>On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:37:40 -0700 Tris Schuler >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Frankly, until the industry comes up with > > some hard video standard we're all basically chasing our tails with > > online > > images and the critique of same. It's good enough for casual purposes, > > but > > to get seriously critical with this stuff is silly at present. I wonder > > why > > so many do. > >It's a personality defect, not a technology defect. > >I find one of the most alarming problems I face is brain calibration. EG I >spend ages on a scan, getting it just right. A day or week or month later I >look at it again, on the exact same kit where nothing objective has >changed, and it looks completely, horribly wrong... > >Regards > >Tony Sleep
The beauty of that coin's obverse is that you can simply redo the image in the manner you now to perceive to be better, then share it instantaneously with anyone who has interest--or outright replace the old version, usually with no one the wiser. I suffer the same feelings with some of my work, and often post revised versions, or did when I was still on Photonet. Why, I don't know, as hardly anyone bothered to comment. But it still mainly boils down to practicalities of the display medium, which for the vast majority is some sort of CRT. Few of these offer users identical images to view. You see one thing while your audience might well (often does) see something else. Close but no cigar, so why the angst? Tris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
