P3D unnatural imaging

["ron labbe" <ron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

abram klooswyk writes:

>However, mostly I agree with Brewster (quoted before in P3D 2960):
"(...) 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."  (The Stereoscope..etc., 1856, p. 157)<

Funny that the above was written at a time when nearly all photography was
black and white!

Replication of what our eyes see is always going to be a compromise of some
kind. In many cases, such as telescopic and microscopic imaging, what our
eyes see without magnification is quite insufficient. In a macro stereo
image, there is no such thing as ortho stereo- yet one is treated to a sight
only available by manipulation of natural sight. Certainly I am awed by the
wide base hyperstereos of cities I have seen that are not afforded by the
normal stereobase. Likewise, I have seen many landscape images that have
been enhanced, in my opinion, by increasing the parallax so that an
otherwise merely beautiful scene takes on a fantastic, magical quality. This
may offend purists, but true orthostereo is very hard to find~ perhaps
impossible.

I am a huge fan of 3Discover's incredible stereography... they have an
excellent grasp of just how much parallax to use, in my opinion. Their
cassettes are consistently among the best stereoscopic photos I have ever
seen.

Vulgar? Unnatural? So is Picasso.



ron


ron labbe
studio3D 30 glendale st maynard, ma 01754
978 897-4221 fon/fax
mailto:ron@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.studio3d.com


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