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.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

Re: [photo-3d] Decline of the stereo market


  • From: "John A. Rupkalvis" <stereoscope@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [photo-3d] Decline of the stereo market
  • Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:54:24 -0700

Stereo imaging always has been what is now called a "niche market".

However, in the 50's it was a pretty big niche (it had declined
significantly by the 60's).

Many reasons have been given for this decline, and most are at least
partially valid.

One that stands out in my mind is simply that which has been politely called
"human inertia" (human laziness).  Given the choice between a more useful or
higher quality product and one that is significantly easier to use, most
people will opt for ease of use.  Even if the easier to use version is
slightly more expensive than the otherwise better version.

At that time, we had three options: mounting our own stereo slides, having
the lab mount them in cheesy cardboard mounts (usually incorrectly,
difficult to view or especially, project), or shooting non-stereo
conventional flat pictures with no other work required.  No contest.

Today, for the most part, we only have two of those options.  Again, no
contest.

Look at the example of View-Master.  Stereo cameras, excellent 3-D
projectors, and viewers existed.   Today, only viewers (and sporadically
some "toy market" 2-D projectors) are manufactured.   Any guesses as to why?

JR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Kersenbrock" <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] Decline of the stereo market


> Chuck Holzner wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know the reason(s) for the decline of the stereo market
> > back in the 50/60 era?  Maybe we can prevent it from happening again.
>
> How can it decline?  We have to get it "up" first.  :-)
>
> Mike K.
>
>
>
>