Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Glasses ....aaargh!
Old 12-08-2018   #1
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,322
Glasses ....aaargh!

I'm shortsighted and have used contact lenses for most of life.

Some years ago I started wearing multifocal contacts as my eyes aged and messed up my close-up "reading" vision when wearing normal contacts.

Unfortunately, I've recently given up contact lenses and started to wear glasses because contacts could no longer fix my near vision.

I get on wiith my new multifocal glasses fine except when using a camera. And I'm near my wits end and getting seriously hacked off...

If I'm wearing glasses I can't use my cameras: I can't see the entire viewfinder unless I squash my glasses right into the camera. That's not good for the glasses (scratches!), it's uncomfortable, and the glasses get smeary from skin oil.

If I don't wear my glasses, my near vision is perfect but I can't see into the distance beyond a few feet! (Looking through the viewfinder with the dioptre adjusted is fine - but I clearly can't walk around with a camera duct-taped to my head!)

I've compromised by having my glasses on a string. I wear the glasses as usual so I can see my subjects, then take them off to use the camera. But that's not ideal - it's awkward and breaks my rhythm constantly taking my glasses on and off. And the dangling glasses often hit the camera, coat/shirt buttons, zips, etc., so I worry about scratching them (they were very expensive!).

What do you glasses wearers do?

I just cannot think of a solution. Having to wear glasses is seriously putting me off photography. Perhaps I'll just give up.
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #2
markjwyatt
Registered User
 
markjwyatt's Avatar
 
markjwyatt is offline
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 499
With my Contax I focus with glasses, then lift them and drop them onto my accessory shoe mounted viewfinder, frame and shoot. Sometimes I frame with them on, but I cannot see the edges well. I can see well enough without glasses to frame, but focusing would be tricky.

With my Fuji-XT-2, the eye relief, rubber cup and diopter work well with my glasses on. Other cameras have other results. I use Mamiya TLRs for instance with waist level finder and mounted magnifying glass (if needed).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #3
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,048
Just wear my glasses Rich
I`ve recently bought a couple of those rather large shaped rubber eyepieces for each of my Sony cams which exclude any extraneous light .
Maybe one of those will help .
They`re only a tenner from Amazon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #4
bmattock
Registered User
 
bmattock's Avatar
 
bmattock is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Age: 58
Posts: 10,675
Worn glasses all my life. I just learn to 'pan around' inside the viewfinder to see all the corners. It's natural for me, but I can understand how aggravating it must be.
__________________
Immanentizing the eschaton since 1987.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #5
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
Just wear my glasses Rich
I`ve recently bought a couple of those rather large shaped rubber eyepieces for each of my Sony cams which exclude any extraneous light .
Maybe one of those will help .
They`re only a tenner from Amazon.
The problem is not so much extraneous light but getting my eyeball close enough to see the entire viewfinder - my glasses get in the way. The lack of "eye relief"...

It seems that camera manufacturers haven't designed their cameras for glasses wearers!
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #6
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Did you try a really good right angle finder w/diopter correction?

Well, it's a bit uncommon and makes a rangefinder camera a bit bulky, but it works like a charm

I've written some posts on that very topic ---- I have -7 or -8 spherical plus an annoying astigmatism, and all of a sudden, with right angle finder and no glasses, I can see the world through the rf more three-dimensional than ever before, it seems!
__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #7
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,322
Thanks for the suggestion folks.

All my cameras have very good dioptre correction – so seeing through the viewfinder isn't the problem. Seeing all of the viewfinder is...

In short my problem is either

• I wear glasses and can see my subject – but can't see the entire viewfinder (without squashing my glasses) or
• I don't wear glasses and can see my full viewfinder – but can't see my subject unless looking through the viewfinder!

I want to see my subject without these problems. Just like I could with contact lenses. Surely there must be an easy solution as this must have been a problem for over a century for photographers!
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #8
bayernfan
Registered User
 
bayernfan is offline
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 704
I just get along with lifting the glasses onto my head and looking through a diopter adjusted viewfinder. I keep a small microfiber cloth with me to wipe my glasses should they become too oily or spotty.

Maybe try lifting your glasses upwards onto your head instead of letting them dangle around the neck. I find it's a little quicker to go back and forth between glasses/no glasses with this approach, and it doesn't interfere with what I'm wearing or my camera strap.

