P3D Re: PSSP talk: Barriers to Entry

[boris@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Boris Starosta)]

>From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
...
>The real "barrier to entry" today is that a standardized stereo system
>does not exit!
Agreed

>Calling the Realist mount a barrier to entry is negative and plain wrong.
>So, let's say it is a barrier to entry.  What should we do?

Get clubs to accept 2x2s in competition.

(from Tony Alderson)
>>Boris criticizes the 1 in 30 rule (certainly with some justification),
>>but if his goal is simplicity, the full depth range equation is worse.
>
>Amen brother!!!
...
>confuse the living sh-t out of them, or just tell them, "try 1/30...
>that's a starting point"?  A starting point, that's what it is.

I say change the rule to 1/15.  That's a very simple improvement.

and include:
>close ups.  The only warning was to limit the background when
>shooting close-ups.  The rules were very well laid out...

That is what I finally learned was making my closeups difficult to view - a
distant background.

>do it is to not toe-in *if you can*.  No one is going to jail for
>toeing-in!!!

Okay, I guess I'm overly sensitive on the toe-in thing.  But I do seem to
see occasionally, that people come on this list advising novices not to
toe-in under any circumstances.  I am fighting this notion.

>>In my opinion, Boris is singling out certain pet peeves of his, and
>>ignoring other equally "nefarious" issues.
>
>You bet he is!  Did you notice his opening statement:
>
>>what I am really talking about is a nefarious complex of factors,
>>which in the aggregate impedes a simple, easy, and convenient approach
>>to the medium (i.e. my approach).

Thank you, George, for reading my text so carefully.  Yes, I am focussing
on my "pet peeves," because that is where my experience lies.  I don't feel
that my presenting a talk on someone else's peeves or experience would be
entirely appropriate (except in some kind of a "review" or general
historical presentation).  I admonish everyone to recognize that I am no
authority: I have been shooting stereo for less than two years.  As I've
said before in this forum, you may take value out of my opinions because of
their novelty and irreverence, coming as they do from a newcomer who is
absolutely in love with the medium and wants to see it expand.  I do mean
to shake things up.

>*His* approach is the simple, easy, and convenient approach to the
>medium.  Yeah, sure!  Go and tell the "novices" that they need
>two SLRs back to back and slide film to get started in stereo.

I'm working on this.  I'm experimenting with two Olympus XAs, to be
displayed at the PSSP meeting.  This rig is arguably smaller and lighter
than the Realist, has autoexposure, shoots full frame twin rolls of film,
has a TOE-IN feature, so that the slides are instantly viewable as they
come back from the processor.

Now it is true that this camera cannot be "bought" by a novice.  But I am
researching this as a platform which may one day define the standard.  Who
is to say this will not be the configuration of a commonly available stereo
camera some day?  It ought to be.

>From the standpoint of mounting slides, this camera will be more fun than
the RBT S-1.  It will have similar functionality (except autofocus - which
I have heard Dr.T discount in defence of the Realist), and about 1/10 the
cost to aquire.

>Amateurs want to take pictures of vacation and family, not nudes.
>They don't care about portraits.  They want the family at the
>dinner table.  The Parthenon on a sunny day.  That's what they want.
>They want a lightweight, easy to use stereo camera, not two heavy...

and they don't want to mount slides!

>
>OK, this is Boris' approach.  How about my approach which was/is shared
>by thousands of stereo enthusiasts???  You want to talk about "novices"?
...
>from supplies that Reel 3-D offers.  Have been happy ever since.  I have
>had at least a dozen people follow these steps.  All success stories.

As I said, these ideas are to bring in more people, and not to prove the
current population of stereo enthusiasts as crazies.  Although I think a
strong argument can be made there.  (Some people very dear to me have
called me crazy!)

>Barrier to creativity?  That's another issue... If you are a published
...
>real barrier is one's imagination, not the R-mount itself.

The barrier to creativity argument is based on the lack of new blood in the
art, not the R-mount per se.


and then...

[responding to the negativity about the R-mount]
>It still does.  Most recent stereographers I know started with a used
>Realist or Kodak and graduated to other things later.

Why graduate?

>> Eventually, anyone seeking to design a new stereo system
>> needs to ask himself: why was this system eclipsed?

Inconvenience in processing, post-processing, and viewing.

>The barrier presented by mounting and viewing Realist format is not nearly as
>great as the complexity barriers presented by twin-camera rigs,

I strongly disagree, obviously.

My twin rig was not expensive (I already had one SLR).  Setup is not
complex, it is always ready to go.  The only stereo related adjustment I
have to fiddle with is toe-in.  Admittedly, the current rig is heavy and
unwieldy, which is why I am making myself an Olympus semi-P+S twin rig.

>Since nearly all retailers are using Kodalux, you
>can still get Realist format mounted at nearly every drugstore
>(although the last time I did, I didn't like the results).

Was that a pro or con argument?  I don't like the three weeks wait from kodalux.


Boris Starosta            boris@xxxxxxxxxxxx
                          http://www.starosta.com
usa 804 979 3930          http://www.starosta.com/3dshowcase



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