Re: [photo-3d] Re: Digital vs Film

[Project3D@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 07/04/01 03:37:40 GMT Daylight Time, you wrote:

<< I agree that the appearance of digital stereo cameras 
 is inevitable.  However, I don't think that will 
 happen while the technology is changing so rapidly.
 Currently, the manufacturers must be concerned about
 being on the cutting edge, selling their inventory, 
 and getting their investment back before the camera
 becomes obsolete. >>

Very true. But how long will it be before someone is looking for another 
"gimmick" to offer???

<< On the other hand, the feature of
 being able to twin two digital cameras seems like such 
 a small technological step, that it is surprising that 
 it hasn't already happened just by accident.>>

The big problem with simple camera twinning is that is requires to operator 
to do some "post-shooting-manipulation" which point-and-shooters won't do...
 
<< About the JPS format, I never understood its advantages
 except for flagging images to be used with a particular
 plug-in in web browsers.>>

Which, of course, was why I was suggesting it. The camera manufacturer could 
offer a complete "package" (or even a series of packages from"budget" 
(anaglyph) through to "Professional" (shutter glasses) ) so that 
point-ans-shooters could just err point and shoot, then download the images 
to their computer for instant 3-D. No post-shooting-processing needed by the 
user... 

<<  Other than that, it seems to
 me to be a complete nuisance.  Is there some other
 advantage of the JPS extension?  Is it really necessary
 in the applications you suggested?  Wouldn't it be
 better for the JPS extension be added upstream when 
 it is needed?>>

That could work, of course. But do you think the average point-and-shooter 
will be prepared to download two images, open them in some application, merge 
them and add the extension???
 
Bob Aldridge

 

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