[photo-3d] Re: Suitable subjects for 3d....

["Abram Klooswyk" <abram.klooswyk@xxxxxx>]

Rory Hinnen Oct 25, 2000 :
> I was reading "The World of 3d" the other day (...)
>> "Moving objects are an other matter that should be avoided in a 
>>stereo photo, because viewing a well-presented stereo photo gives 
>>you a feeling of seeing reality (...)"
(...)

> I find that water, fountains and moving people are fascinating 
> (I > have one of my better pictures that includes all three 
> "unsuitable subjects").

Since Koo Ferwerda is no longer around to answer this, I might
say something in defense. 

I agree that for an artistic eye no unsuitable subjects exist,
and I too would encourage experimenting (like George T., Bob Maxey
and Dan Shelley have said). 

However, it can hardly be denied that beginning stereophotographers 
sometimes are disappointed by a "frozen water" appearance or a
"Madame Tussaud" portrait, effects that simply don't occur when you 
look at a single monopicture.

The reason obviously is that the awareness of flatness always is
present when you look with two eyes at monopictures (without the 
tricks recently discussed on the list). 
But stereopsis evokes a sense of realism, which is contradicted by 
frozen people or water (btw, "stereopsis" presumes binocular 
disparity). 
This effect of stereoscopy is probably more apparent to "naive"
people than to experienced stereographers. (Note that Koo Ferwerda 
was experienced in giving stereoprojection shows to "non-stereo" 
audiences.)

So do anything you like, but don't be surprised by criticism of 
frozen subjects.

Abram Klooswy