clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 14.08.2014 09:25, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> > On 14-8-2014 0:07, Stephen wrote:
> >> To me that is much better, I can see the cat now. ;-)
> >> IMO these images with deep shadows and bright sunlight need a compromise
> >> as our eyes adjust in RL. But cannot do that on an image.
> >> Don't you think that there should be some dust in the air?
> >>
> >>
> > Yes, and the compromising is delicate as the notion of 'acceptable'
> > tends to vary from person to person in this case. In the present case a
> > bit lighter or darker would also be possible. ;-)
>
> Not only does the notion of "acceptable" vary from person to person, but
> -- I guess even more importantly -- it also varies from display to
> display. Experience in these newsgroups has shown over and over again
> that people complaining about images being too dark tend to change their
> mind once they have been coaxed to calibrate their display properly.

Nonsense. They just need to increase/decrease the number and density of
rods/cones in their eyes.

Post a reply to this message