasca shots to those taken with other classic stereo
cameras...

But a "blind" observer (only in the research sense, Carole 8-) ) with no
preconceived notions observes a clear difference in the results; she
does not know what a Belplasca is or how much is costs or which lenses
it has, she is not even anticipating that different cameras could yield
obviously different results. But some differences obviously stuck her...

I have witnessed this several times myself in others... no reaction to
Realist 2.8s, Customs, Verascopes, even twin rigs or RBTs (except the
S1) but put a well-exposed Belplasca slide or print pair from a
well-adjusted camera up, and folks (just plain old folks, not camera
nuts) tend to spontaneously react to the "sharpness and clarity" of the
pair. In fact, once upon a time I myself had the same reaction,
completely unaware of what the different stereo cameras were...

This does not of course mean that she, I and our co-observers are
"right" as these judgements are completely subjective.
Resolution/contrast tests are meaningless as individual preferences must
be the final arbitor...


Eric G.


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