Re: [photo-3d] House of Wax / why 3d

["John A. Rupkalvis" <stereoscope@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" <drt-3d@xxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] House of Wax / why 3d


> I think this is related to technical difficulties... In
> stereo projection stereo slides move as fast as 2D slides
> and it takes about the same amount of time to absorb the
> information (I think...)
>
> George

I think it is related to the subject matter.  Stereoscopic imaging is very
subjective.

The information in some stereo slides can be absorbed almost as rapidly as
the information in a flat image of the same subject.  However, with other
subjects, it seems to require more time to fully appreciate all that the
image has to offer.

When viewing a scenic, for example, I can pretty much take in the image "at
a glance", and be ready to move on to the next one if it is displayed flat.
If, however, it is stereoscopic, I would feel cheated if I was not given
enough time to really scan the image, and study the details in depth.  A
pun? I would not be surprised if I was told that the original phrase
"studying in depth" came out of the concept of stereoscopic viewing.

JR


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/