Which camera are you using?
__________________
M_V instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #9
bmattock
Registered User
 
bmattock's Avatar
 
bmattock is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Age: 58
Posts: 10,675
My astigmatism is such that there is no diopter adjustment I could ever use to use a camera without glasses. Been that way all my life. For the same reason, I cannot wear 'cheater' drugstore magnifying glasses. But since I've had it all my life, I'm used to it. As mentioned, I keep my glasses on - can't see a bloody thing without them and not a candidate for contacts. But I scooch around inside the viewfinder to see the corners. All I can do. One gets used to it.
__________________
Immanentizing the eschaton since 1987.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #10
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,426
Have you ever tried Flexon frames? I'm sure there are other brands that do the same thing--flex so well you can almost tie them in knots. You can push your face closer to the viewfinder when the frame flexes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #11
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,200
If you are shooting a rangefinder, an auxiliary viewfinder might help. The Zeiss ones are excellent if expensive and they have a rubber eyepiece that won't scratch your glasses. If you shoot a Nikon SLR, try an F3 with a high eyepoint finder or any F model with a sports finder. You could also put some liquid electrical tape, just a small amount, to keep from scratching your glasses. I am 73 and have worn glasses since fifth grade, so I'm used to coping with the problems, scratches and all. Good luck.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #12
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmattock View Post
Worn glasses all my life. I just learn to 'pan around' inside the viewfinder to see all the corners. It's natural for me, but I can understand how aggravating it must be.
I pan around too. I also put masking tape on the eyepieces of my metal camera eyepieces to avoid scratches. I have given up on some cameras because the viewfinder is such that I can see through it enough to pan.

I have started using AF SLRs with wide lenses because of difficulty focusing. Don't give up photography, I know that my DSLR with live view makes life easy, just like my Rolleiflex.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #13
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 844
Understand your frustration, I'm getting there myself, although my eyesight without glasses is still sufficient to get a rough idea of what I'll get in a picture.
The only real way out seem high eyepoint viewfinders, such as Nikon F3 HP (and supposedly the later pro models), low mag finders on RFs (50 frameline on a 0.58 VF might be pretty nicely visible with glasses) or waist level finders with magnifier that will work with glasses. And rear screens of course, might be not the worst option in the end.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #14
hendriphile
Registered User
 
hendriphile's Avatar
 
hendriphile is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 369
Shortly after being gifted with my uncle’s old M3 around 1980, I took it down to Marty Forscher to be checked out. He looked at the camera, looked at me, and said, “Do you find scratches on your eyeglass lenses because of the camera eyepiece?” “Yes,” I said. Mr. Forscher then produced a rubber O-ring, attached to the camera, and said, “No more scratches on your eyeglasses!” That O-ring is still on the camera.

BTW I find that when using the DR 50 and the goggled 35, there is plenty of space around the frame lines to compose.
__________________
"It's so heavy! And it's full of numbers!" --- teenaged niece upon meeting my M3.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #15
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichC View Post
The problem is not so much extraneous light but getting my eyeball close enough to see the entire viewfinder - my glasses get in the way. The lack of "eye relief"...

It seems that camera manufacturers haven't designed their cameras for glasses wearers!
I wasn`t suggesting that the extraneous light was the problem just that they were designed to exclude it but they may also help you with your problem too.
I wear glasses and don`t seem to have a problem . if I do with certain viewfinders I tend to ignore it or else pan around the viewfinder as bmattock suggests .
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #16
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
 
Sumarongi's Avatar
 
Sumarongi is offline
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 570
Monocle?

__________________
**Any feature is a bug unless it can be turned off.** (Daniel Bell Heuer's Law.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #17
Kai-san
Filmwaster
 
Kai-san's Avatar
 
Kai-san is offline
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Norge
Posts: 117
Contax offered an LCD viewfinder for their last film SLR, the N1. It consisted of a tiny digital camera that screwed into the viewfinder and connected with a lead to an LCD screen which you could attach to the flash shoe. You could even switch between colour and B&W. And this was in 2005! Unfortunately they are quite rare, I have not seen many of these for sale. Maybe this could be an idea for a kickstarter, an LCD viewfinder with adapters for different cameras? There must be many photographers with this problem, myself included. I have bought diopters for most of my cameras, and my glasses go on and off all the time. One solution is of course to switch to a camera with a waist level finder. But I'm afraid that rules out rangefinders.
__________________
Kai
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #18
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,257
Easy answer - get a Nikon F2, F3, or F4 and use the DA-1, DA-2, or DA-20 action sports finder. Massive, truly enormous eye relief. You can see the entire VF from about 150 yds away... (ok maybe not that far).
Akshully the F3HP allows you to see the entire VF with glasses easily too.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #19
bmattock
Registered User
 
bmattock's Avatar
 
bmattock is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Age: 58
Posts: 10,675
My ophthalmologist has informed me that when my cataracts become 'ripe' he will be able to remove them and also do an ocular implant at the same time which will end my astigmatism and give me as close as possible to 20/20 far vision. I'll still need near vision assist, but can get by with drugstore cheaters at that point. Proabably have another 10 years to wait, though. I'm only 57.
__________________
Immanentizing the eschaton since 1987.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #20
BLKRCAT
99% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,775
My M5 is modified with an M6 eyepiece as to not scratch my glasses when I'm wearing them. Shooting 50mm on an M camera is fine. There's enough eye relief that a 50 is fine.

