P3D Mona Lisa in 3D

["Andrea Blair" <asblair@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>>some subjects just don't work in (i.e. benefit from) stereo.  Would 
you photograph the "Mona Lisa" in stereo just because you were there? If 
so, why?<<<<

>>>>Marvin Jones wrote: Actually, have you ever seen the Mona Lisa in 
the Japanese book 3D Museum? I've seen the picture a thousand times, 
easily, and never paid a moment's attention to the landscape behind her. 
But with 3D, the picture really seemed to come to life for the first 
time. Not only the central figure, but the whole intricate background 
meant a great deal more. I was really surprised at what a tremendous 
difference 3D made to the picture.<<<<

ALthough this is a terrific reference for 3-D images, I believe the 
original comment was more along the lines of "why would you photograph a 
flat object (such as a painting - in this case, the Mona Lisa) in 3-D?". 
The same could be said for why photograph a postage stamp, or anything 
completely flat (i.e., no depth). To merely record it as a stereo image 
(i.e., 2 images) does not create depth in a flat object. The paintings 
were manipulated, to the best of my knowledge. If this is incorrect, 
please, someone, let me know! (I missed the beginning of the slide show 
at NSA, which probably explained how the effects were done.)

BTW, the show at NSA done of famous paintings was fantastic. Marvin is 
correct here by noting what a tremendous difference the 3-D effect has 
on the paintings.

Andrea Blair
asblair@xxxxxxxxxxx



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


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