"Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:13ik7n8pq6f9kc0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> MOST EXCELLENT observation. Kodak set the metrics. Those are the same
>> folks who conducted a hugely expensive and detailed survey of average
>> customers (largely of automatic processing) and Kodak set their metrics
>> to those standards, as abysymal and utterly tasteless as they were,
they
>> still represented the drug-store processing majority. (Imagine the Bell
>> curve - who wants to live on top?) Oh, and what camera did Kodak come
out
>> with in response to that study? The wholly embarassing failure, the
Disc
>> Camera!
> This is simply not true. The Kodak speed method was developed over a
> very long time by quite valid research all of which has been published
in
> peer reviewed journals. Much of the work conducted under L.A.Jones
> leader****p was published in the Journal of the Franklin Institute.
> There is a big difference between market surveys and scientific
> investigation and you are confusing the two.
The study I am familiar with was a market study; it strove to find the
kind
of print most people like so that they could recommend processing and
materials to their mass processing clients. Market means the typical
purchaser.
