http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/ Engadget Comments for Komamura's two-headed Horseman 3D camera http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/1. The lens separation you need depends on the size of what you're shooting and how far away it is. Big and/or far=bigger separation.
2. Too much separation= unviewable shots. Oversimplified rule of thumb: separation NOT TO EXCEED 1/30 distance to subject, and that means nearest part of subject in picture. In general less is more.
3. Each picture (L&R) needs a frame. These two frames should be spaced slightly (1.2mm, in 35mm format) further apart than the lens spacing ("Base"). Old Stereo Realists had two square apertures in the film plane spaced 71.2mm, lens base was 70mm. The two apertures project to coincidence about 7 ft. in front of the camera, nothing in scene should be closer than that. Digital 3D shots can be digitally cropped to the same purpose. Question: does anyone know if the Horseman 3D camera has proper film plane masking?
4. Absolutely simultaneous 3D pairs are absolutely necessary if anything in the scene moves. Slide bar and chacha shots have their uses, but if anything moves in the scene (waterfall,etc.) or you want to shoot by electronic flash, s-b and chacha don't cut it. Too bad some camera company doesn't make a factory 3D digital camera with both sensors slaved off the same computer, and in the same housing, so they are optically aligned and time synchronized. ]]>Apr 26th 2008 3:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 29th 2006 9:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 29th 2006 9:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 29th 2006 10:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 29th 2006 10:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/
I don't mean to nag, but these typos are popping up pretty regularly. It detracts from the site's image.]]>Apr 29th 2006 10:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/
*sheepish grin*]]>Apr 29th 2006 10:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://briandavidphillips.typepad.com/brian/2006/02/new_stirrings_i.html or somesuch. :-) I would NOT reccommend anyone buy a film based 3D camera at this point as there are just way too many companies now getting out of film. There are digital options . . . cha cha shots or twin rigs and a few folks who sell hacks. I use a twin rig of two Sony V3s with a LANC Shepherd and it works fine. Those with digital SLRs can use a Lorel 3D Lens-in-a-Cap adaptor as well (albeit, the quality isn't as good as a twin rig). Eventually, we should see a true mass market digital 3D rig (not the Pentax Optio which used chacha but a true stereo lens piece of equipment). There is a lot of stuff going on in the 3D world of late http://briandavidphillips.typepad.com/brian/3d_stereophotography_and_photography/index.html so good things are on the horizon.]]>Apr 30th 2006 12:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 30th 2006 12:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images/xpan.jpg]]>Apr 30th 2006 12:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 30th 2006 2:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Apr 30th 2006 10:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.loreo.com
]]>May 1st 2006 12:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/May 1st 2006 5:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/
Are you familiar with the Canon 5D and 1DsII? Have you actually tested them against film? Professional photographers are dumping medium format because they have found these two cameras are outresolving it. Photographs are not collections of line pairs. A photocopy can be very sharp, but quite uninformative. A Canon 5D delivers as much information as medium format film at the same ISO, probably because a sensor cell is capable of recording more accurately than the smaller film grain. Here's an article that explains this so that next time you can have a clue: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/clumps.shtml]]>Nov 3rd 2006 7:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Aug 30th 2006 7:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/
No. Professional photographers are switching to digital because of the increase in quality. Cost and convenience are a bonus. If you are in any doubt about it, read this:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml

Better still, hire the cameras, pay for the drum scans, and actually do the tests yourself. Then maybe you'll know a fraction of what you would need to "inform the ignorant masses".]]>Nov 3rd 2006 7:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/I have been shooting for 20 some years.
For weddings and parties and such, (which I enjoy shooting) my digital friend spend so much time at the computer when all I do is drop off and pick up.
I also like have the negative backups to my cds.]]>Sep 13th 2007 7:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/29/komamuras-two-headed-horseman-3d-camera/Sep 13th 2007 7:23AM