> Mitch Crane wrote:
>> email@example.com wrote in news:1164739831.818478.136660@
>> > Mitch Crane wrote:
>> >> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote in
>> >> news:email@example.com ps.com:
>> >> > Mitch Crane wrote:
>> >> >> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote in
>> >> >> news:email@example.com oups.com:
>> >> >> > Lez Pawl wrote:
>> >> >> >> "Rod Speed" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:4st6mqFvmf3jU1@mid.individual.net...
>> >> >> >> > Michael Linford <email@example.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> I have a two year old
> reckon I know what his name is.
>> >> The bit about grayscale certainly won't work if red doesn't
>> >> work.
>> > I guess youre not up on the curious things the eye & brain do
>> > with colour perception.
>> No I'm up on the fact that, psychovisual phenomena aside, you can't
>> do greyscale without red.
> Lol, you cant put how vision works aside when discussing what the
> eye sees. Your black isnt black either, on crts, but the perception
> of it is black - and thats what counts.
"Lol", I can certainly put it aside, because unlike the fact that my
black isn't really black, the loss of red is very perceptible. No one
is going to walk in here and go, "Whoa! Your blacks aren't all that
black." If my monitor had no red anyone who can see red would notice
Are you seriously arguing that people wouldn't notice the loss of red
in the same way they don't notice that blacks aren't really black? Do
you really think that, just as people buy monitors every day without
noticing that the black isn't black, people would buy monitors with no
red and not notice? Of course you don't.