BruceW said:
This is a picture from wikipedia, showing the sensitivity of the eye as a function of wavelength. The green curve represents the sensitivity at low light levels (which is what I assume is true in our case).
It seems to suggest that the sensitivity to red light is 100 times less than green (at low light levels). That's a massive factor! I guess that could be right, since I could only just see my red laser, but you say that the green laser was easy to see.
The black curve shows the sensitivity of the eye at normal light levels. I guess this is what to expect if it was a really powerful laser, then the eye could see red laser light more easily.
I believe this
is an important contribution. Most likely that website will also detail the difference between he eye's absorption mechanism of red and green light. Seeing red in the dark vs. light should
not be substantially different since the eye's saturation to red light doesn't scale exactly like it does with other light, with the exception of the effect of pupil dilation. Red wavelengths are only absorbed by the cones in the eye, which are 100 times less dense than rods if I remember correctly, which explains the sensitivity difference, and the reason why our eyes don't have to adjust to red wavelengths in the dark.
Additionally, Rayleigh scattering is important, but not the only factor that changes with wavelength. Not just the scattering, but the absorption of red, IR, etc., should be more probable because they require a lower energy transition than higher energy light like green, blue, UV, etc.
If you're considering solid-state lasers, you might also want to check the effects of the resonator bandwidth and coherence on the scattering, because SS red lasers are much easier to come by, so SS green laser producers will not seek a smaller bandwidth at the expense of power.