5 ms·

It's not a function of seeing it the dark, it's that human eyeballs have really good dynamic range, which is exactly why they'd beat cameras in those conditions

• pdonis 9y ago
  > human eyeballs have really good dynamic range Not if they're not given time to dark adapt. As I've posted elsewhere in this thread, human vision would still be better than that of a video camera using visible light, but that still wouldn't be very good under variable lighting conditions.
  • imh 9y ago
    There's a range of light to dark you can see at once. Your eyes can adapt and move the whole range up and down, as can cameras. You're right that it takes time. But the width of the range at a given moment is wider on people than many cameras (sans post-processing). That's why this video is deceptive. Our eyes can see details in the light and dark at the same time better than cameras can. This (https://i.imgur.com/3u1kN7T.png https://i.imgur.com/3u1kN7T.png) is an example. The top picture has less detail in both the lightest and darkest portions than the bottom one. The human eye is reeeeally good at that.
    • pdonis 9y ago
      > Our eyes can see details in the light and dark at the same time better than cameras can. Yes, I agree. But that doesn't mean that a human eye would necessarily have seen the pedestrian in this situation in time to react. (Based on other posts elsewhere in this thread, I don't think a human driver would have been able to see the pedestrian in time without high beam headlights on.)