CompuServe Thread

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