On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 23:07:48 GMT, Dave Shrader
wrote:
My Physics books indicate that wavelengths greater than 610 nm are 'red'.

Hi Dave,

Last touch on this point of experience. Probably very, very few
scientists and even fewer engineers would subscribe to this. It is
fine for a commonplace description useful for discussion in cocktail
parties, or tailgate parties (why they would want to know this rather
inspecific specific is another issue).

I dare say any commercial application would characterize 610 nm as
either yellow or orange. However, this is again a problem of human
perception - just like calling sunlight yellow (most photographers
would beg to differ) or calling it white (the rest of the
photographers would beg to differ). In one word: Subjective.

So, to the nature of glare, and its frequency and to the ACTUAL
purpose of anti-glare glass
it supposedly suppresses the reflection of rare gas light by
covering sensitive exhibition photographs:
Ar - Argon vapor
Na - Sodium vapor
and a host of other mixes, none of which are commonly red ;-)

When was the last time you visited any photographic art galleries that
were illuminated with Neon? Anti-glare is just a marketing pitch
anyway, how many photos are illuminated under any wavelength specific
source? The truth of the matter is that all general purpose lighting
is broad banded and negates any promise of "anti-glare."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC