Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Hi,

I'd like clarification of a paragraph in the PR book (3rd edition), please!

At the bottom of page 47 it says:

"When in Photofocus, the print on the page is probably blurred. That is okay, because to see the blip, you must place your focal plane at some distance away. To have clarity up close, you will need to relax your eyes and have the focal plane move in."

OK - "When in Photofocus, the print on the page is probably blurred". Fine, I get the blip page and the text is out of focus. My eyes are still effectively focussed on the wall, which I used to diverge my eyes and then I glance down to the book.

However, "To have clarity up close, you will need to relax your eyes and have the focal plane move in." So, do we have to move "the focal plane in"?

--

Do you see what my question is? I find the quoted paragraph ambiguous and confusing! The first sentence says Photofocus should be blurred. The last paragraph says it shouldn't be blurred and the focal plane should be moved.

Can people please clarify what is meant to happen?

Many thanks,

AJ

[This message has been edited by boomyboomy (edited February 08, 2003).]






Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
hey donīt worry . you can see everything blurry that has no problem.
I kwon the paragrath says two things. But in here in the forum everybody who could make phing work, says that you can see everything blur.
So donīt worry see the blip and Blur.
Komplicado






Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
No need to force it, just keep relaxed and stay with it... you'll develop the clarity over time. The blurred is fine, the clarity that Paul talks about comes with experience.

The blurred focus is perfect for beginners and once the eyes get used to doing this focus on a regular basis you can notice the clarity that Paul speaks about.

Alex






Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Edit: This is in reply to Komplicado. AlexK must have posted whilst I was typing.

--

That's what I originally thought until I saw the stereoreading page.
http://www.debateit.net/stereoreading/

Using this, the text is very sharp, as is the magic eye image behind it. This made me go back and reread the PR book and then I came across the aforementioned paragraph.

It certainly makes more sense to me that the subconscious could understand it better if it was in sharp focus. But then again, this is PR...

AJ

[This message has been edited by boomyboomy (edited February 08, 2003).]






Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
AlexK - OK, so if sharp focus is something that is learnt as you photoread, I take it that it IS necessary.

Therefore, beginner photoreaders who have blurred vision will absorb nothing from the photoreading step?

Hence, do I take it that beginners do the photoreading step to gain EXPERIENCE of the whole PRMS rather than to actually 'photoread'?

AJ






Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
MAN! I am confused now!
Is it better Phed with the same focus of the stereoreading focus ?
I have already put a question that looks like these but with this post I got confused.
So is it a better Focus when you are with the stereoreading focus ?
Thanks.






Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Member
OP Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Komplicado - glad to see I'm not the only one! Sorry it was me that confused you though...!

Anyway, so from my understanding proper photofocus looks like this picture taken from this thread: http://www.learningstrategies.com/forum/ubb/Forum8/HTML/002421.html

So, should it look EXACTLY like it does in the above picture. i.e. SHARP and EVEN with NO blurring, but lots of overlapping?

And we get this sharpness by simply relaxing deeper?

AJ

[This message has been edited by boomyboomy (edited February 08, 2003).]






Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
No, not necessary period. Because; Reading is done with the brain not the eyes. However your eyes see it, your brain knows how to understand it. The letters make the same patterns in blurred form. So identifying them is easy enough for the brain. (same eyes same brain and same consistant letter shapes).

So how you see it is how you see it and that's fine.

As Paul stated in the book
"When in Photofocus, the print on the page is probably blurred. That is okay, because to see the blip, you must place your focal plane at some distance away."

I'd like to emphasis "When in Photofocus,

As long as you are in Photofocus you are photoreading.

As I already said, just relax keep using it just like any muscle exercised it improves in other ways as well, not just for the exercises.

Blurred - thats's great for photoreading.

With surreal clarity - that's great for photoreading and shows that the muscle has developed.

Like the ability to use exercise equipment... at first it is slower more cumbersome but you still reap astonishing rewards... later as the muscles have gotten used to it your stamina builds and there is a sort of ease in your using the exercise equipment. The reward then is the consistency of your being able to perform the exercise.

You don't think that just because you haven't experienced the mastery of someone who has used the exercise equipment for some months,(their muscles performing in a more relaxed fluid manner than the beginner) that you cannot start using the gear with your level of mastery? As ironic as it sounds the most noticable rewards are at the beginning after that the continued exercise is just staying in the flow.

Same with photoreading. The blurred blip page brings heaps of rewards. The later clarity when you photoread is just the sign that your muscles and mind are now used to it and in the flow. You just do it. So please don't get hung up on it.

Alex

[This message has been edited by AlexK (edited February 08, 2003).]






Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
Offline
Administrator

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
For the record, my clarity is better than
and different to that blip page image and was originally blurred rather than overlapped. I think this is because the opposing eye softened the secondary image by me I never really saw double lettering - only the blip page and the rest of the text blurred.

However I suggest. Start from where you are at and use that rather than trying to achieve something that may never be ideal for you.

Blurred was great, the clarity is no big deal it's just the experience that the muscles are working... It doesn't always have that clarity either however books come together with the same ease anyway so I just take it as it comes.

Alex






Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
Finally! I really get it.
I already did the system work, but I was with this doubt. So thanks to everybody.
Problem Solve!!!!

Komplicado







Moderated by  Patrick O'Neil 

Link Copied to Clipboard
©, Learning Strategies Corporation, All Rights Reserved
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 5.6.40 Page Time: 0.084s Queries: 33 (0.040s) Memory: 3.2092 MB (Peak: 3.6022 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-05-24 09:03:24 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS