RE: [photo-3d] RE: Loreo Thoughts

[drinaldo <drinaldo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

THE VOICE OF REASON FINALLY 


-----Original Message-----
From:	Joseph Petrarca [SMTP:jpetrarca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:	Tuesday, November 28, 2000 10:28 AM
To:	photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:	[photo-3d] RE: Loreo Thoughts

Subject: Re: Re: Loreo Thoughts
   Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:17:24 -0500
   From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" <drt-3d@xxxxxxx>


	Can you recommend a Realist to an old lady (apologies to
	all old ladies in this list) or to child?  There is a good
	portion of our population that would be very happy with
	a Loreo.

	George Themelis
George-
I would recommend a Realist to anyone.  I think it embodies all the
mechanics of basic Photography and while it does not DEMAND an understanding
of the basic principals, it certainly offers the potential to learn, as does
any fully-manual camera with seperate light meter.  I started on the
venerable Argus C3 when I was a child.  I managed to figure out the basics
myself starting with sunny16 (printed on the film box)- eventually obtained
a meter (years later), started developing and printing, got into stereo, and
advanced 35mm cameras.  Keep in mind, this is no longer the 1950's...most of
us, even older folks and especially kids, are using highly sophisticated
computers, faxes, MP3 players, CD's, DVD's, etc, etc. and manage to
continually learn new hardware, software and troubleshooting techniques.
Compared to all of this, an Argus C3 or a Stereo Realist is a stone ax.  I
would think the visual effect "bang-for-the-buck" seems to be much greater
with a SR than a Loreo and just ain't that difficult to learn/
PS- I just read your SR book-nice job!

Joseph Petrarca