LTM: STEREOLY: Example of Stereo Pair.

[jcgoodman]

Now for something completely different! Here is a stereo pair

originally captured with a STEREOLY beam-splitter mounted in

front of a "Red Scale" Elmar 5cm lens. Film was Kodachrome

25. Perhaps photo.netters would like to mess around with this

image and see if a single 3-D impression can be obtained direct

from the computer screen. The STEREOLY has already done the

Left/Right crossover at the time of exposure. 3-D enthusiasts will

know what I mean here.<div></div>

[john_shriver]

John: swap the sides. At least with the "eyes crossed" technique, you've got the depth direction backwards. Weird effect!

[jcgoodman]

This pair might work with the "crossed eyes" technique - I think I

have successfully swapped the Left for Right etc.<div></div>

[Troll]

The first pair works for me. I'm sorry, but the revised one is wrong (there's a name for this -- pseudostereo something, but I've forgotten what it is). Anyhow, it's backwards.

[richard_nunamaker]

Yep, I agree with Bill. The "crossed eye" technique (I did this a lot when I

worked in electron microscopy) works great for the first photo (though the

blossoms do seem to be in the "wrong" direction), but not the second one. In

the second, there's a third image which appears in the center-- and it's "in

stereo"-- but there are some ghost images of the grape hyacinths...and that's

distracting. In the first photo I can see the image perfectly in 3-D, but it would

be nicer if the blossoms were facing toward the viewer instead of away...but

that's simply the way the photo was made. This is very cool. The 3-D effect is

amazing....have your face just the "right" distance from your monitor and allow

your eyes to relax and gently "cross"...really cool! Thanks, John!

[Robert_Lai]

The first pair work. I would suggest that you put the white line between the two pairs, as the "triple image" came up more quickly when I tried looking at the second pair. However, I could never get the central image to merge the overlapping features of the second stereo set. The first pair's features did merge eventually. Some objects with greater depth differences would also help. Yes, the flowers point away from the viewer.<p>For those who want to try it, place your eyes about 6-8 inches away from the screen. Put your nose right along the black line in the middle of the first stereo pair (don't bother with the second pair). Let your eyes relax so that both eyes look forward, rather than in conjugate gaze (i.e. triangulate at the point of focus). Eventually, you'll see 3 images, with the full depth effect visible in the middle image.

[todd frederick]

It works great. I used to do a lot of Stereo photography using a 4 image Nimslo camera, mounting the two end images on a 4x7" card and viewing them in an antique viewer. I eventually taught myself free viewing, but it's hard on the eyes.

 

Good quality photo!

[jcgoodman]

Fun. It can be hard work, I know, getting a good result. The

flowers in the photo were at minimum focus distance of the

Elmar 50, and with the Stereoly this does cause a degree of

"hyper-stereo" effect. I should have - will do in next few days -

posted a stereo landscape or two - where the 3-D effect is

usually a bit more comfortably achieved. Incidently, the later

STEMAR outfit, which I have sometimes used, did not do any

crossover at time of exposure, hence a crossover-type of viewer

was required.

[Troll]

One of my proudest Leica possessions was a complete STEMAR unit. I bought it in the early '70s from OLDEN camera for $400, when stereo stuff almost couldn't be given away. A year later I lost it in a major home robbery, and charged the insurance company $600 for it's replacement. Since then, every time I've found another one the price has excalated to just above what I could afford to pay (at the time). I think they're now going for $6-9000. But if I ever win the lottery....

[jcgoodman]

That would have been an irritating loss, Bill, to say the least! In

the early 1990's I was allowed to play with a friend's STEMAR -

complete outfit in leather case AND a rare pair of stereo

projecting lenses, with polarizing filters -( you had to use

polarizing spectacles to see the 3-D effect) - for use on PRADO

projectors. It was great fun. STEMAR was a better system

technically with its use of wider-angled lenses, but I do prefer the

older STEREOLY because of its easier access to a 3-D effect.

Angle of view of STEREOLY was something like a 90mm lens in

portrait format. And Stereoly beam splitter and viewer are a lot

cheaper than Stemar.

[fred_mueggelhopper]

If you want to shoot some stereo and are not willing to spend the $$$ for a

Stemar, look for an old Wollensak Stereo 10 camera or a Revere Stereo 33 camera

with the Wollensak lenses. They make very nice images for not a lot of money.

If you want to spend less, the Nimslo can usually be found for $60. or less and can

shoot chrome for stereo slides. Or some of the Pentax Optio digital cameras

have a stereo mode built in. Or you can just "cha cha" with your Leica and usually

get a good stereo effect. Try some stereo!

[jcgoodman]

Yes, Fred, and there are the many brands of beam-splitter

attachments and viewers - Pentax made one of the best. These

might work very well on digital cameras as well - I haven't tried

digital stereo yet, as far as capturing the image is concerned.

Most of the well-known stereo cameras have come down a lot in

price on the "Used" market.

[poc2]

I picked up one of these recently and it's pretty wonderful.

Great results from an early 1930s commercial stereoscopic system.

Edited August 11, 2023 by poc2