P3D Re: My first stereo show - strange reactions

[fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Dr. George A. Themelis)]

Thank you Keith for a most interesting description of your first public
stereo show.  We are called to answer two questions:

1.  Does a stereo show for a non-stereo audience have to be "gimmicky" to
    be successful?

2.  Why is stereo "rejected" by experienced 2d photographers?

I will try and tackle the first one here and the second one in the
following posting.

Most newcomers to 3d are impressed by the "gimmicky" stuff.  But as the
impact of the stereo effect wears out what is left, IMO, is good
photography with depth.  My first Realist pairs looked great.  My first
twin SLR stereos were a solid "wow!".  Ten years later I am selective about
what I like and usually depth is just a supporting factor, not the main
one.

When people in photo-3d say that they like and prefer the extra depth of
side-by-side twin SLRs or make comments about not wanting to bother with
anything without sufficient depth, I always question how long they have
been taking stereo pictures.

As a presenter of stereo slide shows to non-stereo groups, I will include
pictures with good depth, out of the window compositions and just plain
good stereo photography in one show.  Variety is the key for me in these
presentations.  Show close-ups, scenics, special effects, etc., all in one
presentation.  Only gimmicky or only subtle pictures might not do it.  Try
and borrow and copy (w/permission) interesting images to include in your
shows until your own collection and interests grow to be diverse enough.  

Interesting is not necessarily gimmicky.  A number of people in this list
(Ron Labbe and Jon Golden are two that come in mind) have produced
excellent stereo shows based on solid and interesting images.  I would like
to hear their input too.

-- George Themelis


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