P3D Re Need help getting started with Lenticular

[abram klooswyk <abram.klooswyk@xxxxxx>]

Larry Berlin wrote (P3D Digest 3263, 25 Mar 1999):

>(...) a multiple imaged lenticular allows a greater deal of movement
>of the head with a greatly reduced sense of spatial distortion.
I agree.

>(...) I'll take as many lenses as possible as the *better* option, 
>taken on a theoretical basis.
This is right of course when you compare lenticulars with other 
lenticulars. That also is the reason why David Burder used a many-lens
camera and why Bonnet (and earlier workers) used a large angle.

My reaction "TWO lenses are best" only applies to _depth resolution_
when comparing lenticulars on the one hand with classical twin-view
presentation on the other.
I have the idea that many stereoscopists don't know that the 
_theoretically_ best depth resolution of lenticulars is far below the
depth resolution of even average twin-view stereos.

Tom Kidd asked me off list on lenticulars:
> (...) What fascinating ones have you seen?

To my mind come work by Hugo de Wijs (Netherlands), done with a 
professional WT-102 camera, which had a build-in lenticular screen, 
and a few impressing ones by David Burder (England), who used
different techniques among which a long many-lens camera (I forgot
the number, it was some 10 lenses ?). 
Most of their work are commercial ads, but some of them are really 
nicely done artistic work.
I probably was most impressed long ago in Paris (perhaps because it
was the first large lenticular I have seen) by a large insect (about
one meter high), a macro shot done with the special setup of Bonnet. 
He use a camera moving in a circle segment (I have spoken with 
Mr Bonnet on that occasion in Paris).

Abram Klooswyk


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