Re: Free Realist Help by DrT.

[P3D <PTWW@xxxxxxx>]

>Thanks for your comments. I had thought so, that you had bought a Realist
>from Dr.T and that the light leak was from someone he had sold a Realist
>from the posts on P3D.

Yes, he did eventually explain this publicly.  What was not pointed
out was that the back on this camera was *so* loose that an expert like
him certainly should not have needed to run a test roll of film through
the camera to discover the problem, which was what he used as his defense.
But as I said, he was very fair in his dealings with me after I pointed
out my surprise at the problem.  He even sent me a free roll of film for
having had to pay postage to send the camera back to him for repair.
Also, he had repeatedly tried to tell me to use my money for something
else in stereo photography, that I shouldn't need a 2nd Realist.  I was
afraid of a camera failure during my extensive fall travels (recall one
of three rolls I shot a year earlier with a borrowed Revere was totally
blank due to a camera problem), and also wanted to experiment with prints
in addition to slides.  Dr. T decided to send me the camera to use for
no charge during the trip, but I insisted I did not feel right about that.

> BTW did you get it for $100 as he mentions always.

I think that is in the ballpark of what he pays for them; he sells them
for a little more.  He said after Rochester he raised his price to $125,
though I forget what the old price supposedly was.  It is still a good
value.  What was very amusing, though, was that he had vehemently told
me that the $159 I paid at a camera store for my first Realist 6 months
earlier was way too much.  Then when we got to discussing what he had
available, he said he had one for $125, or a "newer" model for $175.
I had no idea about the distinction, and asked him to explain.  It
turns out my $159 camera was a newer model like the one he was selling
for $175.  But he still wouldn't admit I got a good buy on mine...he
always compares to what he *pays* for them.

         1         2         3         4         5         6         7
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345


>I had requested the VM stereomatic proj.

I suspected this was what you were talking about.

>and the TDC projector.

Which TDC did you want, the 716 or 116?

>I 
>said no, that I am still interested in the TDC when the next day he emails
>me, saying that he decided to sell it to some else. Can you believe it.

I'm very disappointed to hear he did that, after publicly stating first
come, no exceptions.

> He then goes on to say to me
>that he has no choice but to sell it to the other person that was first
>and that he had made a mistake with the times of who was first. This
>was because he has two email accounts.

I often send my mail to him to both accounts, and certainly would have
for the first-come sale offer!

>And we are all allowed to make mistakes. But he
>didn't follow any strict policy in the TDC and didn't apologise for
>it. 

That is certainly not fair treatment.

>Sorry Grant, but will have to disagree with you on this one

Thanks for the rapid support on that point.  I'm almost always in digest
mode, so by the time I get something, prepare a reponse and get it into
another digest, it is usually quite a bit later.

Paul Talbot, trying to figure out if he is going to get *any* work
             done this week at all!


>Be careful with those fractions Grant!  Actually, last night Jim and I were
>talking about fractional bracketing.  The aperture markings of the Realist
>are closely spaced dots.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, but my recollection of my Realist is that
the dots are very widely spaced at the wide-open end, and very narrowly
spaced at the closed down end.  My modern SLR lenses have evenly spaced
aperture markings, with indents at each full stop differential.  (Some
SLR lenses have 1/2 stop indents.)  The camera body has electronic
exposure control adjustment calibrated in 1/3 stop increments.  One of
the shortcomings of the Realist is that it is not quite as easy to
achieve precision aperture control, due to the non-linear scaling of
the aperture dial, especially in the f/16 to f/22 range.

>  The best one can do is go in-between for half stop increments.

I'm sorry to have to be contrary, but this is not a completely
accurate statement of fact.  My later model Realist has the "Red
Dot" simplified approach to help the less sophisticated user get
passable results.  (Dr T, what is the correct Realist terminology
for this?  And please correct me if the aperture dot is on all
Realists; I know that one of my Realists has one fewer red dot(s)
than the other.)  The aperture Red Dot is between f/5.6 and f/8.
(f/6.8 would be halfway, but I thought the mark always looked like
it says 6.3; either the paint is worn or the mark is not right at
half-way).  It is certainly not at all difficult to place the
aperture ring half-way between the red dot and either f/5.6 or f/8,
yielding pretty accurate 1/4 stop control.  With other settings, it
is admittedly quite difficult to distinguish between, for example,
"1/4 stop down from f/11" vs. "1/3 stop down from f/11."  If anyone
on the list professes a need to accurately distinguish between
f/12.4 and f/12.8 on their Realist, I will support Dr. T when he
asserts that they are excessively meticulous with their exposure
*as compared to average* but I will have absolutely no objection
to their using that standard if it improves their enjoyment of
their pictures.)  I'd have to go check the camera to be sure, but
my best recollection is that between f/11 and f/16, you can still
tell the difference between "more than half way" and "less than half
way."  Above, f/16, I do not attempt anything more than 1/2 stop
accuracy with the Realist.  Of course, the above is all subject to
the caveat that because the scale on the Realist is not linear,
1/2 way in between is not quite the same as 1/2 stop.  Perhaps the
red dot is physically half-way, which would explain the difference 
between the calculated half stop value of f/6.8 and my recollection
of an f/6.3 marking.

Dr. T (and all other photographers) I strongly encourage you to
shoot a formal "exposure test" roll of slide film with your Realist
(or camera of choice) if you have never done so.  It is just amazing
(at least to me) when you see with your own eyes what the difference
is with such *seemingly* slight exposure differences.

If you have not done this procedure before, please note that the
fine adjustments of exposure must be made using the aperture control,
not the shutter speed.  Most cameras allow continuous incremental
adjustment of the aperture, but finite adjustment of the shutter
speed.

Paul Talbot


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