#Lenzfx
Jeez, look what I started.
When I first made an inquiry about the reflection in the sample image, it
wasn't to start an argument. I am merely a serious, PROFESSIONAL animator (I
really doubt that any animations that I have done would look like "they were
done by a 5 year old with a crayon" no matter what they may be compared with)
who wants to make sure that the tools that he spends money on are up to the
quality standards of my clients. I also happen to have spent over ten years
studying almost every aspect of visual perception I could get my "hands" on,
from perception to photography. I am NOT an expert on math, raytracing, or
computers and don't claim to be.
I questioned my views when I read your responses and when several people posted
in support of your theory, with none in support of me. To me this is what
someone who is concerned with the truth does (David Rhoten, for example : )).
I did several experiments to test out if I was being stupid (as I admit I often
am) and spent WAY too much time pondering it, in the obsessive way which is my
very own. I wondered if I was confusing the problems of representing how we
2-eyed creatures see a reflection (kind of floating on a separate focal plane)
with how the 1-eyed camera sees it. I am glad that you gave me this
opportunity to reconsider all of this, as I should have done more of before
responding to your first response.
In the end, however, I am convinced that either we are talking about different
things, or that you are mistaken. What may have happened is that I confused
the issue by arguing it incorrectly. I suggest that anyone really interested
in this should read the messages posted by JKJ and Don Landis for some much
more clear explanations of the phenomena than I could have written. What some
people may be mistaking for seeing a mirror and its reflection at the same time
is the way that the human eye can change focus from one to the other so quickly
that its almost imperceptable. The camera doesn't have this same ability.
As for your comment, <<And as to the last word, I think that's still waiting
to be heard. It's my opinion that no one really knows whats going on with this
field…if we did, we'd have cloaking devices by now.>>, I am sure that the
field of optics has probably progressed far beyond the point of our
discussions. If a serious scientist got ahold of this thread, he'd probably
think that it was WRITTEN by 5 year olds with crayons <G>.
BUT, regardless of this, the value of your product has been proven. If it
takes this much discussion just to prove that the reflection in STILL.JPG is
incorrect, then it probably will go unnoticed by anyone viewing animations made
with it. From the beginning, all that I wanted to know was whether you could
fix it. Now its up to me to decide whether its worth the money, and after the
glowing endorsements of Mr. Yost and JKJ I'd probably say yes. Would there be
any way that you could upload a flic of the depth of focus effect MOVING? If I
could look at that (with the things in focus and the angle of reflectance
changing) it would eliminate any hesitations I still have.
respectfully, and friendly-ly,
scott "Nyquil" roberts