P3D Re: Faking it? No!

[michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)]

> I view the above and previous statements on the subject with some
> reservation.  So, the only way to photograph a distant object/scene is via
> hyperstereo?  Is 1.2 mm constant or minimum stereo deviation an ideal to be
> achieved?

It has been "established" that the 1.2 mm spec is an "optimum" based on
projection in the SWAG formulation of that number.  Is this same number
"optimum" for use for hand-viewer-only use?  If not, what number would 
be the hand-viewer-only equivalent of the 1.2mm projection number?

> 
> I am not faking it!  I am capturing as I saw it.  I liked what I saw.  I
> like what I recorded on film.

Exactly!  An image looking across the Grand Canyon that shows depth is weird
because in person it looks flat to the eye, and it's that flat-in-real-life
effect that also give the sense of depth in a quasi-perverse sort of backhanded
way.  At least when looking at stereo photography from the "emulate real-life" 
point of view (vs. "artistic rendition").

Mike K.


P.S. - Note that I have a personal bias against "obvious" hyper shots, I personally
       just don't like them.  But that's just me (and possibly only "now").
> 
> George Themelis
> 
> 


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