My personal favorite way to view MF3D is with either a 500W movie light about 3 ft behind the STL viewer or outside pointing almost to full sun. I like the maximum amount of light to open up the shadows and, I feel, maximize the Dmax of the image. The brightness makes the image seem more real...there is as much light hitting the eyes as there would be on a sunny day.

There is a certain maximum amount of light the STL viewer can take before it starts imposing a weird moire-like pattern onto the image.

I've experimented with more exposure to open up the shadows and allow for less light in the viewer, but I feel it brings too much overexposure of the skies and other highlights of the image.

BTW, I am using a Sputnik so all exposures are Sunny 16 eyeballed.

I bought the LED lighted viewer and I LOVE the focusing ability. What a treat to not need to wear my eyeglasses. But, I feel it really lacks the POP of a more powerful light. It seems fairly dim.

Also, I like changing the color temperature of the light towards warm to compensate for the blueness of the Fuji film. The movie light is tungsten-colored and also the morning/evening sun accomplish this similarly.

I would love to hear thoughts of those with more experience than I on this matter.

> My personal favorite way to view MF3D is with either a 500W movie light
> about 3 ft behind the STL viewer or outside pointing almost to full sun.

Do you wear sunglasses when you do this? :)

> There is a certain maximum amount of light the STL viewer can take before
> it starts imposing a weird moire-like pattern onto the image.

Moire pattern? Where does it come from? You should be able to answer your
own question since you have experience with high light intensity. I think
there is a fine point where there enough light and too much light.

> I bought the LED lighted viewer and I LOVE the focusing ability. What a
> treat to not need to wear my eyeglasses. But, I feel it really lacks the
> POP of a more powerful light. It seems fairly dim.

You can use the front port of the focusing viewer and the diffuser of the
standard viewer in the back and have the best of both worlds.

> Also, I like changing the color temperature of the light towards warm to
> compensate for the blueness of the Fuji film. The movie light is
> tungsten-colored and also the morning/evening sun accomplish this
> similarly.

I understand what you are saying. In 35mm stereo some people prefer the
Kodaslide II viewer with the AC bulb because of the warm light of this bulb,
as compared to the whiter halogen bulb in a Realist red button viewer.

But wouldn't it be better to use filters to get the image where you want it
to be when viewed with white light?

George

amuderick wrote:

>
> I've experimented with more exposure to open up the shadows and
> allow for less light in the viewer, but I feel it brings too much
> overexposure of the skies and other highlights of the image.
>
> BTW, I am using a Sputnik so all exposures are Sunny 16 eyeballed.

I can offer two suggestions.

1) Get a handheld lightmeter. I get very good results from the
Sekonic L-308S. It's compact, simple to use, takes one AA battery,
includes flash metering, and is not too expensive. Since I've been
using the L-308S I haven't had exposure trouble unless it was
operator error (forgetting to actually change the camera settings,
forgetting to change the meter ISO when switching film types). The
included belt case and lanyard make it easy to carry with you all
the time.

If you don't want to deal with batteries there is also the Sekonic
L-398A.

2) If you want to continue using Sunny 16 there are a few handy
exposure guides available. Exposure-Mat
<http://expomat.tripod.com/> is a free paper exposure calculator
that works by placing your film speed next to a description of the
scene brightness and then reading off the exposure settings. There
are links to other exposure calculators at the bottom of that web
page.

Expositor is an inexpensive iPhone/iPod Touch app that seems to be
based on Exposure-Mat and similar paper calculators.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |

Brian,

Thanks for the tips. I have an old Sekonic (no battery) that I use for
my 4x5 gear. But, I like to minimize my gear on the road (or
mountaintop). I don't think any of my exposures are wrong. It's just
that sometimes the photos have an extreme dynamic range...skies to
shadows. I feel that the opening up the exposure to make the shadows
more visible isn't the right choice. Then the highlights are lost and
saturation is decreased. Instead, I slam the slide with more light
during viewing. That solves the problem IMHO. The problem, I feel, is
that the 3D world backlit viewer doesn't offer enough lumination.

