CompuServe Messages

Lanny, >I still think images on my Mac are more than adequate for identification purposes. Yes, that's probably true. That's why I ended my note saying that for 'image appreciation' or differentiating between similar photos the difference may be significant, but I wanted to make the point that for general, gross differences, I understand that screen presentations may be more than sufficient. >as most eyes can't really distinguish 1.6 mill colors as compared to 32,000) , This is also probably true. But, as Al Balmer pointed out, the way the eyes work, perception in general, is a complex and involved subject. The fact that we cannot consciously resolve something does not mean that our subconscious does not resolve something and make use of the info in some 'background' <g> type of mental processing. (Note that in the computer world 'eyes' are generally thought of as mechanistic, as 'camera' equivelents wired into the brian which serves as a 'processor' unit. Biologists, neurologists and such see the issue as much more complicated, where the eyes are almost literally viewed as 'outgrowths' of the brain, parts of the brain, and some processing happens at the eyes, and other is differed to the brain proper.) >Maybe I am crazy, but due to the way the eye sees and handles color, I still think images on my Mac are more than adequate … <g> Yes. It's a question of what we're accustomed to. I kind of like McDonalds, but I assume I'm crazy <g> and my taste buds have been 'dumbed down' by lack of exposure to real restaurants. (When I drive through, say, northern Wisconsin and _all_ restaurants are like home cooking which lots of courses, real fresh food, and actually unrushed, pleasant waitresses and such, it never occurs to me to miss McDonalds… … Mark