I'm not saying adjusting parallax doesn't make some shots look better. I'm just saying that real depth is determined by the IA distance, and that doesn't change. If it looks better, that's what's important, but some of my shots don't look better with greater positive parallax. They look worse, especially some of the closer shots. That's probably personal preference, but for me some objects need to come forward more. Adding positive parallax for most or all shots, it seems to me, is counter-productive.
Actually it is a function of more than just the IA. considering this is an imaginary illusion, it becomes a function of IA + lens focal length, screen size, screen viewing size, screen plane push, I/O and alignment of your eyes, to name a few. In the DVD that comes with Mendiburo's book he demonstrates these functions and how the positions of objects and screen ( point of zero parallax) change. It is really very complex issue with hundreds of parameters that interact with each other. It is such a complex function that he could not describe it in the drawings in the book which is why he resorted to a 3D animation in 3D studio Max on the included video.
Joe- I recall the JVC sales rep at NAB pointing out how the adjustment could be done which is the same end result as the Sony, just different controls. I was a bit confused when Frank claimed this didn't exist on the JVC. After all he owns the JVC and I don't. Regardless- when it comes to these adjustments and the affects on screen, I find my observations often differ with Frank's.
In many of Frank's experiments, I found the parallax excessive and painful to see yet he felt comfortable with it. In the Garden project, early on we discussed the z depth of the many scenes and The result you ended up with is not just very good 3D, it is actually relaxing to watch. The 3D is most often subtle. In my projects to date, I do push the envelope at times with some in your face and off in the distance extremes. I think Mark has a tendency to push this more often in his projects. Not saying this is bad, just different. It's about style. But some people get annoyed and uncomfortable while others, like Frank, may see this as just adequate for "good" 3D.
The bottom line for this is that because stereoscopic 3D is an illusion, different people will see it differently. I have now placed the production of 3D in that mystic category of "Beauty is in the eyes and mind" of the beholder. The only safe way to achieve the best for large audiences is to not exceed the limits of the known rules of thumb.
Frank- FYI- I have the same 32" Vizio monitor here and use it as a secondary 3D monitor on my computer for viewing the work in Vegas.