P3D D-3D

[ron labbe <ron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mary Ann Sell writes:
>The creation of a 2nd list would be difficult to follow threads on
>subjects that cross over into both areas (i.e. scanning slide images for
>posting on the Internet).  Where would this type of question fall -- into
>C3D or regular 3D.  
>

This seems clearly electronic/digital: slides that were already created
(and discussed in P-3D) are now crossing over into the cyber world (for
discussion in D-3D).

I vote for a split:
Emulsion-based 3D (P-3D)vs. Electronic-based (D-3D). 
I was brought up on emulsion-based media, which has plenty of room for
discussion~ but digitally-based imaging is such a fast-moving and volitle
area that it deserves it's own space.

Peter Davis writes:
>But what about the people who don't want to talk about digital 3D, or film
>3D, but rather about 3D and stereoscopic imagery in general?  There will be
>no place for that discussion, and that would be sad, because there is far
>more synergy and overlap among these fields than there are differences.
>

Discussion of theory relating to stereopsis should remain on P-3D... as
long as it doesn't involve pixels!


ron

ron labbe
studio 3d  30 glendale st maynard ma 01754
978 897-4221
mailto:ron@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.studio3d.com


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