P3D A few good men...

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

Springsteen wrote:

>Can Ferwerda, McKay, Klooswyk, Bercovitz and all the other 
>formula-toting folk really be just a bunch of time-wasting 
>spoil-sports?

All these are fine gentlemen but seems to me that they are
better known for their writings than their pictures... :-)
(if I am wrong I am sure I will be corrected :-))

McKay is my personal hero... Apparently he was more interested 
in the final results that the theory behind them.  You have his 
book Bruce.  Now read it! :-)

"The stereographer was once very proud of his theoretical knowledge,
whether it was accurate or not, and he used stereoscopy only as a
stepping stone to elementary, very elementary stereogrammetry,
and to him 'stereo' was far more grammetric than scopic.

As far as stereography is concerned, errors, mistakenly called
'distortions' if they are invisible simply do not exist.  I recall
one enthusiastic young mathematician who wrote about 20 pages
pointing out that certain stereo technique was not distortionless
as claimed, but involved two serious distortions.  'Of course',
he added, 'these two distortions neutralize each other and so are
not apparent, but they are there as I have proven!'  He simply
could not understand that stereoscopically the invisible is
non-existent.  He was delving into the realm of stereogrammetry.

... In this volume we shall deliberately disregard all of these
fascinating mathematical complexities and treat our subject from
the only rational, stereoscopic point of view; that is, with the
visual appearance as the standard.  IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT, IT ISN'T
THERE."

This was McKay in 1953.

And this is George Themelis, 45 years later.



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