P3D Re: I saw the Future - Part II

[roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John W Roberts)]

>Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:13:54 -0700
>From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: P3D Re: I saw the Future - Part II

>John Roberts writes:
>>We're talking about preserving
>>the ancient and beautiful art form of 1950's stereo slides, but at the
>>same time people are spoiling the authenticity of this heritage by
>>intruducing wider slide formats, and by using modern films with finer grain
>>and faster film speed. 

>Aggghhhrrr... John! You have a way of twisting and bringing up unsual
>aspects to every argument! :-)  

Why, thank you George! :-)

>Well, I think what counts more is not
>how the images are recorded (old cameras, glass plates, etc.) but
>how they are viewed.  Using a computer to print Holmes' cards to be
>viewed in an antique or modern Holmes stereoscope for me is a continuation
>of the old tradition, while using liquid crystal glasses to view the
>images in a computer, is not.  It is the viewing that defines the
>craft in this case, I think.

Also note that computer printers can print to transparencies. The resolution
of consumer-grade printers is not high enough to produce really satisfactory
results in Realist format, but perhaps full-size printouts on 8.5 x 11" sheets
or half-size printouts (both views printed on one sheet) could be viewed
in some sort of large-format transparency viewer. 

I seem to recall suggesting such a possibility several years ago. Has
anyone tried this?

(Of course, the same trick could be done with opaque prints and a 
large-format print stereoscope, and as yet another possibility Holmes-
format photographic transparencies could be made, for viewing against
a diffusing light source, or as prints with a white opaque backing added.)

John R


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