[photo-3d] Re: Camera separation in stereo photography

["Ray Moxom" <raymoxom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Abram Klooswyk wrote:
> A funny thing about Stephen Spicer's reaction on Ray Moxom's
> article in the Sydney Stereo Camera Club's "3d Window"
> (now at http://www.egroups.com/files/photo-3d/  -  BTW, from
> which issues of the 3d Window do these articles come?)
> is that Steve says that Ray, among the other "primary elements
> controlling the geometry of stereo photography", speaks about
> "viewer-lens focal length". However, I find no mentioning of
> that element in Ray's piece.

Original item on Stereo Bight was in 3D Windows issue 143 (March 1999).
Stephen Spicer's more technically correct response was in issue 145 (July
1999).

Stephen's example of photographing a wire frame cube and then viewing it
with a viewer having lenses of the same focal length as the taking camera
is, in my opinion, a great example of what true othostereo is all about.

My original article was aimed more at the novice to stereo photographer by
pointing out that there is a lot of flexibility in our marvellous hobby. It
is possible for two sets of stereo pairs of the same subject, but with
different separation, to both be acceptable. They can not, of course both be
othostereo, but I have seen very few judges of International exhibitions
take this into account. Some of the most 'pleasing' stereo shots that we see
often have a slightly exaggerated stereo effect.

Ray