Re: overheads (was: Meters for lecture hall)

["RAUBER, JOEL" <JOEL_RAUBER@SDSTATE.EDU>]

de gustibus non est disputandem

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sampere [mailto:sampere@PHYSICS.SYR.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:26 AM
> To: PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
> Subject: Re: overheads (was: Meters for lecture hall)
>
>
> I'd much rather live with a document camera than deal with
> keystoning problems
> that overheads present.
>
> sam
>
> Larry Smith wrote:
>
> > At 10:02 AM -0400 4/18/01, Michael Edmiston wrote:
> >
> > > Therefore I am completely aware that the cost of using TV
> cameras in class
> > > is prohibiting some people from doing it.  However, I
> maintain it will
> > > eventually replace the "overhead projector" and I have
> decided not to invest
> > > any more of my effort into tools for overhead projectors.
> >
> > My comments have nothing to do with projection meters per
> se, but aside
> > from the cost, there is another reason I think overhead
> projectors won't be
> > replaced by TV cameras or document cameras: the overhead
> projectors have a
> > much greater resolution.  I love my document camera (Elmo)
> for many things
> > and use it often.  It has some flexibility overhead
> projectors don't (for
> > example I teach HP calculators by putting the calculator on
> the Elmo), but
> > for fine detail diagrams I've yet to find anything as good,
> cheap, and
> > convenient as the overhead transparencies.
> >
> > Larry