No Subject

[STDudley <STDudley@xxxxxxx>]

In a message dated 98-03-28 12:38:00 EST, Larry Haines wrote:

<< 
 I had not realized from previous letters on photo-3d there might be so
 much apparent interest in full frame 35mm stereo.  I have been taking
 stereo for nearly 50 years using mostly a Realist.  But I am frank to
 admit I have never been full happy with the limited (5p) width
 pictures.>>  

I think a lot of people are unhappy with the Realist format.  To me this was
both the beginning and the (ultimate downfall) end, of the 50's stereo boom.
If Seton Rochwhite or Kodak had made the format full frame or at least a 7p
single-space (between pairs) vice  5p double-space, stereo might have been
able to ride out the lean times, apologies to the those die-hard eccentrics
:-) on this list (like me).
  
<<I took a three year hiatus from
 stereo from 1993 to 1996 while I was on an assignment in the
 Philippines. >> 

Too bad -- you could have gotten some great stereos there I'll bet. 
 

 << With a lot of mentoring by
 such people as Paul Milligan I proceeded to .......  >>

Nothing like getting help from the best.  

<<Paul and others suggested I
 would also need two cameras to use for wide stereo base photos...... Many
shots with near subject further than 15 feet can be stereo enhanced by pulling
the
 cameras further apart. .... .I bought two slide bars from Jasper Engineering
in
 California and devised a way attach them to one another for an even
 longer bar. >>
 
Was the double twin bar conversion difficult with the Jasper bars?  I have
often wished I could pull my cameras further apart.  I have almost always
liked the results from my "limited" hypers.  I use a pair of 24 mm lenses that
have a nice limited hyper affect when shooting scenerey with people in the
mid-scene (not too distant).  Most people (not familiar with stereo) can't
even tell it's a hyper because they expect the person to look small (I think)
-- when compared to the outdoor scene the person is part of.
  
 <<So far, even though I have much less money to worry about,>>

     :-) Yes, I believe you ... and I know the feeling on a more limited basis
:-)

<< I am delighted with my new pictures.  They are what I was yearning for over
 many years.  No question that it is harder to look at each pair since I
 must load two slides in the viewer each time.  But the results are so
 much better.>> 

As long as it was worth it and you're happy.........congratulations on the
success.

<<  I have my developed pictures returned in 2x2 mounts for quick
 viewing.  The good ones are remounted.  For stereo circuits I am
 intending to mount in RBT 7p mounts......  

Larry Haines >>

This is what I do too for previewing. Although I am using a cheapy plastic 2X2
availbale light viewer from Reel 3-D.  Perhaps I should consider what you do
as well.  I have about a year's back log of slides to "put together".
Sometimes I'll mount them in 8p or 9p RBT's.  I actually prefer double sided
glass mounts for exhibition slides, which typically need to be 7p or less.  I
put them in the old Emde enclosures .......which are now no longer available. 

A nice solution would be an eclosure that would allow  two 2 X 2 slides to be
one piece, so you wouldn't have to pick up two slides. Anybody ever heard or
seen something like that?  
 
Thanks for sharing this Larry. I've been using twin Nikon 2000's for about 2
1/2 years. They are not auto-focus but do have an auto-winder.  Unfortunately
the tripod mount is at one end of the camera, so the cameras tend to swivel on
my Reel 3-D "economy bar".  I have electronic shutter releases which I thought
would sync all my flash shots.  Unfortunately I have had a lot of difficulties
with flash synchronazation and even staggered (one camera firing late)
firings.  I discovered that the camera receptacles (for the shutter release)
had a plactic peice broken-off on both cameras and typically it would fire
together when I held my finger over one of them.  I finally got the socket
replaced and am going to try it again (been busy) soon. I primarily use 35mm
Nikkors, but also use 24mm Nikkors and occasionally the 50's. Looking to get a
pair of 135mm too.
Most of the pictures I take are on hiking trips -- often covering fairly long
distances with over-nights, so weight is a factor to contend with. Probably
why I haven't gottent the 135's yet. I usually consider it to be a good trip
if I have one of those "camera strap tans" on the back of my neck when I get
back :-). 

Steve Dudley
Chicago Stereo CC 
 
 
 
  >>


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

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2654
***************************