P3D Re: PSSP talk: Barriers to Entry

[aifxtony@xxxxxxx (Tony Alderson)]

I certainly hope someone will either transcribe Boris' talk, or perhaps
Boris will post up his notes to the web, so we can all mercilessly slam his
good intentions ;-)

But a few off-the-cuff points:

Boris complains about the Realist-format mount; but let's not forget that
the Realist system was originally intended to solve these problems of
"barriers to entry" for casual photographers. And for quite some time, it
did exactly that. Eventually, anyone seeking to design a new stereo system
needs to ask himself: why was this system eclipsed? (But of course, Boris
is right; mounting 5 perf ASA stereo slides nowadays is a pain in the neck
and certainly discourages me from taking more pictures. RBT, Albion and
Spicer mounts just don't compare to the original EMDE and Realist masks for
ease of use.)

But it's not just the Realist format that has faded: when I got my first
Realist some 27(!) years ago, slide films in general were readily
available, and significantly less expensive than prints. (And you could get
Kodak stereo mounting thru your corner drugstore at comparable cost and
turnaround to flattie slides) Now, transparencies are significantly more
expensive, and many "general" stores don't even carry slide film.

Boris criticizes the 1 in 30 rule (certainly with some justification), but
if his goal is simplicity, the full depth range equation is worse. Well,
we've had plenty of discussion on this point in P3D and T3D, no doubt there
will be more. From the last such debate, my impression is that today the
historical context and practice has been forgotten and consequently the
meaning distorted. Don't forget the Realist system offered medium and
closeup mounts specifically to address this issue. There is nothing
comparable available today.

As for the complaints about "Toe-in Prohibition"; it's a lot like alcohol,
marijuana and extramarital sex prohibitions. Extreme moralists blather a
lot about it, but nobody has ever really obeyed. Toe-in is a reasonable
compromise in some circumstances, but like alcohol it's too easy to abuse
and create endless problems. There's a reason (call it bitter experience)
why us old-timers advise moderation here. On the other hand, as Charles
Smith of the UK pointed out to me a long time ago, rigidity on the issue
makes much stereography impractical and prohibitively expensive. (Boris'
point exactly, eh?) In any case, twin-camera rigs and constant readjusting
of toe-in won't strike many newbies as "simple."

In my opinion, Boris is singling out certain pet peeves of his, and
ignoring other equally "nefarious" issues. IMHO, planostereoscopy is
inherently complex and will never appeal to the masses in the way flattie
snapshots do. We will have simple, convenient 3D imaging about the same
time we have understandable, useable, bug-free operating systems.

Don't hold your breath.

Tony Alderson

P.S. Don't misinterpret me. I wish I could fly out for the PSSP meeting,
not to heckle Boris, but to cheer him on. He is certainly correct in
advocating flexibility in technique. His impressive work is a strong
argument in his favor.



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