On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:25:47 -0600, "Dan P" <dan### [at] yahoocom>
wrote:

>"IMBJR" <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in message
>news:ns9s405oak9lls0s01ea0m0o00qu5melft@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:24:28 -0600, "Dan P" <dan### [at] yahoocom>
>> wrote:
>>
><snip />
>
>> >An interesting image. I see why you need the additional color depth. The
>> >blue bar on the right might not be as subtle limited to 256 shades.
>>
>> You really need to read the text that comes with a posting. Read it
>> and realise that the 16-bit aspect was a mistake.
>
>In context with the rest of this threads in this group, I can totally
>understand why you might think I'm being sarcastic. Because I saw no posts
>in the thread yet, I thought it would have a different context but I was
>wrong. Lemme explain: I think I understand why you are so concerned about
>the color being exact because of your style of art. Most of us are
>techno-types so we are thinking in terms of technical merit. Where your art
>isn't highly technical, it is very /artistic/ and your use of color appears
>to be what you are focussing on. So, when I saw the subtle blue on the
>right, I thought, "A person who isn't concerned about the color wouldn't
>bother to be that subtle with the blue." I also didn't read the entire other
>thread because I'm too busy which is why I kept out of argument -- I still
>don't know enough about what is going on.

I had the germ of this notion in my head this morning!

Maybe that's it. Perhaps this place's techincal characteristics are at
the expense of it's potentially more artistic side.

>
>...I do know, however, it took me all of 2 minutes to install Irfanview and
>get the plug-ins...

Exactly.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message