Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

P3D Re: Cardboarding


  • From: boris@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Boris Starosta)
  • Subject: P3D Re: Cardboarding
  • Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 02:24:50 -0500 (EST)

Michael Kersenbrock wrote:
>
>Yes, despite what may have been mentioned, a telescopically taken photo
>of a person can be done with the person showing depth (not a cardboard
>person) according to Herbert C. McKay.  I quote from his book (below)

>From the quotation:
>        If we maintain a proportional increase between base and
>magnification, the type of reproduction closely approximates that of
>orthostereo. We reproduce the objects at their full natural telescopic size,
>and with that distance and degree of relief which is fully natural for that
>size. Thus if the lenses are doubled in focal length and the base is also
>doubled, objects are shown in the size and relief normal to a distance which
>is just half that of their true distance.

Now, I specifically remember a very lengthy series of Posts, this past
summer, that seemed to conclude (with as much consensus as is possible on
P3D - namely, not much) that one cannot in fact approach ortho imaging of a
remote object by combining increased focal length with increased
stereobase.  At that time, and still at present, I am exceedingly
interested in this particular problem, as it relates to orthostereo.  Shall
we now re-open the discussion on combating "squash" with stereobase?

For your consideration, I submit Ron Labbe's photo of Leah
(http://www.studio3d.com/pages2/people.html), which he has stated (to me in
a private communication) was taken with a telephoto (I can't recall the
f.l., but it was quite a bit over 80mm).  On the website, cross-viewing,
the depth looks exaggerated (stretch), which implies to me, given the use
of a telephoto, that the stereobase was not normal (>>70mm).  Ron, feel
free to jump in on this.  I've not seen the slide, nor have I met Leah in
person, so I cannot fully judge the image, but on the web it looks very
strange to me.  I propose this is an example of the use of a larger
stereobase to compensate for a longer taking lens f.l.

Am I right, Ron?

Respectfully submitted,



Boris Starosta

usa 804 979 3930

boris@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.starosta.com
http://www.starosta.com/3dshowcase

"A lifetime can be well spent correcting and improving
one's own faults without bothering about others."
- Edward Weston

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.3

mQCPAi9Yap8AAAEEANdQWo6gIXW+QIPZ/ttmwc7nFZ2/M3dXmLbx3cEU1yUq6rJh
GcOcidaZcpp7GSdjYso6obdLRRwECmPIpMx8Zv8F7xwhsud2y/GM6Xfrb5TMZ9tR
yf2Kn1SAf4iAZwXlKAV0HKTBZCrrQOauT9f9YNJIaKJOe26t5AazJ69kgdhlABEB
AAG0IkJvcmlzIFN0YXJvc3RhLCBhbWF0ZXVyIGFzdHJvbm9tZXI=
=ZyTw
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----



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