What was photographer doing?

[DerbyBorn]

On a recent holiday I saw a photographer fiddling with his camera and tripod. He was positioning it with great care. He took a photo and then carefully moved it toward his subject by a couple of inches and took another. He kept repeating this for as long as I could see him. I couldn't see what the subject was as it was hidden by a boat. It could have been a bridge parapet. Was it some sort of artistic technique he was using? I was intrigued but was on the opposite side of the Grand Canal in Venice so I couldn't get a close look.

[Scott M]

Either making a stop motion sequence or just wanted to was bracketing[1] to get exactly the artistically correct shot.

[1] Usually denotes taking photos at a range of exposures, but can't see why it can't be applied to a range of distances.

[Jon Fairbairn]

Possibly focus stacking or animating a travelling shot, I?d guess, if he really was moving it towards the subject.

[Chris J Dixon]

He could have been seeking a particular effect of perspective or depth of field.

Maybe he was trying to reproduce the view in a painting, and was incrementing his viewpoint so that he could later select the closest match.

Alternatively, perhaps he wanted to create a video fly-through.

Chris

[Jethro_uk]

Not sure about moving forwards, but my Panasonic Lumix has a 3D feature where you take 2 snaps side-by-side ...

[Graham.]

Perhaps the poor fellow suffers from OCD.

[Andrew Mawson]

He was the "distraction" working as part of a team dipping your pockets and nicking your iPhone :)

Andrew

[Adam Funk]

What do you use for stereographic viewing?

[John Williamson]

There are programs that will let you produce either side by side pairs for a stereograph or anaglyphs to use the red/ green specs.

Fuji did and may still sell a twin lens camera with a 3D display on the back, and offer a service to print 3D prints from the files it produces with lenticular surfaces so you don't need glasses to view them.

I have a Sony compact camera that will produce 3D images for display on a 3D TV set, and which can be printed using a third party program, without moving the camera using a single lens and two exposures. I haven't a *clue* how it does it, but it seems to work well.

[Jethro_uk]

I lost interest (well filed it away for a rainy day research project) when I realised there was a wealth of stuff out there. What started my interest was buying a new passive-3D TV (3D wasn't the reason for buying) and remembering the camera had a 3D mode. AIR (I'm not that keen a photographer) you select it, and take the photo panning across the subject. The camera takes a series of pictures that can be processed into a 3D image.

it's that last bit where the work gets done ;)

[Graham.]

Why re-invent the (er) reel.

[damduck-egg]

Wonder if you can get anything for my Weetabix viewer.

After 50 years my pictures are well out of date and a bit worn.

G.Harman

[John Williamson]

If you have the source material, there are many free programs that will print the cards.

I have also seen quite a few 19th and early 20th Century cards to print out for sterographs on the internet. These may work with the Weetabix viewer after a trim.

[Rick Hughes]

A zoom lens would do that a lot easier

[John Williamson]

No. A zoom lens will let you zoom in without changing the view's perspective. Moving the camera between shots changes the perspective between shots, giving a more natural effect.

[Clive George]

And AIUI the combination is how they did some of the shots in Vertigo.

[John Williamson]

Yes, if you get it right, moving into or out of the scene while keeping the main object the same size by using the zoom can be very disconcerting.

[Adam Funk]

Interesting, thanks.

[Adam Funk]

Weird!