Photo reading???

Not open for further replies.


Master Jedi
Registered Senior Member
Last night I found myself watching a program about a new way of reading called photo reading... I was woundering if anyone knew of it and if it worked? So if and one would like to put in a few words about it I would very happy. thanks
I have also seen this infomercial, and was wondering how difficult this photo reading is? Or if it is even possible. Any comments would be great!

Speed reading...

Hope im not 'getting the wrong end of the stick' here, I have NOT seen the 'infomercial' as I am from the UK.

If 'Photoreading' is a way of reading text at high speed:

I remember seeing, a long time ago in a forgotten corner of the internet, a piece of software which breaks text files down into words, then displays a small box in the centre of the screen which 'flashes up' these words in the correct order, at a very fast rate. The theory is that the brain can cope with reading much faster if it does no thave to filter out the extra noise of the words around it, and the software supposedly increased your reading speed when using it. I was dubious, and still am, but a piece of software like this would not be hard to write, for experimental purposes.

I am dubious because I think reading a text requires understanding of both the atomic elements (i.e. letters which make up 'words' - as far as reading goes, the smallest 'atom' we seem to need to worry about is the word ) and of the entire context, i.e. the words which surround others. Maybe not... it might be an interesting experiment. Notice how, when glancing at a single word, it is almost impossible to look without 'understanding' or reading the word.

Hope this is somewhere near the mark!

If 'Photoreading' is something else entirely:

Oops! sorry!
I just was watching a Photo Reading infomercial a few moments ago, I came right to the internet to learn more about it.

I went to the offical website and found that it was some $250 to get the "kit."

I'm reluctant to dish out that much money without actaully knowing how it works.

If anyone knows anything about this "Photoreading," I'd like to hear what they have to say.

It seems I had jumped the gun...

PhotoReading does not seem to be speed reading, and after I had waded through all of the commercial, advertising crap ( which, as an aside, contains the phrase 'As Yoda, from The Empire Strikes Back said, "Try? There is no try. There is only do or not do." ' It makes me squirm! ) at , I am convinced that this is actually quite an interesting idea, and I would even go as far as saying that I have seen evidence of this technique in my own learning in the past. The untapped potential of the brain is a very interesting subject.

Now, the problem is, why do people wish us to PAY to use our OWN brains? Im not paying. But i'll find out how to PhotoRead. I'll post here what i dig up. <-- a good one...

Also, it seems that one of the techniques for 'recovering the information' is something along the lines of mind-mapping, which is an old technique, and much documented.

Can't help thinking there is a good idea in there somewhere, although it reeks of 'gimmicky-ness' to me.
( The marketing garbage makes me ill... )

There is too much hype surrounding this. It is a hard sell with little science to back it up. The reference to Einstein who claimed we only use 10% of our brain has been firmly refuted many times now. We use all of our brain. This attempt to throw in a famous name to give credibility to their sales talk gave me much concern.

Follow this link - this shows possibly where the idea for photoreading came from.

There is a lot of references on the web to photoreading and all seem to be asking you to send money. I suspect the technique works but it won't be as good as they claim. If you can afford to lose your money then try it, otherwise I would advise you to continue to search for some independent research and evidence.


Looks like we are doing the same type of searching. I have to admit that I am intrigued and I have been thinking about speed-reading for many years.

I Agree that this seems to be a huge amount of hype. However, the idea of 'blasting' data into the right brain appeals to me.

With right-brain activity heightened by Alpha and Theta waves, and a vast amount of information passed before the eyes, who is to say what is being stored? Kind of like the machine in 'The Lawnmower Man'.. still seems a little SF. However.. sound waves ( pink noise etc ) can stimulate these kinds of brain reaction, and i am certainly inclined to believe that music helps with learning, maybe the root lies somewhere.

I would tend to agree that the brain can cope with much more than we 'feed' it, and that we are just conditioned not to.

Still not paying 250 dollars... :)
Infomercials are something I am highly skeptic about. If it was such a great product you couldn't keep people away. The fact that they put it on the air waves means that usually it is hogwash with a little something there to make it sound reasonable. If 5% of the viewers actually send money they have made a killing.

