Re: [photo-3d] Re: Medium Format viewer

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Lopp" <dlopp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] Re: Medium Format viewer


> > If we follow this to the next logical step, the most efficient film
> > image shape is probably round, where you can eliminate the window of the
> > mount and use the full dia. of the viewing lens to view all parts of the
> > image.  It's a strange shape, but should seem more immersive.

Image shape is an interesting aspect that used to be addressed frequently,
but I have not seen anything on recently.

Certainly, a round image would be most efficient in terms of using a lens'
full image area.  Normally, the field is so much larger than the film
aperture that it is rare that you see this, except with fisheye optics.
The square or rectangular images that are most common actually crop off
quite a bit of the image area of most lenses.

In terms of "immersion", there are several schools of thought.  If I run
across any of these concepts (which have been published in many books,
papers, magazines, etc.) that seem to be relevant to the present discussion,
I will post them.   In the meantime, here are some thoughts for commentary:

Human vision is not square or round, but rather two irregular shaped fields
(very roughly ellipses with occlusions caused by our nose, brows, eyelids,
eyelashes).  These fields overlap, albeit incompletely.  As a result we see
a central stereoscopic area with a monoscopic area on each side.  Each field
is wider than it is high (the exact ratio being determined by the
physiognomy of the face of the individual).  The entire area of both fields
together is quite a bit wider than it is high.

Thus the reason for wide aspect ratio images (widescreen).  A lot of the
realism of Cinerama has been attributed to the peripheral vision attributes.
There has been speculation that a stereoscopic version of Cinerama (which,
unfortunately, never occurred) would be more dynamic than even Imax.
Theoretically, Omnimax should achieve this.  But, in practice, the films
that have been exhibited on the domed Omnimax screen have not had as much of
an immersive effect (at least to my eyes) as Cinerama.  Part of this may be
due to the perspective rendered by three cameras with crossover image
directions.

Anyway, research into HMDs and retinal image display systems could lead to
much more immersive stereoscopic images than we have now.

JR


 

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