Re: [photo-3d] Re:SI 3D

[pd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Kenneth Luker writes: 
> After looking at the issue (the glasses were still stuck in place in
> the centerfold, even though the magazine had been well-thumbed and
> bedraggled by the jocks who perused it from its place among the
> dog-eared current issues, apparently never trying to see the 3D at
> all) I decided not to get a personal copy.  Yes, the pictures were
> in stereo, but frankly I was disappointed.  The anaglyph experience
> is a trying one for me anyway, and although there was some good
> action shown, my overall impression was of a series of pictures that
> had something pushed into my lap and a background of a flattish sea
> of faces in the crowd.  That's an unfair generalization but after a
> week, that's all I can remember.  I guess I'm spoiled by seeing
> sharp, well-mounted transparencies in a bright viewer.

Did you check them out with the glasses?  I was actually very
pleasantly surprised at how *good* the anaglyph images looked
... *much* better than anything I'd seen before.  I think these were
even better than the swimsuit issue (ignoring subject matter, of
course.)  Certainly they're not going to compare with transparencies
in a viewer, but for a mass-market print medium, I thought these were
very good.  Unfortunately, I thought the Toyota ads looked the best.
Who's their photographer?

-pd


-- 
--------
                             Peter Davis
               Funny stuff at http://www.pfdstudio.com
    List of resources for children's writers and illustrators at:
                  http://www.pfdstudio.com/cwrl.html