Re: [photo-3d] Re: Next step from Realist?

[Peter Davis <pd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 12:21 AM 6/16/2000, you wrote:
>George Themelis wrote:
> > I do not count single or twin cameras as a substitute for
> > the Realist but as a supplement that gives you variable
> > stereo base and variable focal lengths.  I always used
> > SLR cameras together with my stereo camera and I
> > will continue to do so.
>
>I agree that twin SLRs are not a substitute for a stereo camera.
>
>However, the very small twin Olympus XAs which give 100mm (4 inch) lens
>separation and are no bigger or heavier than a Realist are a more than a
>suitable (and economic) replacement for the Realist.

I do have a rig of twinned Ricoh Shotmaster II point-and-shoot cameras 
which has given me some excellent results.  I really like this one for 
landscapes, travel photography, etc.  I do consider this a good Realist 
substitute for this kind of shot.  However, it's not really suitable for 
indoor shots ... people at home, kids' parties, etc.  Also, I get a slight 
out-of-synch problem occasionally which causes disturbing artifacts in some 
slides.

On a recent trip to Disneyworld, I had the backpack loaded with the twins, 
the Realist, and a video camera. Heavy!

-pd
--------
                              Peter Davis
                Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com
                "The artwork formerly shown as prints."
            Resources for children's writers & illustrators:
                   http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html