Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Sam A.
McCandless" <samcc@v...> wrote:
> At 3:47 PM +0000 5/22/03, jim hayes wrote:
> >[snip] ... as I moved my head (mine, not printhead) up and down 
> >under my OTT-lite, the streaks moved! It turned out my progressive 
> >glasses created a tiny difraction line which just looked like roller 
> >marks! So an oldish guy is baffled again by his (progressive) 
> >bifocals!!<g> [snip]
> 
> 
> But "progressive" lenses - specifically polarized SOLA/Sola's or 
> Varilux - have been recommended to me, both for viewing the screen 
> and for other close but variable-distance viewing, not just of prints 
> but also of something being photographed from a short distance away, 
> topographic maps on the screen of a notebook computer in the 
> passenger seat, etc.
> 
> So I'd appreciate any advice about any or all of this, especially 
> since both with and without my old glasses, I found the entries in 
> the Photoshop palettes dismayingly small on Apple's LCDs on a recent 
> visit to an Apple Store.
> 

Sam,

Don't worry about it much. I had an 18 watt "vison-saver" model
OTT-Lite trained on a step wedge uniform shadow area from about 6
inches or so away. And I could barely see the "fake" lines. Of course
it upset me at the time, as I didn't want ANY marks on my photorag. I
just discount them now when they pop up- they are really at the limit
of vision, viewing under ideal conditions, at the right obtuse angle.
My glasses have two of them built in each lens I think.

I chose a Zeiss glass(!) version of progresive lenses, but I'ld
probably go plastic Varilux if I had to do again, simply from safety
aspect.

I think there may be more problems looking through a camera viewfinder
than anything else like a monitor.
Jim Hayes