One of the techniques that I pickup a long time ago and have practiced ever since which leads to faster reading is to lop off the ends. Depend on peripheral vision to pick up the ends. Especially in column type reading. It won't take long to discover if you got the context of the sentence, as it will either make sense or it won't. The biggest amount of time it will.

Roughly 2/3's is all you need to look at to get the gist of the subject that is involved. It will change depending upon the depth and technicality of the subject. With lighter stuff you can move the 1/3's inward. For heavier stuff you move them towards the ends.
Last edited:
I have looked on a various number of pages on the internet, and basically the all say the same thing about how to photoread. There are some other steps, but photoreading involves getting into a meditation-like state (I read that you should close your eyes and then imagine looking at yourself from behind you head at the reading material), then, when you are relaxed, just simply look at the words on the page as fast as you can, not actually trying to comprehend what the words mean. You should go through each page in about a second.

Then you wait on it (the recommened time is 24 hours so you can sleep on it, or 20 min of it's necessary).

After that you try to remember as much as you can about the material.

Very interesting concept, but I wouldn't want to pay $250 to have some guy tell me that on video.
I wanted to find some truly independent reviews but there doesn't seem to be any. That's a worry. And I'm not about to trust the tetimonials published by the vendors.

I have come to the conclusion that, good idea as it may be, we all naturally practice this form of reading in some way or other... flicking through a magazine in a shop, or a book in a library, or even flicking through news on the internet. It *IS* a marketing ploy. I have no doubt that there is something in it, scientifically speaking, however - and if it takes marketing to bring that to the attention of someone with slightly more honorable goals than 'making a quick buck' then so be it.

All the articles talk about reading as if it is a laborious task. To me this is nonsense. I ENJOY reading, and i like to savour the use of language and appreciate it for the art form it is, *100%* of it. not '10% is material, 90% is filler'. I agree, PhotoReading could be useful for reading technical documents and books quickly, but i sincerely suspect that any of us *with learning skills* do so to an extent anyway...

I gave 'StereoReading' a go yesterday ( kind of like photoReading, with slight differences ) and found that it gave me a headache, but I *do* have some (albeit miniscule) recollection of the texts i read - not in anything like the detail i would like, but then I'm not sure i did it right. I'm sticking to enjoying reading for now...
yeah photo reading my be a marketing ploy, and I do enjoy reading books to gain the full benifit that the author intended, but I still think it would be cool to tell someone that you can read 693,000 words be minute like the guy on the infomercial...:)

i think photo reading really is something..
its a very cool concept
something that i am sure will eventually work for me
i just tried stereo reading
it seemed to me that i really experience the "high" that the webmaster was talking about
wow... this is so cool
a look into the human brain...
so cool
i felt like i used a part of me that was never used b4
everyone should try this (not buy the 250 dollar thing. i never did just try out stero reading)
I visited lots of sites - the origin of speedreading:

I visited lots of sites, intrigued by the radio ad (informercial) over the past few weeks.

Started with a Google search, and ended up finding out the origin of speedreading, and lots of other related "accelerated learning" information...

Visit my "Surfing History" and you can also find out why you don't need to spend $250US :eek: necessarily, the info. is out there! :cool:

Just thought I would make my 2 hour obsessive surfing session benefit others :D
Last edited:

There is too much hype surrounding this. It is a hard sell with little science to back it up. The reference to Einstein who claimed we only use 10% of our brain has been firmly refuted many times now. We use all of our brain. This attempt to throw in a famous name to give credibility to their sales talk gave me much concern.

clearly u did not visit

see how to u/l d/l units to your brain
You can do Photo-reading yourself:

Start by getting those large letter books that kids and older people use. Scan the book from page to page at first slowly. Practice with a relaxed mind. You will be able to get the gist of the book.

Then do the same with subjects that you like, this time with normal size fonts. The brain soaks from larger (12 point and up) faster than smaller fonts. It is because of the resolution and how brain processes the information.

Then practice and practice...

I've heard about it. Actually I'm watching it as I type this. I figured I'd Google it. If this does work then I could really use it.
Not open for further replies.