P3D What is wrong with the depth discussion?

["Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think by now it is clear that basically we are all in agreement.

No one likes the extremes.  Someone mentioned a steady diet of
flat images.  No, no one likes to see that.  On the other hand,
people do not like to be told that they cannot take ANY stereo
picture with little or no depth.

I am like Bob... I see my picture taking as a continuous event
that will result in a story.  I was there, here is what I saw.
I am a "record photographer".  I don't shoot every picture for
awards but for my own enjoyment.  I have been known to copy a
flat postcard twice just to include it in a show about Greece
because this image said something that none of my other pictures
did.  I do not claim that this is a stereo picture (or that I 
took it) and don't feel guilty about showing it because it is
part of the story.

Many good arguments and good points were made.  Especially on
how important (or secondary) is depth in stereo photography.

The question of how much depth there should be (on the average) 
is still up for grabs.  A matter of personal preference and taste.

So, let's all hug and kiss and get on with our lives! :-)

-- George Themelis


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