But I wear contacts to shoot 35. I can't stand not seeing everything when shooting 35. There's something awesome about "getting into" the viewfinder. I love it.
__________________
Tumblr Youtube
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #21
ellisson
Registered User
 
ellisson's Avatar
 
ellisson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Elkins Park, PA
Posts: 516
To echo suggestions by others, I find that an auxiliary viewfinder can greatly help with 35mm and wider lenses. Agree that the Zeiss finders are bright and give a spacious view. Wearing glasses, I also find the goggled 35mm lenses preferable to having to pan around with the non-goggled versions. And as noted above, you get more space around the frame lines (50mm) for context.
__________________
Respice Finem

flickrgallery
Pbase gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #22
Pfreddee
Registered User
 
Pfreddee is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the suburbs of Dillwyn, Virginia
Age: 78
Posts: 454
Just wait until you get cataracts! One of the more interesting aspects of them is what I would call "Age-enhanced Reading." (Most of us who have cataracts are of a certain age.) For example, I picked up two jars of Vita Pickled Herring for Thanksgiving, and got one in Sour Cream Sauce, and the other in Urine Sauce, which upon closer inspection turned out to be Wine Sauce. Still, that did provide a light moment during shopping!

With best regards,

Pfreddee(Stephen
__________________
Open the pod bay door, HAL.

I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.

Drat.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #23
Uncle Brian
Registered User
 
Uncle Brian is offline
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: New Zealand
Age: 62
Posts: 25
Not sure what cameras you have but I have some issues using my film cameras when wearing glasses. I can't see enough of the viewfinder either and it's frustrating, if I take my glasses off I can use the diopter to view the image but need to put them back on again to make any manual adjustments.

I can set my Nikon F80 to P and let it do everything while I just compose and of course i can use the wheels on that camera to adjust f and speed too.

My OM-4T and Zorki-4 are very difficult to use but it can be done if I'm in the right frame of mind.

I'm considering getting a digital camera that will do everything for me and also allow me to view the back screen if the viewfinder image is less than ideal, something like a X100F maybe.

I also have a TLR which if I ever get used to the reversed imaging might also be the answer.

Don't give up the answer is out there
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #24
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,322
OP here...

Sorry, should have said earlier: I no longer use rangefinders but changed to SLRs for more accurate framing – which is why I'm so concerned abut not being able to see the entire view.

My two main cameras are

• Mamiya 645 (with prism finder)
• Sony A7R II (electronic viewfinder).

So, no auxiliary viewfinders...
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #25
Uncle Brian
Registered User
 
Uncle Brian is offline
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: New Zealand
Age: 62
Posts: 25
Can you use a waist level finder on the 645? Maybe move to another big slr like a RZ67?

What about large format? That glass is huge!

Just tried my cameras with my glasses on and I can see the whole frame in the F80 most of it in the OM and bugger all in the Zorki.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #26
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 1,469
I thought that multi focus contacts would be a good idea for shooting my M9. I got them and found that the near vision lens wouldn't work with the focus patch as that's a mirror and through some quirk of physics I needed the distance vision to see the focus patch. I went to the distance Rx for both and was happy as a clam. I haven't tried them on my digitals nor my MF film cameras yet. I'm assuming the same case will apply as they use mirrors for viewing as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #27
RichC
Registered User
 
RichC is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
I thought that multi focus contacts would be a good idea for shooting my M9. I got them and found that the near vision lens wouldn't work with the focus patch as that's a mirror and through some quirk of physics I needed the distance vision to see the focus patch. I went to the distance Rx for both and was happy as a clam. I haven't tried them on my digitals nor my MF film cameras yet. I'm assuming the same case will apply as they use mirrors for viewing as well.
I had no problem with my varifocal contacts with any of my cameras - well, the Mamiya 645, Nikon D800E (predecessed the Sony A7R II) and ye olde worlde Moskva rangefinder. Not sure if there are different types of varifocal contacts but mine used the "bullseye" concept, where the "lenses" were arranged in concentric circles. Worked fine accept in low light, when my pupils were too large and messed up my near vision!
__________________

-=Rich=-


Portfolio: www.richcutler.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #28
Uncle Brian
Registered User
 
Uncle Brian is offline
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: New Zealand
Age: 62
Posts: 25
Last silly suggestion on this sunny Sunday morning ... Do you have a local camera store that has a large variety of cameras that you can hold up to you eye? Might be the only way to find an answer and it could be fun.
I'm considering this as an option but camera stores are almost extinct around here
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #29
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 5,899
Lately I've been using the string on my eyeglasses and taking them off, when i have a diopter lens on the viewfinder. Otherwise, if leaving my glasses on, I use the bodies that have the .58 finders so I can see the whole frame--or mostly.

