P3D Re: Why different?

["John Goodman" <jgood@xxxxxxxx>]

RE "Why [would people need] different cameras of the 
same [Realist] format?"
George wrote

> The question was why "different"?  For example, why
> a Realist, a Kodak, a Revere, a Wollensak, TDC Vivid,
> TDC Colorist I, TDC Colorist II, and not 8 Realists?

For the pleasure of their very different personalities, of 
course.   :-)

With not quite a year of stereo shooting under my belt, I've 
only used two among the above group, and have examined 
two additional others. Any of the above can yield great 
shots, naturally, but they are as different as different 
people are, each with its own virtues and limitations, if you 
will, its own "character". This "character" affects a large 
portion of my experience when using these kinds of 
camera, and I imagine this intimate relationship with one's 
equipment is a common thing among photographers.

Even among the few Realists I've used, each seems to 
have a strong personality, despite their being essentially 
the same design, and to coax out the best results requires 
getting to know each one individually. (Preaching to the 
choir?  :-))

I recently acquired a Custom, and though I "know" that any 
Realist in good adjustment when stopped down to f. 11 will 
deliver beautiful results, darned if there isn't something 
special about this particular camera. It has a great deal of 
character, perhaps even nobility (as well as a few 
shortcomings), and it communicates this, so for me the 
results it makes possible have a special tang. Ditto for 
anyone's camera that's loved, I would imagine.

JG