clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/User:Clipka/Gamma

> Comments appreciated.

  percieved -> perceived

  While the information is great, I'm wondering if it's a bit too long-winded.
People get bored when reading a wall of text, which may be especially bad if
the important info (ie. the info which would be most useful for the reader)
is at the end. Most people might stop reading before they get to the info that
they need to know.

  Maybe some restructuring of the article could help this. After a short
introduction, first explain *what* has to be done, and then explain *why*
(rather than the other way around). Even if the reader gets bored at the
middle of the article, at least he will have seen what he needs to do in
order to get things right, even if he still doesn't know exactly why. He
can later refer to the reasons.

  Some brief history of why gamma correction exists in the first place
(going all the way back to the invention of CRT) and where the name "gamma"
comes from could be an interesting tidbit of information. This doesn't need
to be long. One single paragraph should be enough.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message