#Lenzfx
Aaron, David
I apologize for any inaccurate assumptions I may have made, but I did warn that
I was NOT a physicist in my first note. I think I have probably proven that
pretty well by now : ).
<< what we'd have is a reflection that is in perfect focus (since AD is our
focal range) superimposed upon a surface which is out of focus (since AB is not
our focal range). I'm trying to imagine how this would look but I'm absolutely
certain that it's nothing I've EVER seen in real life.>>
<< a reflection of an OUT-OF-FOCUS item off of an IN-FOCUS item will always be
IN-FOCUS.>>
So maybe I am way off base, but if I am then could someone explain to me how
you are able to look at one of those stereogram posters and change your focus
from the image to the reflection on the surface? Maybe I am reading what you
are saying wrong, but your argument seems to say that the reflection would
always be in focus when the reflector is in focus. Another example would be in
a movie when there is a shot of a rear view mirror and the reflection is in
focus while the mirror is not (can't quite remember the specific movie I'm
thinking of).
Also, I don't want to get defensive (I'm sure you think its too late for
that!), but when I said "The image reflected doesn't gain any special
properties because of the location of the mirror," I meant to stress
"location"- I wasn't implying that the surface qualities of the reflector
(color, texture, etc.) wouldn't affect it.
I really didn't mean to impugn (?) the quality of your product. Only that of
your sample image. Please accept my apologies.
Scott "am i flamed yet?" Roberts