P3D Our 3D interests...

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

I read Duncan's comments with great interest:

"I guess a lot of the appeal of stereoscopy for me is in showing a 3D
effect where none can ordinarily be seen. The inference to be drawn from
that, is that there is probably no point in me ever buying a Realist (am I
speaking your language, Boris?), whereas hypers and hypos give the
audience (including yours truly) the chance to appreciate that the moon is
round, Hale-Bopp is nearer than the stars, and that bugs aren't flat,
until you squash them."

Actually Duncan, you are the extreme opposite of Boris.  Boris has
criticized the Realist system because it does not give orthoscopic views. 
You express lack of interest in this system because all it gives is
ordinary (=realistic?) views.  And I stand in-between, recognizing that
both realistic views and special effects (hyper, hypo, and computer-
generated images) can be interesting and worth pursuing.

But there is another point I will like to make:  Stereo photography for me
has two components:  stereo + photography.  You are emphasizing the stereo
aspect.  Especially stereo that cannot be perceived with our bare eyes. 
However, in my eyes, there is more than "stereo" in this hobby of ours. 
There is good photography too.

I don't know if you have been exposed to good stereo photography, or not. 
Here is where the viewing becomes extremely important.  I maintain that
good stereo photography can only be appreciated under the optimum viewing
and presentation conditions.  Some inferior stereo presentation formats
(please, don't ask me to go into details :-)) will show the stereo effect
but will fail to show the beauty and realism of good stereo photography.

I agree that a bug in an SEM stereo pair is impressive.  Especially if this
is the first time you have seen one.  But once you have seen one, you have
seen them all.  Unless you have a special (professional perhaps) interest
in studying bugs, I really don't see how this subject can maintain you
interest for too long.  Same with telescopic views of the moon, images of
Mars from the Pathfinder.  These are nice when you first see them but they
tend to wear out pretty fast in the eyes of the layman.

On the other hand, good stereo photography has an infinite number of
twists.  No two great photographs are alike.  With stereo photography you
have a chance to be intimately connected with the subject.  A great scenic
will make you feel like being there.  A portrait of an attractive lady
looking at you will make you feel uncomfortable as when you are introduced
to the real person.  And after you have spent some time viewing the
picture, you are going to feel as if you have been introduced to this
person.  

Bottom line:  While I do appreciate the stereo effect (and I use it in my
professional work for its information content) 10 years of involvement with
stereo photography have made me enjoy the intimacy, realism, and beauty of
good stereo photography.  And while I still enjoy hyper- and hypo- stereos,
I want them to be good photographs in the first place.

-- George Themelis


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

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2617
***************************