P3D Re: A few good men..., Fatous Formula

[abram klooswyk <abram.klooswyk@xxxxxx>]

I wrote (...):
  >I consider depth meters, spreadsheets and base calculators 
  >a waste of time ;-). 

George Themelis:
  >What???  Are you serious about that?  No depth meters?!
  >(I would really like to know if you are serious... the 
  >smile ;-) throws me off a bit)

This is the best appraisal I've got since long - someone
seriously (? is he serious ?) wants to know if I'm serious! 
How can I keep uncertainty lasting? Unsubscribe?

The short answer is: of course I'm almost serious... 
But note that depth meters are not distance meters. I practise 
focussing and I do have a kind of depth meters on my camera's 
(yes! I have more than one), although most people call them f-stops. 
In many cases allowable depth is close to possible f-stop. 
(Todeschini, remember). And mostly 1/30 will do. Why bother with a 
Fatous Formula? (Wait for my great Wizzard Storm against it). 
Of course you can enlarge base (sorry, will switch to Tech-3D) 
and add depth. But, although I think Sir David Brewster has made 
serious mistakes, there is some (serious?) truth in his statement 
(The Stereoscope..etc., 1856, p. 157):

"(...) unless we require an increased relief for some special 
purpose, landscapes and buildings should be taken with the
normal binocular camera, that is, with its lenses 2 1/2 inches
distant. Scenery of every kind, whether of the picturesque,
or of the sublime, cannot be made more beautiful or grand
than it is when seen by the traveller himself. To add an
artificial relief is but a trick which may startle the vulgar,
but cannot gratify the lover of what is true in nature and
in art."

I greet all vulgars and lovers,

Abram Klooswyk


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