Re: TOBS: WDDK
From: Mark (nospam_at_nspam.com)
Date: 10/05/04
- Next message: Mark: "Re: TOBS: WDDK - comments from Porter Kier and Karl Popper, Norman Cousins on SM"
- Previous message: Mario Petrinovich: "Re: Is SCIENCE magazine 2 or more years behind; Re: Orrorin"
- In reply to: Spartacus: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Next in thread: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:29:04 GMT
Spartacus wrote:
>
> I too need correctional lenses... Your eyes distinguish depth preception
> via a three dimentional image. Cameras produce a flat two dimentional
> rendition. Technology comes from our copying or duplicating (where
> possible) things that occure naturally but not always as efficiantly. i.e.
> birds don't need air ports or runways... Those with eye afflictions don't
> represeent the average. Film has a specific ISO rating. Your eyes adapt
> over a wide range of ISO to accomodate fpr either light or darkness.
>
SNIP a lot of other stuff:
There is a bit of a flaw here, which should be noted. Eyes do
indeed adapt over a range of light conditions - they do it by
opening and closing an "iris" to let more or less light onto the
light-sensing parts of the eye. It is the latter that is most
equivalent to film, not the whole eye. If you want to use the
eye/camera analogy, you must compare the whole camera to the eye
- a camera is designed to adapt to low or high light in much the
same way as our eyes work - by opening and closing an iris, to
let more or less light onto the film.
- Next message: Mark: "Re: TOBS: WDDK - comments from Porter Kier and Karl Popper, Norman Cousins on SM"
- Previous message: Mario Petrinovich: "Re: Is SCIENCE magazine 2 or more years behind; Re: Orrorin"
- In reply to: Spartacus: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Next in thread: John Ings: "Re: TOBS: WDDK"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|