P3D Re: Classic Light Meter

["Dr. George A. Themelis" <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Wasn't talking about you specifically George.

Sorry! :-)

>After paying $150 for a camera, a $30 meter is *NOT* required to take
>good photos!

Please tell us where to buy the $30 lightmeter.... In my story, I 
exaggerated a bit... My new lightmeter was $45 and that was
back in 1988 when I got my Realist for $85.  I now use a $200 digital
lightmeter... but that has not made me a better photographer nor
has it improved the ratio of good exposures that I am getting now
vs. the brief time before the $45 and before the $200 light meters.
It has just made be more lazy at times...

>For that matter, why use the $30 one if it isn't necessary for
>award winning photographs?

It helps but it is not necessary.  I am not going to be carried away
and make statements that I don't believe.  Lightmeters help.  But 
they are not necessary to take award winning photographs.

>Might a beginner sometimes actually have money for a lightmeter?   :-)

Sure!  Then they should get it.  But if they don't have the money,
they should go ahead with stereo anyways.
    
>P.S. - I suspect a lot of people do well *with* a light meter too.

Definitely!  I never said that light meters are bad for anyone.
All I am saying is that they are not necessary to: 1) get started
in stereo photography, 2) get good pictures and decent exposures.

-- George Themelis


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