Re: LOREO OR BEAM SPLITTER?

[P3D Charles D Hotchkiss <revcdh@xxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 16 Sep 1996 01:17:46 -0500 P3D Clifford L Davis <mr.3-d@xxxxxxxx>
writes:
>Hi everybody! I was going to buy a LOREO point and shoot, but somebody
>told me they are not too much better quality than a 
Hi,
The Loreo isn't bad.  You need to take the older models apart and paint
some parts that are, but shouldn't be reflective.  Then it takes pretty
good pictures and when you are lucky very good pictures.  I had a Franka
Splitter and I didn't have much luck with it.  The images are a little
sharper, but there is still a lot of glass involved and the Frank has
front surface mirrors which cause some ghosting.
I just got a letter from the vice president of the Delta Queen Steamship
Company expressing delight with a series of stereo prints (mounted in
Q-Vues) that I made of the American Queen while it was marooned in
Cincinnati earlier this year.
The Loreo isn't a Nikon, but it's not bad.  One other thing, the Loreo
flash is wimpy and needs 400 asa film at a minimum.  I prefer the grain
pattern of 200 asa  so I use a little, cheap ($12.00) slave flash.
No 3D system is perfect and it's always a little bit hit and miss, but
when it works, it's terrific.
Charlie H.


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