[tech-3d] Standards

[Ray Zone <r3dzone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce Springsteen wrote:

> I, for one, support the
> general adoption and continued improvement of the ISU glossary, and would
> gladly proselytize for its use here in T3D, of all places.  That is, if it
> is readily available on line.   It's a good glossary and has no decent
> competition.  The extension of that achievement by Rupkalvis and the
> California contingent should be very interesting.  Will there be any
> on-line discussion somewhere that interested lurkers can quietly follow,
> by invitation, before this sticky cake comes out of the oven?

Ray Zone responds:

Thank you, Bruce, for a gentle and humorous rapprochement regarding the
Stereo Glossary, ISU and Abram Klooswyk.  It is always a pleasure to read
your writing (by the way, how is your article for Stereoscopy coming
along?).

The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) is a
venerable international organization with quite an amazing library of
technical articles in the SMPTE Journal going back to 1922 (pre-television
so it was the SMPE journal at that time) and many wonderful technical
articles on 3-D have been published in that Journal over the years.  So, the
committee for standard terminology for stereoscopy co-chaired by John
Rupkalvis, is really international in scope rather than just out here on the
'coast.'  

John told me that he is proposing taking every available stereo glossary
along with that of the ISU and collating them to arrive at some workable
standard terms and definitions.  In fact, I'm sure he would welcome your
input so you should feel free to email him directly with any recommendations
you might have.  And, with gentle prodding, I'm sure he can be persuaded to
keep subscribers to both tech-3d and p-3d apprised of the progress of the
stereo glossary.

Standards and standard terminology are always important issues in evolving
technologies.  Without standards, new technologies would not proliferate.
And without standard terminology, communication among developers and
practitioners would be impossible.  The current issue of the SMPTE Journal,
for example, includes a status report from the SMPTE Technology Committee on
Digital Cinema and, as is stated in the preface, "The entire system must be
defined, designed, proven in, and standardized.  The work needed extends
well beyond that which any one organization, including SMPTE, can provide.
However, SMPTE's standards work is essential, and it is now underway."

Stereography, from amateur stereophotography to professional stereo motion
pictures and television, has always suffered from a lack of uniform
standards.  In fact, the history of stereography itself, is an epic story of
competing standards and formats.  The lack of universally accepted terms and
definitions for stereoscopic parameters has factored into the evanescence of
stereography as an enduring form of visual communication.

For a visit to the SMPTE website:
http://www.smpte.org

For a look at the work of John Rupkalvis:
http://home.earthlink.net/~campfire/3dnews/feb.pdf
  


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/1/_/520353/_/981774037/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->