Aaron

Brian Reynolds wrote:

>
>
> amuderick wrote:
> >
> > I've experimented with more exposure to open up the shadows and
> > allow for less light in the viewer, but I feel it brings too much
> > overexposure of the skies and other highlights of the image.
> >
> > BTW, I am using a Sputnik so all exposures are Sunny 16 eyeballed.
>
> I can offer two suggestions.
>
> 1) Get a handheld lightmeter. I get very good results from the
> Sekonic L-308S. It's compact, simple to use, takes one AA battery,
> includes flash metering, and is not too expensive. Since I've been
> using the L-308S I haven't had exposure trouble unless it was
> operator error (forgetting to actually change the camera settings,
> forgetting to change the meter ISO when switching film types). The
> included belt case and lanyard make it easy to carry with you all
> the time.
>
> If you don't want to deal with batteries there is also the Sekonic
> L-398A.
>
> 2) If you want to continue using Sunny 16 there are a few handy
> exposure guides available. Exposure-Mat
> <http://expomat.tripod.com/ <http://expomat.tripod.com/>> is a free
> paper exposure calculator
> that works by placing your film speed next to a description of the
> scene brightness and then reading off the exposure settings. There
> are links to other exposure calculators at the bottom of that web
> page.
>
> Expositor is an inexpensive iPhone/iPod Touch app that seems to be
> based on Exposure-Mat and similar paper calculators.
>
> --
> Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
> reynolds@panix.com | You push some
> buttons and see
> http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ <http://www.panix.com/%7Ereynolds/> |
> what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
> NAR# 54438 |
>
>

I think the moire pattern comes from internal reflections in the viewer due to the brightness.  I will try mixing and matching the viewer parts.As for filters, I like having flexibility after the fact vs. setting things in stone.  I am experimenting with duplicating and might look into filtering the dupes.

Thanks!
Aaron

DrT (George Themelis) wrote:

 

> My personal favorite way to view MF3D is with either a 500W movie light
> about 3 ft behind the STL viewer or outside pointing almost to full sun.

Do you wear sunglasses when you do this? :)

> There is a certain maximum amount of light the STL viewer can take before
> it starts imposing a weird moire-like pattern onto the image.

Moire pattern? Where does it come from? You should be able to answer your
own question since you have experience with high light intensity. I think
there is a fine point where there enough light and too much light.

> I bought the LED lighted viewer and I LOVE the focusing ability. What a
> treat to not need to wear my eyeglasses. But, I feel it really lacks the
> POP of a more powerful light. It seems fairly dim.

You can use the front port of the focusing viewer and the diffuser of the
standard viewer in the back and have the best of both worlds.

> Also, I like changing the color temperature of the light towards warm to
> compensate for the blueness of the Fuji film. The movie light is
> tungsten-colored and also the morning/evening sun accomplish this
> similarly.

I understand what you are saying. In 35mm stereo some people prefer the
Kodaslide II viewer with the AC bulb because of the warm light of this bulb,
as compared to the whiter halogen bulb in a Realist red button viewer.

But wouldn't it be better to use filters to get the image where you want it
to be when viewed with white light?

George

>> My personal favorite way to view MF3D is with either a 500W movie light
>> about 3 ft behind the STL viewer or outside pointing almost to full sun.
>>
>> Do you wear sunglasses when you do this? :)
>>

Actually, to increase the overall
IQ of stereo viewing, the potential lies in the lighting system, then
next the optics. The reason is, our eye at 2.5 - 3mm diameter pupil
has tremendous MTF vs. a 4 - 5mm pupil.... our vision is optimized for
very small apertures, and it takes "daylight" levels of light to drive
our pupils to these small diameters. A 500 Watt bulb pushes about 10k
- 15k lumens. But losses are high, due to the inability to control the
light pattern... all lighting falls at the inverse of the square....
So my guess is, under a best case scenario through the STL diffuser you
will measure about 5 - 8k lumens, vs. about 1k lumens of the 3d World
back lit viewer. Clearly an improvement, but since ours pupils reacts
to stops of lights, (due to the tremendous dynamic range) it takes a lot
more light to drive your pupils down to optimum size. Try pointing the
STL viewer directly overhead at the sun, on a sunny day.... that will
deliver about 30k lumens of light on the film. But since the film eats
up several stops of light, there is even more room for improvement,
specially for young people, whose pupils dilate down to 2 - 2.5mm....
for someone 55+, this is more than sufficient light. Pupil size plays a
big part....


