While colour temperature is one factor that effects the perceived friendliness (or lack thereof) of CF lighting, colour rendering is critical in certain appliacations. I'm not surprised that you weren't happy with a CFL in the bathroom. Skin tone is often one of the most (or at least noticeably and uncomfortably) distorted when you don't have full spectrum access. In Slashdot terms, think adjusting your RGB settings on your monitor.
Sunlight is the best for colour rendering, incandescent lamps are pretty close with a CRI of 95+ while most CFLs are 80+. You can buy CFLs with better CRI but we are talking significantly more than a few more bucks to achieve incandescent-like lighting.
Lower CRI will effect the wall colour you've gotten accustomed to seeing under incandescent lighting which can seriously alter your perception and comfort in the space. Its certainly a major consideration for any situation where your ability to perceive 'natural' colour is important - such as the bathroom mirror, your dining room (funky coloured food can be very unsettling), possibly your workstation, dressing room, etc. Personally, the only place I can deal with current CFLs is in the hallway and porch light.
I don't care whether the future is that incandescents become as effecient as CFLs or CFLs achieve incandescent-like lighting. I agree something has to change.
Usually the most useful information from any source is the footnotes/references. Usually the best wikipedia entries are the ones with a good chunk of references. Wikipedia is great for orienting yourself to your topic and then giving you a bunch of citations to get you started.
Doing your research online without ever stepping into a library is not the problem. Getting a resource from a library does not ensure it is any more authoritative. There are plenty of journals available online either directly through the publisher or through your local library (especially university libraries). What needs to be properly communicated to students is how to assess the quality of the information they are looking at and how to match that to the needs of their paper - not just generalizations that online information is unreliable and print information is valid.
Some basic questions to ask yourself...
Who wrote the article?
What are their qualifications?
What are their motivations, prejudices, stated objectives and assumptions?
Who reviewed/published the article?
Who is the intended audience?
When was the article written? Is it still accurate/relevant?
Who are they referencing? Who is referencing them?
Take a look at your course readings (especially the footnotes). Look for trends of publishers, authors, journals that your profs obviously respect and consider authoritative. It's a good start and answering some of these questions gives you something to write about.
Good to know he doesn't mind wasting his valuable time to pick up a penny. I guess it was time off the clock since it was before he started the work day, so he wasn't making his $300/sec yet.
But wait. Does that mean he was two minutes late for work if he was still in the parking lot at 8:32?
Very interesting from the point of view of a painter/architect whose boyfriend is a hacker. We've made similar comparisons ourselves in many conversations. I look forward to finishing the essay which I'm sure will inspire many more conversations and blogging.
I was just discussing this issue minutes before reading this post. Ah, hotkeys, sounds like a good plan but I can't get myself to use them (completely, that is) because I am an artistic user (oh yes we do exist and we even read slashdot) and eye-hand coordination is easier than muscle-memory for me. And besides, there are mouse shortcuts out there too.
This issue was brought up as I was sitting down to play a game of Dungeon Siege with my boyfriend and setting up hotkeys that I know I will probably never use because my reflexes are highly tuned for eye-hand and less so for muscle memory. So I naturally reach for the mouse when being attacked by monsters and not the keyboard.
Since the post was directed to those of us who are interested in its applications for Photoshop and 3D rendering programs. . . Makes sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
While colour temperature is one factor that effects the perceived friendliness (or lack thereof) of CF lighting, colour rendering is critical in certain appliacations. I'm not surprised that you weren't happy with a CFL in the bathroom. Skin tone is often one of the most (or at least noticeably and uncomfortably) distorted when you don't have full spectrum access. In Slashdot terms, think adjusting your RGB settings on your monitor.
Sunlight is the best for colour rendering, incandescent lamps are pretty close with a CRI of 95+ while most CFLs are 80+. You can buy CFLs with better CRI but we are talking significantly more than a few more bucks to achieve incandescent-like lighting.
Lower CRI will effect the wall colour you've gotten accustomed to seeing under incandescent lighting which can seriously alter your perception and comfort in the space. Its certainly a major consideration for any situation where your ability to perceive 'natural' colour is important - such as the bathroom mirror, your dining room (funky coloured food can be very unsettling), possibly your workstation, dressing room, etc. Personally, the only place I can deal with current CFLs is in the hallway and porch light.
I don't care whether the future is that incandescents become as effecient as CFLs or CFLs achieve incandescent-like lighting. I agree something has to change.
Usually the most useful information from any source is the footnotes/references. Usually the best wikipedia entries are the ones with a good chunk of references. Wikipedia is great for orienting yourself to your topic and then giving you a bunch of citations to get you started.
Doing your research online without ever stepping into a library is not the problem. Getting a resource from a library does not ensure it is any more authoritative. There are plenty of journals available online either directly through the publisher or through your local library (especially university libraries). What needs to be properly communicated to students is how to assess the quality of the information they are looking at and how to match that to the needs of their paper - not just generalizations that online information is unreliable and print information is valid.
Some basic questions to ask yourself...
Take a look at your course readings (especially the footnotes). Look for trends of publishers, authors, journals that your profs obviously respect and consider authoritative. It's a good start and answering some of these questions gives you something to write about.
Good to know he doesn't mind wasting his valuable time to pick up a penny. I guess it was time off the clock since it was before he started the work day, so he wasn't making his $300/sec yet.
But wait. Does that mean he was two minutes late for work if he was still in the parking lot at 8:32?
I think I'm offended. You really shouldn't piss off that very crucial 1.7% you already have.
This is where you reply "Yes Dear. I was wrong." and buy me flowers.
(all virtual bouquets may be sent to brunelleschi@gmail.com)
Very interesting from the point of view of a painter /architect whose boyfriend is a hacker. We've made similar comparisons ourselves in many conversations. I look forward to finishing the essay which I'm sure will inspire many more conversations and blogging.
I was just discussing this issue minutes before reading this post. Ah, hotkeys, sounds like a good plan but I can't get myself to use them (completely, that is) because I am an artistic user (oh yes we do exist and we even read slashdot) and eye-hand coordination is easier than muscle-memory for me. And besides, there are mouse shortcuts out there too.
This issue was brought up as I was sitting down to play a game of Dungeon Siege with my boyfriend and setting up hotkeys that I know I will probably never use because my reflexes are highly tuned for eye-hand and less so for muscle memory. So I naturally reach for the mouse when being attacked by monsters and not the keyboard.
Since the post was directed to those of us who are interested in its applications for Photoshop and 3D rendering programs. . . Makes sense to me.