I have been a believer in shooting in camera converged and I have been doing so, but I think I am becoming a believer of shooting parallel. I wanted to see what the other shooters of stereo were thinking these days?
I should also add that John Schwartzman shot parallel on the current Spiderman and I thought the stereo was very well done and most of all very easy 3d to watch.
Below are the pros and cons of each in my mind. I see there are two reasons to shoot converged and 3 good reasons to shoot parallel
Pro Converged arguments:
1. There is a little, perhaps 5%, more perceived roundness on objects but you really-really have to be looking for it to notice it.
2. Its easier to shoot converged because it displays 3d well on the onset monitors unless you use a convergence box like a Davio.
Pro Parallel arguments:
1. I think it is an easier to view and resolve the 3d, because the sides work/fuse better because the cameras are pointed in the same general direction.
2. In post there is no Key-stoning to correct like there is in camera converged meaning potentially easier/faster post production.
3. Due to the nature of optics being very good but not perfectly square, keeping the anomalies of bend and barrel distortion of the two images pointed on the same points will make for a better match once blended in to one stereo image.
Here is a test I did, one is camera converged and one is parallel and converged in post . They are maybe 15 seconds apart with the same IO. The red letter on the left "C"=Converged and "P"=Parallel. Check them out here on youtube 3D:
What do you guys think these days?