There is a picture of the new Chinese viewer at the bottom of this page:
http://www.3dworld.cn/en/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=20

A.

Is that a "red button" I see on the upper right ? If so, that's a pretty
tight lighting design they've come up with !

Bob

>
>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
>On 12/27/2007 at 1:55 PM autre_valse wrote:
>There is a picture of the new Chinese viewer at the bottom of this page:
>http://www.3dworld.cn/en/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=20
>
>A.
>

>> On 12/27/2007 at 1:55 PM autre_valse wrote: There is a
>> picture of the new Chinese viewer at the bottom of this
>> page:
>> http://www.3dworld.cn/en/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=20

Bob Schlesinger wrote:

> Is that a "red button" I see on the upper right ? If so,
> that's a pretty tight lighting design they've come
> up with !

Nice find :)

Yes, Bob, looks like a "Red Button" to me.

We can't see how deep the viewer is back there, but I expect
them to be using an LED panel (thin, low power, instant on).
The battery pack can also be really thin. If they use some
lipo batteries, I think it would fit in the same space as
the diffuser used on the MFPV.

It looks like they have the lenses mounted on their own
movable board with a rack and pinion adjust at the top of
the viewer.
--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

Bob,

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Bob Schlesinger wrote:

> Is that a "red button" I see on the upper right ? If so, that's a
> pretty tight lighting design they've come up with !
>
> Bob
[snip]
> >http://www.3dworld.cn/en/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=20

I agree. It's premature to judge their design only by that photo, but the
light panel appears to be way too thin. Any dust on the surface of the
diffuser will likely be too close to the film plane to be out-of-focus and
the diffuser might also be too close to the light source - providing
uneven illumination. Asking them for detailed specifications is a waste
of time. We'll just have to wait and see.

It's annoying to witness design mistakes like this when there are many
people, right here on this forum alone, who know for example not to put
the diffuser so close to the film plane. 3DWorld is just too _ _ _ _
(adjective of your choice) to ASK for guidance in designing their
equipment. They insist on designing stuff in a vacuum, then turning it
loose on the market with their fingers crossed. One hundred people would
surely come up with a hundred different viewer designs, but in my opinion,
adequate diffuser spacing is one of just a handful of criteria to which
every viewer should adhere. One look at that photo says they've blown it
and that's a shame given how rare an opportunity this is for the consumer.

All that said, I am nevertheless extremely grateful that 3DWorld has
responded (in any shape or form) to our requests for a focusable,
illuminated viewer. Poor placement of the diffuser will be a minor issue
if they get the rest of it right. The fact that they have the will to
pursue this market at all is a blessing.

Mike Davis
(keeping MY fingers crossed)

Michael K. Davis wrote:

> It's premature to judge their design only by that photo,

(snip)

> We'll just have to wait and see.

I agree, we will have to "wait and see". Anyone know how long
we must wait before we are able to see?

Chuck

It looks interesting to me. They seem to have introduced a new "flat
panel" paradigm w.r.t. illumination. Will the two green levers allow
focusing the L and R eyepieces separately? Time will tell I guess.

John

> One look at that photo says they've blown it
> and that's a shame given how rare an opportunity this is for the
> consumer.

Hi Mike,

I think you are unreasonably harsh in your criticism, not having seen
the viewer.

George Themelis

George,

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, DrT (George Themelis) wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> I think you are unreasonably harsh in your criticism, not having seen
> the viewer.

My opening paragraph began with:

> I agree. It's premature to judge their design only by that photo, but
> the light panel appears to be way too thin.

Mike Davis