Using a Nikon F3 with high eyepoint finder could be a good idea, and/or the Zeiss Ikon with its large eyepiece.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #30
Goody
Registered User
 
Goody is offline
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 57
I have a diopter on the camera and keep a pair of glasses on that I don't mind beating up -- tip the glasses up when ready to shoot. But as you've discovered it's a compromise -- for me that's better than than trying to shoot with glasses on. I like to see through the viewfinder without issues.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #31
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,486
Same condition as you. Put a +1 diopter on the eyepiece and use top of bifocals.

If your eye doctor has an old fashioned set of trial lenses, use them to find exact + required or try reader at the drug store over regular glasses.

Possible to under correct one eye so you can see RF patch and have correct RX in other eye. Now no longer required to take glasses off/on, but only one eye will see distance perfectly.

No way to improve edge if you require glasses. Frame subject without glasses and locate center RF patch. Add glasses and put patch in remembered location.

Leica with live view can use visoflex or screen on back.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #32
Saul
fighting inertia
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Saul is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Baltimore MD
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumarongi View Post
Monocle?

This is THE way to go!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #33
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 6,155
I need to count myself as lucky in a way. Been nearsighted ever since the eighth grade, and put up with the viewfinders because I always got glass lenses until I no longer could.



After that, I just started taking them off while shooting. It helps being right-eye dominant, especially since I just found out after all these years I have an astigmatism in the left eye.


Or, I'd use cameras that had rubber shields around the viewfinder, and do the scanning method of framing. It just depends. But my distance vision is not so bad that I can't frame up a shot before looking through the finder. It's just that I don't notice things that might affect the look of the scene in a negative way.


All I can say, Rich, is sometimes you just have to not think about it, and find some sort of workaround. Depending on which 645 model you have, one of the other finders (like the AE III) could have better eye relief. Or you could just go with the waist level one.



Don't know what to say about the Sony, except that you could get one of those attachable loupe hoods for the back screen.


PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2018   #34
CMur12
Registered User
 
CMur12 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Moses Lake, Washington, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,008
I'm nearsighted, have significant astigmatism in both eyes, and I'm left-eye dominant.


I can see all of the image in the viewfinder with my old manual-focus 35mm SLRs (pressing the glasses lens against the camera's eyepiece). This isn't possible with a lot of SLR viewfinders. Compact, fixed-lens RFs have also worked well for me.


Being left-eye dominant, if an SLR has controls to the immediate right of the finder, I simply can't use it.


Even so, I found myself moving more to TLRs and waist-level finders, where the glasses weren't a problem at all.


Adding a DSLR to the mix now, I'm finding that there is so much in viewfinder that I can't see it all with glasses on. So, I have to take the glasses off, adjust the variable diopter in the finder for my myopia, and try to see around the astigmatism. It still remains to be seen if I will be able to make this work.


- Murray
__________________
Still shooting film: Medium Format with assorted TLRs; 35mm with manual-focus Minolta SLRs and a Canonet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2018   #35
lynnb
Registered User
 
lynnb's Avatar
 
lynnb is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,398
Relax your framing standards, scale focus and shoot from the hip

I wear multifocals and have similar issues. Lots of good suggestions here. I have minimal problems with F80 and OM1, maybe a little scanning around. I use external VFs on Barnacks. The biggest problem is the Bessa II, no cold shoe and the VF is squinty to say the least. Worst eyeglass-scratching VF of all time was Fed 3, until I put a ring of gaffer tape around the eyepiece.
__________________
Lynn
happiest when shooting 35mm and 120 film
RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2018   #36
ebolton
Number 7614
 
ebolton's Avatar
 
ebolton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Age: 61
Posts: 327
I use a combination of all those methods: the string, panning around, and diopter adjustment in the cameras I have that feature it.


I use the string all the time, even when I'm not shooting. The difference between my far and near correction is so much, the optometrist gave me trifocals. I hated those, because the intermediate section of the lens was tiny and I needed it a lot for computer screens at work and home. I ditched the trifocals and now have 3 pairs of glasses: a bifocal with the far and near prescriptions (standard bifocals), and two copies of 'screen glasses', bifocals with the intermediate prescription on the top and the near prescription on the bottom. I leave one pair of screen glasses at work and one at home, and wear the standard glasses with the string all the time. Switching is fast, and with the standard glasses on the string I always know where they are. It saves time and aggravation.


It's also economical: I no longer buy glasses at the optometrist. I get the prescription from them for standard bifocals, and translate it into the two bifocal prescriptions I actually need, and buy them online from Zenni. The three bifocals from Zenni cost less than one pair from the Optometrist and work just as well.


-Ed
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:48.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.