← Back to context

Comment by Dylan16807

5 days ago

I'm not sure what you mean by Photoshop pixel.

They also look more like a square when I back away. And the mismatch of the square model doesn't mean the point model is good.

4 comments

Dylan16807

Reply
grandempire  5 days ago

> And the mismatch of the square model

So your intuition for why squares makes sense is wrong, but you’re still holding on to it.

> doesn't mean the point model is good.

What does show it’s a good model is all the theory of image processing and the implementation of this theory in camera display systems.

You’re welcome to propose an alternative theory, and if that is consistent, try to get manufacturers to adopt it.

  • Dylan16807  5 days ago

    > So your intuition for why squares makes sense is wrong, but you’re still holding on to it.

    I said subpixels are rectangles. Because they are.

    If the point model was all you need, then objects small enough to slip between points would be invisible. Which is not the case.

    In particular a shot of the night sky would look pure black.

    So if being wrong means we should abandon the model, then we can't use squares or points.