Re: [tech-3d] Stereo Base Calculation With a $20.00 Handheld

["Allan Griffin" <agriffin@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike,  would you kindly explain this point to me:  "Are you proposing that
the fixed separation provided by the stereo cameras used by the bulk of us
for general subject matter (subjects other than macro or hyper) be discarded
in favour of a continuously variable inter-lens separation"?

If not, then may I assume that you are talking here solely with reference to
macro and hyper subjects and not the wide mid-field?

At the end of this unduly long adventure into so called simple math, you
say:  "I encourage review, not just for my edification etc. . . . . . . . .
. ."

Thats an interesting point.  If what you have written is theoretical, it
would be appreciated if you were to back it up with practical stereo pairs
demonstrating the statements made and post such on a website to which we
could have access.

Kindly respond, Mike.  I see that you implicate John Bercovitz and Steve
Spicer in your theories.  It would be of particular interest to me if these
fine stereo workers could , in a relatively short amount of space, either
confirm support or otherwise.

Allan
        *************************************

Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 6:29 PM
Subject: [tech-3d] Stereo Base Calculation With a $20.00 Handheld


Mike, you wrote:
> Here's an easy way to calculate the General Solution for stereo base (that
> which John Bercovitz and others use), with a $20.00 calculator (the HP 30S
> Scientific) that prompts you for each variable, allowing you to overwrite
> only those you wish to change, before calculating the stereo base in
> millimeters.  Using this document to program the HP 30S, you can get base
> figures in less than fifteen seconds after turning it on.  The Hewlett
> Packard 30S is a thin, light, two-line calculator that fits the bill
> perfectly.
>
> If you oppose the General Solution approach to calculating base, you might
> want to skip down to the section I call "Comments Regarding the Percent of
> MAOFD Desired."  As old as the debate is, I believe I have shed some new
> light on the subject of the 1/30 Rule vs. the General Solution and you'll
> even be pleased to find I make a case for using the 1/15 Rule.
     ***********
Material in this area deleted.  Please refer to original posting.   Allan
      ***********
>(Yes, I'm new to this sport, but quite obsessed!)

> I vigorously encourage critical review of this article, not just for my
> edification, but for the people I hope it will serve.

> Mike
>
>
>
> >






-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/3/_/520353/_/974458164/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->