P3D Re: Why is 2d photography better than 3-D

[Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 
> From: "Oleg Vorobyoff" <olegv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: P3D Re: Why is 2d photography better than 3-D
> 
> Absorbing, mysterious and subjective - sounds like 3D should be perfect
> for art.  Well, not exactly.  Once you image a 3D photograph, there is
> not much farther you can get into it.  It is just too literal.  Objects
> in a 2D photograph, on the other hand, have ambiguities as to size,
> distance and shape that can be put to the service of art.
> 
> Having completely swallowed Lincoln's bait, I'm now bracing myself for a
> bumpy ride.
> 
> Oleg Vorobyoff
> 


****   Interesting comments. Only someone who hasn't tried to do 
something with 3D pictures could complain there was nothing available 
to be done with them! 

Getting the pictures is only the beginning. The fact that so much can 
be done with them after getting them is a big part of the basis for 
my passion for stereo images!

However the portal to this enticingly immersive realm is the computer...

Freedom in the medium is obtained with a good pair of eyes trained 
in the fine art of freeviewing. Thereafter only your imagination can 
limit you.
-- 
Larry Berlin

3D Webscapes
lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://3dzine.simplenet.com
*-) ---> :-) ---> 8-) ---> 8-O