beamsplitters/nitpickers

["allan carrano" <allan.carrano@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

     I don't see anything wrong with calling those attachments to lenses 
     for creating stereo pairs, beamsplitters.  When the conversation is 
     stereo photography, I think there is little chance for confusion as to 
     what a beamsplitter is.  
     
     Carrying this reasoning to the absurd, I can relate an incident that 
     would suggest we find a new name for "stereo"  photography.  At a 
     local film developing outlet, I told the young lady waiting on me that 
     I wanted my E-6 film processed only.  She tried to convince me that 
     they did a very good job in mounting slides.  I explained these were 
     "stereo" slides, and doubted they could do the mounting.  She looked a 
     little puzzled and turned to a fellow employee, asking:  "Can we mount 
     slides with a sound track?"  True story!  The point is, a newbie is 
     always going to be confused, even when we use the right terminology.  
     
     I can also accept stereopticon for stereoscope with just a little more 
     stretch than the beamsplitting inaccuracy.  At some point the line 
     will probably have to be drawn, admittedly, but not this far up the 
     chain.  I hate to think my hobby will gravitate toward a pseudo 
     sophistication of ultra precise terminology.  THAT will turn off 
     newbie interest more than our being a little sloppy with nomenclature.
     
     Allan
     


------------------------------