Not sure which part of the question to look at but I suppose it would be the astronomy side of things.
Amateur astronomers use motorised mounts that have large databases of objects on a handset or can be connected to computers via serial, they use apps. like stellarium or starry night pro to control what the telescope points at and can be made to be very accurate. It's possible to use what's called a dual mount bar and mount 2 of the same size telescope + 1 extra scope and 'co-align' the pair of scopes onto the same object (I'll explain what the 3rd scope is for in a minute). The dual mount bar would put the telescopes about 24"-30" apart. That would be a cheap way to do it, up to you what you use for cameras, you could use something as simple as an SPC880pc philips webcam.
You could also get 2 of the same mount, 4 telescopes (I'll explain why 4 in a mo, 2 pairs) and place them pretty much any distance you like apart. Although they've obviously got to be able to see the same object and in the night sky preferably, unless you want to look at the sun, do not *ever* look at the sun with binoculars or a telescope or your mates will be calling you cyclops, your eyesight will be gone within seconds!!
So, what's the extra telescope for in each method? Astronomers sometimes use what's called a 'guide scope' which is a dedicated telescope that takes a 'guide camera', this is a dedicated camera that is used to lock on to a target star, to keep the telescope aligned perfectly with the object you are tracking. This is necessary because the gears in at least amateur astronomy mounts have inherent errors, which will show up every now and again by your guide star moving, the guide camera is connected to software that looks out for these movements or 'periodic errors' and as soon as it sees your 'guide star' move 0.25pixels it will nudge the mounts motors and put the guide star back in position. Using a guide camera also cancels any misalignment between the mount/telescope and the celestial pole (about 0.75degrees off the pole star, polaris).
You could also adapt a pair of pan/tilt mounted cameras to do a similar job, just set the alt axis at the same angle as your latitude and align the centre of the latitude axis with the pole star, it won't be as accurate but would track an object well enough for a while, as long as you could set the camera to do 1 revolution per day.
Here are some links to the types of kit you might use:
PC controlled GEM mount:http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatc ... nscan.html
A reasonable/cheapish telescope, although I'd prefer a 66mm as it will give a bigger FOV:http://www.firstlightoptics.com/william ... g-apo.htmlhttp://www.firstlightoptics.com/equinox ... o-ota.html
and maybe something small and cheap like the startravel 80 at the top of the page:http://www.modernastronomy.com/telescop ... actors.htm
For the guide camera I would choose something simple like a long exposure modified spc900nc/spc880nc philips webcam.
and a dual mount bar to strap telescopes to:http://www.astro-engineering.com/images ... 2%20sq.jpg
For a main imaging cameras I would look at something that can do hd video, so probably a canon 500d DSLR (Amateur astronomers regularly use DSLRs for long exposure imaging, particularly canon). This might seem like it's quite an expensive project but in reality this is probably around the lower end of amateur astronomy gear, that having been said it's quite likely that you should be able to find a couple of people with the same mount/telescope with only the guidescope/camera being different.
All of this would need some software to control it all, you would control the skywatcher HEQ mount using free software called 'EQMod' which improves the resolution of the motors way beyond what the skywatcher handset can achieve. http://eq-mod.sourceforge.net/
It gives you 9024000 steps per revolution, which works out to 0.143617 per arc second.
To tell the mount where to point the scope you would use something like stellarium or starry night pro. The former being free.
And to control the guide camera I would use PHD (push here dummy) Guiding from stark labs. http://www.stark-labs.com/phdguiding.html
I'm still not certain that this would give you any kind of depth perception for stars, I think it might well work on the moon and the sun (Don't look at the sun with a telescope, it burns quicker than you can say 'why's it gone dark?!!), jupiter probably, but I just don't see it happening with being able to see a constellation for instance, in 3d. I think the distances are too great for our eyes/brain to be able to process the information, the closest star is something in the order of 26 trillion miles away. The other issue you might have is our atmosphere being a dome will likely be more likely the kind of 3d effect you might get, which combine together to make it naturally look the stars are being projected onto the inside of a dome.
BTW. looking at the burning man stereoscope thing, I believe it's making whatever you are looking at appear a lot closer than it is, as you go up in diameter of the mirror the bigger I expect it to get a zoom effect (given the focal length).