Path: utzoo!utgpu!utfyzx!alias!pearce%alias
From: pearce%alias@csri.utoronto.ca (Andrew Pearce)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: polarized film?
Message-ID: <481@alias.UUCP>
Date: 11 Oct 89 15:46:40 GMT
References: <475@alias.UUCP> <65539@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: pearce@alias.UUCP
Reply-To: pearce%alias@csri.utoronto.ca (Andrew Pearce)
Organization: Alias Research, Dammit
Lines: 15

In article <65539@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> william c ray <ray@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes:
|Well, I may just be an idiot, and someone may have some magical way of doing
|2 polarized images overlaid on the same piece of film, (and Pixars may drop
|to $15 tomorrow...)  But if I were to do a polarized 3d film, and I'm only a
|punky undergrad, with no experience here, I would project *2* simultaneous
|strips usicross polarized polarizers, one on each projector,...
| Will Ray

Well, no, I wouldn't do this. Does the projectionist really have
to worry about two reels of film and about threading them through the
projectors so they start at the IDENTICAL frame each time the films are
spooled up? Not to mention the problems with aligning the projectors on the
screen. I thought of this method but dismissed it as too stupid, we live in
an age of wonders and technology, don't we?