[photo-3d] Re: Camera Coupling

["Mike Kersenbrock" <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

--- In photo-3d@xxxx, "Marshall Rubin" <mrubin@xxxx> wrote:

> one last thing. try this technique using two higher quality DIGITAL 
cameras.
> they're already superior to film-based cameras, and you can 

Be sure your fireproof suit is on, I expect you'll get some
flames sent your way for that statement, especially from
Kodachrome 25 users. :-)

immediately see
> your results and dump those that are unsuitable. you never need to 
buy film
> or processing.

You know, I've said that in the past (I do 3D cha-cha's with my
wife's Nikon 950). However in practice, at least for me, it hasn't
really worked out that way  :-).

Although I could look at (using tiny camera screen)
images and dump them, I actually use the digital camera exactly 
the same way I use film.  I just take a gazillion images and sort 
them out afterwards -- which for digital is AFTER I transfer data 
to my home PC machine.  And even then, I usually leave them there
unless blank or a total blur.  Maybe to CD-R's for backup.

Although it could be different with some automation, my pile of
slides from the (film) processor are faster to see in 3D than
making stereo-pairs on my computer (and quality of view is MUCH 
better with the film as compared to my CRT screen).  Granted, 
realist-format quick gratification
is a good bit slower -- but with 2x2 format, they just pop into
a viewer as-is for a quick and usually good quality image tour.

For me the time it takes to do something isn't so much the 
"latency" time in getting the results, it's the Mike-hours it
takes to get things done.  For me film is quicker, higher
quality, and takes less time to see the 3D results.  

So coupling a couple of 2x2 format cameras might work out well
for others in similar time-crunch situations (I'm at work now
eating my dinner ... back to work!  :-).


Mike K.



 

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