Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D
|
|
Notice |
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
|
|
P3D Re: Viewing with vs. without lenses
- From: Bruce Springsteen <bsspringsteen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: P3D Re: Viewing with vs. without lenses
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 13:57:07 -0700
George said, after pointing out that free-viewing is often yields tiny
details, false sharpness, stretch:
>>>
I know many people enjoy freeviewing stereo prints and
claim that this viewing method has many advantages...
"zero magnification", no stretch, no chromatic aberration,
no distortion due to the lens, etc. Freeviewing has one
big advantage: You don't depend on a device to see
stereo. But if you have a viewer on hand, why would you
freeview?
>>>
I agree with this question, but with the stipulation that it be a good
viewer - not some plastic lorgnette.
I was immersed in this question as the coordinator for the NSA stereoview
competition at Green Bay. There were significant time constraints in the
judging of very many views, and I realized free-viewing might allow for
faster perusal by judges (though in fact this was NOT the case, as I saw
things unfold). But I'm also convinced that a well-made stereoview of any
kind should be made with some idea of how it will/should be viewed. I
plan my Holmes views for what I know to be the typical focal lengths of
Holmes style viewers - and arrange details with the magnification in mind
- and I believe they suffer in free-viewing for all the reasons George
mentions, as do many other views. But many very knowledgeable and avid
view collectors and makers have come to prefer free-viewing, even in the
presence of "good glass", and who am I to spoil their enjoyment by forcing
viewers into their hands? Still, such significant differences in viewing
do not make for a solid, level playing field in the evaluation of stereo
print work, IMHO. McKay talked about how folios (pre-Realist) would
contain prints designed for viewing under all kinds of magnifications,
viewed in whatever quirky hardware participants had on hand, and lamented
what a hodgepodge of impressions was the inevitable result. The situation
seems not so bad now as then, but I sympathize with his view still.
Bruce (How's traffic on Print3D these days?) Springsteen
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
|