Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mike Johnston wrote >>> It's really gotten to a ludicrous level when we start arguing about bokeh in words and pseudoscience. For heaven's sake, this stuff isn't brain surgery. Just take a bunch of pictures with blur in them and look at the blur. We don't have to _quantify_ what's going on; it's enough just to _look_ at it. It's there to see. <<<< You don't _have_ to quantify what's going on, but maybe it would be _interesting_ to try to do so. I don't think you can argue that it's wrong to want to do that. Erwin's approach is just different from yours, so why come down on it so heavily? BTW, what makes it pseudoscience rather than science? I would have thought that the urge to measure and understand is pretty scientific. Rob (who is finding these Pavlovian responses to Erwin tiresome). Robert Appleby V. Bellentani 36 41100 MO Italy tel. (+39) 059 303436 mob. (+39) 0348 336 7990