And yes, you are right, the film will open up another 3 - 4 stops of
data with these levels of light, surely a treat. However, this level
of light does not come cheap.... a custom LED light box I had designed
would cost a few grand to reproduce them in low volume, AND there is
nothing commercially available with these light intensities. Even
though LED's have tremendous efficiency vs. any other type of light, the
box still pulls 700 watts. This includes the power draw of the
required fans for heat removal...

>> There is a certain maximum amount of light the STL viewer can take before
>> it starts imposing a weird moire-like pattern onto the image.
>>
>
> Moire pattern? Where does it come from? You should be able to answer your
> own question since you have experience with high light intensity. I think
> there is a fine point where there enough light and too much light.
>

IMO, daylight reproduction is enough light
:-) The cheap diffusers on these viewers are not designed for ultra
bright levels of light, specially from distance sources, as grain on the
diffuser can project their grain a bit .... hey, for $30, its a steal...

> But wouldn't it be better to use filters to get the image where you want it
> to be when viewed with white light?
>

Agreed...... properly exposed Fuji
film (5500k daylight balanced), will render colors excellent with 5500 -
6000k back lighting.... but not all captures offer 5500k daylight color
temp, in which case, it makes more sense to filter the incoming light at
capture, so the film records the correct colors.... PITA for sure, you
need a color meter and lots of filters to carry... this is one of the
reasons I think shooting film is just too complicated for the avg.
person in this modern digital era. Post processing is the solution to
so many capture shortcomings. The numbers George tossed around for
film shooters is dismal.... and will only get worse through time.

As for trying to bring others into MF stereo.... I think it would be
hard... too many obstacles...for some, the cost of film/processing is
too high....and its harder to get good MF images vs. 35mm...for one, the
shutter speeds are 2 stops slower for same DOF...and with 100 ISO film,
shooting in ideal light for chromes, your shutter speeds require little
or no wind.... not too mention, tripods are mandatory, no Wide Angle
option, etc.

B

> George
>
>
>

>> BTW, I am using a Sputnik so all exposures are Sunny 16 eyeballed.

Chrome film has such a small exposure tolerance
range, even with a good meter and lots of experience, you will find it
is still hard to nail exposure perfect on every shot...without a meter,
you are pretty much restricted to mid day sun with no
clouds....(otherwise, its too hard to see changes of light with your
eyes) Mid day sun creates too much dynamic range within a scene,
unless it has NO shadows..... the film can not record high dynamic
range. Shoot for a 3 - 4 stop scene, which requires diffused light or
the the sun below the horizon. Hence why you enjoyed the bright back
lighting so much, you are plugging your shadows... read up on how to
expose chromes for a starter, you will find, if you shoot in diffused
lighting, and use a meter, chrome film is still the most gorgeous medium
to look at...

Bill G wrote:

> As for trying to bring others into MF stereo.... I think it would be
> hard... too many obstacles...for some, the cost of film/processing is
> too high....and its harder to get good MF images vs. 35mm...for one, the
> shutter speeds are 2 stops slower for same DOF...and with 100 ISO film,
> shooting in ideal light for chromes, your shutter speeds require little
> or no wind.... not too mention, tripods are mandatory, no Wide Angle
> option, etc.

Yes . . yes . . . yes . . . HEY! Wha'da'ya mean "no wide
angle option"?

I'm shooting 55mm lenses on my TL120-55 and offered anyone
here the option of getting the board required to do the
same. Ok it isn't _really_ wide, but its a whole lot wider
than it is narrow and it _is_ an option :)
--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

> I'm shooting 55mm lenses on my TL120-55 and offered anyone
> here the option of getting the board required to do the
> same. Ok it isn't _really_ wide, but its a whole lot wider
> than it is narrow and it _is_ an option :)
>

oooops, sorry, forgot about that
offer.... I use 47's so i don't need em, did you have any takers on the
55's ? A nice option vs. the 80's...

Bill G wrote:

>> I'm shooting 55mm lenses on my TL120-55 and offered anyone
>> here the option of getting the board required to do the
>> same. Ok it isn't _really_ wide, but its a whole lot wider
>> than it is narrow and it _is_ an option :)
>>
>
> oooops, sorry, forgot about that
> offer.... I use 47's so i don't need em, did you have any takers on the
> 55's ? A nice option vs. the 80's...

Yes, as I recall I had eight boards made. I know that at
least four of them were turned into usable cameras. Mine
was out a couple weeks ago.
--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us