P3D Re: Why different?

[Klaas Morcus <k.morcus@xxxxxx>]

John Goodman wrote:
> 
> 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
What a   G R E A T  posting John!!  I'll print it out. Thanks very much.
Klaas
-- 
mailto:k.morcus@xxxxxx