<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Photomicrograph exhibit @ MaRS: Vote for your favourite</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.marsdd.com/2007/08/27/photomicrograph-exhibit-mars-vote-for-your-favourite/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.marsdd.com/2007/08/27/photomicrograph-exhibit-mars-vote-for-your-favourite/</link>
	<description>The blog about innovation and commercialization in Canada</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://blog.marsdd.com/2007/08/27/photomicrograph-exhibit-mars-vote-for-your-favourite/#comment-11871</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.marsdd.com/2007/08/27/photomicrograph-exhibit-mars-vote-for-your-favourite/#comment-11871</guid>
		<description>The beauty inherent in nature and the natural world has long been appreciated by artists - orginally by painters (including the earliest cave paintings) and more recently wildlife and landscape photographers. 

Only more recently have people been seeking beauty and art in the smaller structures of nature that cannot be visualised with the naked eye. 

I recognise that for a working scientist there may to some extent be conflicts -- the best stain to visualise sub-cellular structure may not always be the aesthetic choice, and the equipment is often rather expensive to be "playing around on" --  but nevertheless, you have only to look at some of the images produced to recognise that small can definitely be beautiful, and science can also be art.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The beauty inherent in nature and the natural world has long been appreciated by artists - orginally by painters (including the earliest cave paintings) and more recently wildlife and landscape photographers. </p>
<p>Only more recently have people been seeking beauty and art in the smaller structures of nature that cannot be visualised with the naked eye. </p>
<p>I recognise that for a working scientist there may to some extent be conflicts &#8212; the best stain to visualise sub-cellular structure may not always be the aesthetic choice, and the equipment is often rather expensive to be &#8220;playing around on&#8221; &#8212;  but nevertheless, you have only to look at some of the images produced to recognise that small can definitely be beautiful, and science can also be art.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
