P3D Re: A plan to "rescue" Mr. Shields

[Gabriel Jacob <gjacob@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have to say it's been interesting to read how some fellow P3D brethren
are trying to convert Mark. They might make a believer out of him yet!
Mark, brother George (aka Dr.T) speaks the truth, I've been there! In my
search for self discovery I went astray but Dr.T showed me the light!

Mark, I've also used many cameras (not as many as you have) and 
presently using mainly twin P&S and a Realist. I'm slowly phasing
out using the Realist and concentrating on using twin SLR's. I've
done some more extensive shooting and don't find it too bad (that is
after training on a 3 step Realist, anything else looks like child's play!).

Before that I've tried Pentax beamspitters, single camera 3-D (cha-cha,
ha ha!), twin disposables, Loreo, FED, Nimslo, Q-Dos, and some others
that escape me at the moment. I've used these cameras for slides,
prints, and in the case of the beamsplitter with a videocam and digital
camera. I also have a few different brands fixed mirror beamsplitters
and even a beamsplitter for use with a single-use camera (Fuji). These
I haven't used much. Like Peter, I use these to experiment with a
videocam/digital camera.

I realize not everyone has the same priorities but from what you have
posted so far, it seems you are in the same boat as most of us. There
is of course no perfect system and everything is a compromise (even
an RBT, expensive!). Therefore the best compromise (as I see it) is
getting a Realist format camera. I noticed in your post, you turned down
Dr.T's offer for a Realist. I don't know which camera exactly Dr.T was
going to offer but what he stated is a Realist format camera, not
necessarily a Realist. This is an important point. From your posts you
mention you like to have the option of capturing otherwise fleeting 
moments. Same here. 

A Realist gets some getting used to and you might not one to invest
the time in it. Another good camera Realist format camera to get would
be a Kodak. These can also be found very cheaply (cheaper than what
you paid for the new nimslo) and easier to use, compared to a Realist.
The concerns about film use are minimal with these cameras.  You
also have control of the stereo window, which is very important and
difficult to control with beamsplitter images.

The only other concern I noticed was exposure. I don't think this is a
problem if you follow the sunny day rule outdoors and just follow the
flash guide table indoors. Sure autoexposure would be great but in
the overall picture of things it's a minor incovenience not having it, 
compared to the many other limitations of beamsplitter shots. In
any case, if I can take descent shots without a autoexposure or
a light meter, I'm sure you can also.

As to the FED, this would seem to be another economical alternative,
but my experience is that it's a total lemon. It could be just my bad
luck but the optics were mediocre. I've seen shots from another FED
and they looked a bit better but I can't say they were exceptional.

In closing, all I can say is, try it, you might like it! :-) Like Mark Dottle
said, you've invested time and money on a Nimslo and beamsplitter
setups, why not try a Realist format camera. It won't any anymore 
expensive than what you've tried so far and cheaper than a FED!

Gabriel