Ron Parr

It didn't elude me; I was being intentionally dismissive of that approach.All of the things you mention above relate to objectively measurable quantities. If your point is that tests could be...

Can't argue with that, but I'll point out that there is a reason why testers report objective quantities rather than "beauty". This causes some people who have issues with objective quantities, to...

Teaching something that is obviously wrong serves nobody. It sows misinformation and will generate confusion in the student who gives the matter a moment's thought. Assuming that your students...

This "odd" way to put it is essentially the standard definition.If you prefer "appear acceptably sharp" to "appear in focus", that's fine. Such wording is not unwieldy, but the minimum required...

I wasn't kidding when I offered the correct definition of DOF.His definition is totally wrong in ways that are obvious and could certainly confuse a novice:It states that DOF is a part of the...

I tired to send you a personal email about this but it bounced. I'm sorry to say this in a public forum, but I have to say your text is doing more harm than good. It leaves out key information...

Here you have forgotten one important variable and implicitly introduced another.The one you forgot is the circle of confusion (function of magnification required to achieve desired output...