On Sat, 16 Dec 2017 19:00:32 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/16/2017 3:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
I was wrong.

That phrase is very rare on Usenet! Congratulations on your honesty!

Does that compensate for my miserable math, creative logic, and
failing memory? Probably not. Never mind...

Would you buy a headlight from a company that fakes their demo/test
photos?

Is it "faked" or is it clarified?

I think the fashionable term is "enhanced" which can mean almost
anything.

I'd use the former term only if the effect and intent was deception. But
I've bought several of their headlights. IME all performed as expected
or better, consistent with the beam shots I found. I don't think there
was anything dishonest happening.

Agreed. I don't see any evidence of tampering with the beam pattern.
As James pointed out, my false color image looks almost exactly like
their computah model.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/Cygo-Premium/80%20Lux%20-%20Ausleuchtung%20IQ-Premium%20-%20false%20color.jpg
https://www.bumm.de/files/Technologie/IQ-TEC%20vs%20IQ-Premium.jpg
However, the surroundings in the garage appear to have been fabricated
for the occasion. Whether the intent is to deceive, or simply the
results of an overly creative art department is a matter of personal
opinion.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558