3D imaging on the Alpha 700

[David Kilpatrick]

Loreo has released an Alpha-mount 3D lens unit, and Jeff Wulf, an early tester, has put up a galleries of 3D shots taken using it:

http://picasaweb.google.com/pastorjeff/Loreo3DMacroLens

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/pastorjef ... WLoreoLens

Here is the product information:

http://www.loreo.com/pages/products/lor ... gital.html

It is possible for most people to view these stereograms by making a 6 x 4" inch or smaller print, and using a pair of reading glasses (you have to learn to migrate your vision and look 'through' the print). I found the image shown on my computer screen too large for direct viewing this way. The gap between corresponding points on the images should not be more than 75mm/3 inches and is better at 65mm.

David

[Greg Beetham]

Looks like you really need those special viewing glasses too get the best out of that sort of lateral displacement 3D, probably look pretty good too, except there is no vertical displacement, sort of hard too visualize just how good it is without trying it out with the right glasses too merge the images properly.
Greg

[Vidgamer]

I have done 3D photos in the past, so I've been keeping my eye out for Loreo to make this lens optimized for APS-C size. There aren't many options.

One option is to just move the camera laterally. This only works if you can keep things really straight (or fix any tilting in software after-the-fact). That can be fixed with a gadget that is a slider that mounts to a tripod. Since I don't like carrying tripods, I am not a fan of this approach. Plus things that are in movement won't be captured correctly. But it's a start to see if the idea is appealing to you.

Having two cameras fired simultaneously would be ideal IQ, but now you're talking about a silly amount of bulk and cost.

So, I guess it comes down to, is the novelty of 3D enough to overcome what is probably not an ideal lens? How is the IQ?

I find it pretty easy to see 3D images if you swap them and use the cross-eyed method. Of course, I'd prefer just using a dedicated viewer with prints...

(I actually have a dedicated 3D film camera that takes 4 images simultaneously! This is really the awesome way to do it, but it's expensive to have a lenticular print made, and really difficult to do yourself, even with software. And I don't think the IQ is as good as I'd like, although, part of that is the processing needed... But the result is a print that needs no special viewer.)

[Wes Gibbon]

DK may well correct me, but I seem to remember quite some time ago an article in Minolta World by someone who conjoined a pair of (I think) X300's to produce stereo images.

Stereo images can look quite spectacular when projected (you need special projectors, polarising projector lenses and spectacles, and mounts). You can adjust the positioning so that the image appears to be suspended in mid air in front of the projection screen - disconcerting when a macro image of a tiny bug is transformed to appear six foot long and positioned just above the front row of the audience!

[David Kilpatrick]

Your memory is good. That was David Burder, one of the world's leading professional 3D photographers today, with a Siamese twinned pair of X-700s (I think, not 300s). I will try to find the story and the photo. Because I was one of Nimslo's pro 3D photographers from 1978-1981 in the UK, using both the rail and the multilens custom built cameras, David who then worked for British Oxygen commissioned some industrial shots from me. He was impressed by the XE-1 kit I was using, and later came on the club's 1981(?)-2 trip to Tunisia, where although paying for the trip, he proved a great guide and help to all the party. He later built his conjoined X-700 with a pair of 35-70mm zooms which focused together and aperture adjusted together, synchronised by gears mounted on the rings.

He still sends me his 3D Christmas card every year.

David

[Vidgamer]

That's what I got! An old Nimslo camera, which I bought several years ago from one of the few companies that will process the prints. Before that, I used a disposable camera (I forget the brand), with surprisingly good results. Unfortunately, they stopped production about 10 years ago, so I only had one of those. Sometimes I think the results from that were better than from the Nimslo. Although, one of the last times I had processed a roll, I had a local store process and scan it in, and while they did a good job of dealing with the pairs (they don't line up exactly right), the scans were much lower res than they should have been.

The cost of developing a roll (and having the photos printed as lenticular prints) doubled, and they managed to lose a negative one time, so I had it processed normally the last time, and figured I'd do my own 3D prints. Which is time-consuming and error-prone, so I have only done a few since then. Maybe it's worth sending away for processing.

[Vidgamer]

One web store has the price on the new Loreo lens at $165! Yikes. The old one was only about $100. Hope that means that the quality is up there. Looks pretty nifty. Looks better than the old one

Now that you have me thinking about it, I searched for lenticular supplies, but there is not a lot out there (if you want to buy in less than industrial quantities). Looks like there are a couple of solutions out there, though. You can get software and "inkjet printable" lenticular sheets from Mediabop, but I had mixed results on my old printer. I would like to try again on my newer printer to see if it does better. (Now, I wonder if I still have any left over lenticular paper?)