🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8duUODG00VICA3HYsx@andrew.cmu.edu> mc4c+@andrew.cmu.edu (Mark Choi) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.atari.st: 13-Apr-92 Re: "True Color"
>(Was: Falcon) Piet van Oostrum@cs.ruu. (501)
>
>> >>>>> Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com (BBR) writes:
>
>> BBR> Sigh... let's try it one more time...
>> BBR>  
>> BBR> "True Color" means that the human eye cannot tell the
>> BBR> difference between a computer generated image and the "real"
>> BBR> thing.
>
>> With respect to the use of the term "true color" regarding the new Atari
>> machines, these are the words of Leonard Tramiel:
>
>
>> "BTW, true color does not mean 16 million colors. It means no palette."
>
>> Source: ST Report #813.
>> -- 
>> Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.ruu.nl>
>
>
>with respect to the comments of Mr. Tramiel. He is wrong.

This is getting tiresome...

"True Color" is an empty advertising/marketing term.  In light of the
many factors that go into video/graphic imaging, a definition consisting
of whether the "human eye cannot tell the difference", without further
elaboration on the means by which to make such a judgment, is just as
empty.  And 16 million colors, in any sane implementation, implies that
there is no color palette.  Why not just let the term "true color" die and
simply ask "how are graphics implemented on the Falcon?"


-- Scott Willingham // willing@icsl.ucla.edu
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.