Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!FelineGrace
From: FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: The Future of HAM
Message-ID: <21388@cup.portal.com>
Date: 17 Aug 89 23:38:39 GMT
References: <1579@psueea.UUCP> <19144@usc.edu> <507@tardis.Tymnet.COM>
  <795@becker.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 25

Instead of using the TV as a definition of what needs doing to create a
lifelike picture, why not use the research on what people can see?

Amiga Transactor had an article along these lines awhile back and at one
point the author pointed out that while the human eye cannot distinguish
16 million different colors, at least that many are necessary for lifelike
images because when color range is limited, a wide range of grayscale
is needed to keep the image realistic.  The example was imagine the color
spread between yellow and red in a 4K color palette.  It is probably 20
odd shades of yellow, orange and red.  Now what if your object is orange
and a shadow is cast upon it?  pick two shades of orange and find the range
available in 4K colors.  It could be only 2 or 3.  Because the 4K color
pallete is 16 grey scale of three colors.  The 16 million color pallete
is 256 grey scales of three colors and so when you pick an arbitrary color
(which is a combination of RGB) there will be significant grey scale left
to give you a lifelike range.  

OK, doesn't this mean that the ultimate system would be 8 or more pixels
of RGB?  24 bits of color, 8 of alpha, 8 of direction (or one for HAM) is
still too many for a system in the Amiga market.  I think that compromises
will have to be made on the 3000 and perhaps on the 4000.  But someday all
computers will have relistic color images in the Amiga price range.  Even 
I*M!

Dana