3 ms·

You project into the scene to discover the distance of the object, then set the aperture and/or focal length of your camera as appropriate.

marvin 10y ago
What do you do when the pupil is ambiguously pointing at an object 30cm in front of your eyes, and a mountain on the horizon?
- hodwik 10y ago
  Wide DOF
ascorbic 10y ago
This doesn't help. You need to physically change focus in your eye. Your brain uses the feedback from the eye muscles to ascertain distance. If your eye muscles don't need to adjust focus, then they're reporting that everything is at the same distance. If this disagrees with the stereoscopy or the context then you will get nausea.
- Natanael_L 10y ago
  Light field displays?
- hodwik 10y ago
  > "Your brain uses the feedback from the eye muscles to ascertain distance." Source? I'm under the impression that focus is a brain-first, muscles-second process. If the object was already in focus, I don't think your eyes would mind.
  - ascorbic 10y ago
    It's called the vergence-accommodation conflict. There's quite a bit of literature on the problem in relation to VR. Here's one paper picked at random from Google. http://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2122611 http://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2122611
    - hodwik 10y ago
      If that were true people with only one eye would be nauseous all of the time. As I understand it (which I may not) -- this paper (which purports to be the only paper to have tested this effect), says that they test divergence by having the images displayed at various distances to replicate varying levels of divergence. They see that the closer it is to a realistic vergence/accommodation match the more comfortable the eyes. However -- it should obviously be easier to tune a 3D image which is at a realistic distance than one which is not. It seems to me, they may very well just be showing that effect, just showing that it is easier to adjust the illusion to render realistically at distance. This would make perfect sense. This would then just argue for better tuning.

marvin 10y ago

What do you do when the pupil is ambiguously pointing at an object 30cm in front of your eyes, and a mountain on the horizon?

hodwik 10y ago
Wide DOF

ascorbic 10y ago

This doesn't help. You need to physically change focus in your eye. Your brain uses the feedback from the eye muscles to ascertain distance. If your eye muscles don't need to adjust focus, then they're reporting that everything is at the same distance. If this disagrees with the stereoscopy or the context then you will get nausea.

Natanael_L 10y ago
Light field displays?
hodwik 10y ago
> "Your brain uses the feedback from the eye muscles to ascertain distance." Source? I'm under the impression that focus is a brain-first, muscles-second process. If the object was already in focus, I don't think your eyes would mind.
- ascorbic 10y ago
  It's called the vergence-accommodation conflict. There's quite a bit of literature on the problem in relation to VR. Here's one paper picked at random from Google. http://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2122611 http://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2122611
  - hodwik 10y ago
    If that were true people with only one eye would be nauseous all of the time. As I understand it (which I may not) -- this paper (which purports to be the only paper to have tested this effect), says that they test divergence by having the images displayed at various distances to replicate varying levels of divergence. They see that the closer it is to a realistic vergence/accommodation match the more comfortable the eyes. However -- it should obviously be easier to tune a 3D image which is at a realistic distance than one which is not. It seems to me, they may very well just be showing that effect, just showing that it is easier to adjust the illusion to render realistically at distance. This would make perfect sense. This would then just argue for better tuning.