Sorry to bring this back up, but I see a mention at:
http://www.ny3d.org/2008/07/nsa_convention_report.html
that there was a LEEP viewer with images in Grand Rapids.

While I know we have discussed, at some length, our views on
the LEEP viewer, camera and entire concept, is there anyone
who saw the offered LEEP images and who has anything new to
say concerning LEEP? I'm specifically _not_ looking for a
re-hash of everything which has come before. I'm
specifically looking for comments prompted by a recent
viewing of the LEEP images at Grand Rapids.

It may also be that Sheldon is mistaken and there weren't any
LEEP images there.
________________________________________
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

John Thurston writes:

> Sorry to bring this back up, but I see a mention at:
> http://www.ny3d.org/2008/07/nsa_convention_report.html
> that there was a LEEP viewer with images in Grand Rapids

Not only is this true but there was actually THREE leep viewers and
multiple images.

Ron Labbe set up a display in the Art Gallery with a custom, one-of-a-
kind viewing device with three separate LEEP viewers arranged in a
triangle around a central light source. If I got the story right Ron owns
two of the viewers and the custom stand, but borowed the third viewer to
complete the setup. I believe this originally belonged to Paul Wing.

I am sure that many people took images of this display, but couldn't
point you to a specific person. Perhaps a post on photo3d would identify
them and make images available.

As for my impression of the viewer and images - they were fine, but I
wasn't able to adjust the focus enough without my glasses so I didn't get
the full immersive experience as my glasses placed me too far from the
lenses.

My problem with LEEP images that I have seen so far (six or so images
here and about the same amount I was able to view in a meeting with Paul
Wing quite a while ago) is that they just aren't very sharp or clear and
almost always exhibit some window violations (or whatever you want to
call parts of the images being cut off by the edges of the images frame).
This may just be a case of the photographer and their choice of subject
and placement.

So the concept might be great and if executed with new quality glass
might be the most immersive and impressive stereo experience possible,
but right now I would consider a Mike Davis image in a Saturn viewer as
the very best thing stereo imaging can offer. In my opinion a perfectly
composed, exposed, and focused images will trump a wider field of view
every time.

Hope that helps,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "David W. Kesner"
wrote:

>

> Ron Labbe set up a display in the Art Gallery with a custom, one-

of-a-

> kind viewing device with three separate LEEP viewers arranged in a
> triangle around a central light source.

What was the subject matter of the views ? Were they recent images
or pictures made by Paul Wing ? (There are perhaps no more than two
LEEP cameras that are still working at the moment.)

> As for my impression of the viewer and images - they were fine,

but I

> wasn't able to adjust the focus enough without my glasses so I

didn't get

> the full immersive experience as my glasses placed me too far from

the

> lenses.

Was there an actual lever on the viewer to focus the lenses ? Mine
has a focusing lever, but I found out that a later version requires
to adjust and set the focus at the base and it is not so user
friendly - especially in an exhibition context.

> My problem with LEEP images that I have seen so far (six or so

images

> here and about the same amount I was able to view in a meeting

with Paul

> Wing quite a while ago) is that they just aren't very sharp or

clear


I think we have discussed that plenty on Photo 3D ! It's all a
matter of compromise.

> almost always exhibit some window violations (or whatever you want

to

> call parts of the images being cut off by the edges of the images

frame).


I am a bit puzzled by that comment as there is no stereo window to
speak off in a LEEP viewer given the view is so wide that I can't
see the edges of the picture. Besides, there is enough distortion
near the edges that the distortion gets more objectionable than any
other factor.

> This may just be a case of the photographer and their choice of

subject

> and placement.

Shooting with the LEEP is quite a learning experience. The absence
of a stereo window makes composing more critical.

> So the concept might be great and if executed with new quality

glass

> might be the most immersive and impressive stereo experience

possible


It would also be the most expensive !

Francois

Francois writes:

> What was the subject matter of the views ? Were they recent images
> or pictures made by Paul Wing ? (There are perhaps no more than two LEEP
> cameras that are still working at the moment.)

I do not know who took what images or even who actually owned the
individual images shown. I can't remember all the subjects, but I do
remember a close-up of a cat, a street scene with a car, and an interior
house shot.

> Was there an actual lever on the viewer to focus the lenses ?

Yes, all three of these had the focus lever. It worked better on one
viewer than the other two.

> I am a bit puzzled by that comment as there is no stereo window to
> speak off in a LEEP viewer given the view is so wide that I can't
> see the edges of the picture. Besides, there is enough distortion
> near the edges that the distortion gets more objectionable than any
> other factor.

I could see the edges (without my glasses) so there was a definite window
for me, and it was made much worse when I had to use my glasses and be
farther from the lenses. And yes, the distortion near the edges was bad.

> Shooting with the LEEP is quite a learning experience. The absence
> of a stereo window makes composing more critical.

The only way to not have a stereo window is to have image area outside
your vision range in all four directions. This was not the case for me
and the LEEP viewer, I could definitely see the edge of the image in all
four directions.

> It would also be the most expensive !

Agreed, but who knows what will be possible in future optical technology.

Thanks,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA