[photo-3d] Re; interocular adj. in viewers

["Alan Lewis" <3-d@xxxxxxxx>]

I won't re-quote the thoughts of Don and Peter here.

I think everyone should read another person's opinion on the matter:

Please refer to "The world of 3-d; A practical guide to stereo photography" by Jac. G. Ferwerda.   Start with section 5.3 and follow any other secition links.

A lot of concern is stated by some people about how viewing off axis through a lens is bad when viewing stereo images.  I think you'll find that most of your stereo viewing experiences have been off axis viewing conditions, they are being mis-interpreted as "adjusting lens centerline to eye spacing".

Adjusting the viewer interocular spacing to match your eye spacing and still have comfortable viewing conditions is only practical for twin slides used in a twin viewer that can be adjusted like a pair of binoculars for lens spacing.  In this case (as with binoculars) you are moving both the film chips and the lens to align parallel to your eyes.  This is a true interocular adjustment.   When viewing a monolith mount (one piece) this is not true.  Different rules.

Study how a Holmes stereoscope lens works to see the extreme case.

I am not going to say anything more on this, but the reason I am emphatic in my statements is that the original e-mail about the matter referred to one of my viewer designs as being deficient due to lack of interocular adjustment and that my decisions on using large diameter lenses were based upon cheapness.
This is absolutely ridiculous and I want to make sure everyone is making judgements based upon careful study of how stereo viewing works.


Alan Lewis
3-d@xxxxxxxx
Serious viewers for serious Viewers
http://members.home.net/3-d


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 

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