Bifurcator wrote:
Well, I think most people still really think that the basis for \"3D\" is DOF.
carstenw wrote:
Many of us are repeatedly saying that this is exactly what we do *not* think, yet you keep coming to this conclusion
Bifurcator wrote:
I\'m not coming to that conclusion myself (since page 7 or something). I\'m saying that most of the people NOT IN THIS THREAD still think so. See the difference?
Lotusm50 wrote:
And you can find a lot of people in various places and forums that think that climate change is a hoax. That doesn\'t make them right. See the similarity?
I don\'t really see the similarity myself no. One is using a term everyone understands or not. The other is being well informed about a planetary condition and government organizations or not. BTW, I\'m convinced it\'s a hoax myself.
And I didn\'t mean to bring this all up again. RustyPlug acted surprised when he met with the reality of someone not getting the usage of the illusive \"3D\" term. I was just pointing out that this should be expected is all.
Somewhat \"3D-ish\" to me without lens brilliance, DOF blur, or fine textures.
--
Other ridiculous posts ignored.
Jan 23, 2010 at 06:44 AM
Previous versions of Bifurcator's message #8040622 « what is '3d' ? »
