I think in that case "likelike" would be a much better term because IMHO it is impossible for any 2D image no matter how good to convey the sense of real space 3D photography gives you, even mediocre 3D photography.... JCO -----Original Message----- From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 3D quality in a lens?
On 11 Nov 2004 at 21:22, Don Sanderson wrote: > What is meant when a lens is described as having > a "great 3 dimensional quality"? > Or "it gives photos a 3 dimensional feel"? > I've heard this term used several times in describing > lenses, mostly WA's. > How does a lens lend a 3D quality to a photograph? I think the term is referring to a lens which imparts very little of it's own character on an image. If a lens provides low geometric and colour distortion and an nice smooth rendition of OOF areas and highlights then the images it produces tend to look "natural" or "3D". That's my take on it FWIW. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
