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.
|
|
P3D Re: Beamsplitters
- From: michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)
- Subject: P3D Re: Beamsplitters
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 14:50:17 -0700
> I remember a few years ago we had a personal conversation before you
> started posting in photo-3d. Back then you were telling me that
> beasplitter stereo slides were great, as good as any 5p or 7p image
> you have seen projected in your club.
Well, they didn't have any 7P's yet (that I recall), and the room back
then also leaked light somewhat (I joined in the summer), so even the best
projected slide was at a disadvantage contrast-wise. Compared with a
brightly backlit pentax stereo adapter's viewer, despite the limitations
in the splitter, images did look as good, or even better because of
the increased contrast. Don't think I had seen a realist format
hand-viewer as yet at the time. This was a LONG time ago. The
thing that originally drove me to the Realist format wasn't the
"obvious quality improvement" (which is there) but was the ability to
project -- which until recently I have been unable to do with the
beamsplitter's slide.
> Then you got into two-lens stereo cameras. How much have you used
> your beamsplitter since then?
Indeed, very little in terms of making *NEW* images. It has only a small
niche where it has an advantage for me, and that niche is required very
infrequently. And it'll be completely obsolete if I ever get a
dual-SLR setup working well.
However it still gets used fairly often for the viewer and my existing
slides. Heck, the "chicken slide" I used to test the $5 HP flatbed slide
adapter is on my web site despite being one of the near throw-away's from
use of the beamsplitter (f/stop used was wrong so the middle bar was
large, and the scanner adapter didn't scan very well either). So that
was a use. I still look at my other split slides (including wedding ones).
So it's being used.
> If not much, why?
In so far as why I don't make *new* ones using it -- because I have
other ways which are better and/or different. As I mentioned before,
having things better doesn't mean I'm unhappy with less good things.
Being "less happy" isn't the same as being unhappy. I'd prefer strangers
on the street to give me a thousand dollars in unmarked bills over them
giving me only 500 dollars. But I'd be very happy with the 500, even
though I'd be *less* happy. I would NOT be unhappy.
My club had a group outing last Sunday in downtown Portland (which
turned out to be the first day of a heat wave w/temp in the 100's
which is rare around here -- records were set). I took whatever
had film in it, and turned out to be a Colorist-II and a VM Personal.
Both bigger and smaller formats than the beamsplitter's. And I
expect to be happy with both when mounted.
That does NOT mean I'm unhappy with my David White Realists,
TDC Vivid, FED, or other cameras, be they "better" or not.
They're only cameras. What makes me happiest are images
that I like. Taken with anything.
Mike K.
P.S. - Compared with five years ago, the club's slides themselves
I think have improved tremendously -- as well as now having a
no-windows meeting place that's DARK. Helps a lot with
contrast which is problematic with stereo projection to
begin with. When the new club projector arrives, things
should get even better. Of course, now I compare it with
using a Themalized Red button..... :-)
>
> -- George Themelis
>
>
------------------------------
|