4 ms·

Currently my brain is wired to have focus one on area at a time. It must be a trip to have an entire field of view in focus all at the same time. Especially i

by mey 16y ago

Currently my brain is wired to have focus one on area at a time. It must be a trip to have an entire field of view in focus all at the same time. Especially if you are looking at something in the near-field and the far-field is two wildly separated visual images.

bpodgursky 16y ago
Even if the whole field is in focus, only the parts of the image hitting the fovea (in the center of the retina) will be in detail. That said, I'd still be curious to see how it looks...
ggchappell 16y ago
> Currently my brain is wired to have focus one on area at a time. Good point. Using this technology might have all kinds of unexpected effects on life.
- _delirium 16y ago
  For people with fairly good vision, the brain is already good at doing synthesis, so you have a whole scene effectively "available" to you, even if your eye can't simultaneously focus on all of it--- as you scan across a scene, your iris is constantly opening/closing, and the lens is changing focal depths, but you perceive it as effectively one scene. Sort of a fancy real-time version of HDR plus focus aggregation. It's possible that being able to actually see it simultaneously will make a big difference, but it's possible that much of it won't be that noticeable, because it'll just be implementing in hardware what we can already composite in "software" fairly well. Although, I can imagine one difference might be at wildly different focus depths, e.g. when I'm sitting at my desk, I don't simultaneously perceive my monitor and the tree 100ft away out the window as being in focus. It's hard to say, because there's also a center-of-vision / peripheral-vision distinction involved there, which would still exist even if all distances were simultaneously in focus.
  - ggchappell 16y ago
    I'm wondering if this technology might make it easier to perform certain tasks. For example, consider the various kinds of security or military work that essentially require someone to give attention simultaneously to a large area. (And I imagine there are other examples ....)
CUViper 16y ago
In a lot of video games, the entire scene is in focus, presumably because the developers can't know where you're actually looking. In that context, it doesn't feel weird at all (though I wonder if that's part of why some people get sick watching 3D games). Anyway, I don't know if that would translate to real life, since a 2D monitor doesn't give you any stereopsis hints, but it seems not too much of a stretch...
- rlpb 16y ago
  When I look at my screen, only a part of it is in focus. The computer doesn't need to know where I'm looking; my eyes are blurring those other bits for me.
andrewvc 16y ago
Not really, whenever you're looking at a landscape far away (focussing at infinity) everything is in focus. In fact, any situation where everything in front of you is equidistant from your eyes will mimic this everything is in focus situation.
Groxx 16y ago
Not so much. An enormous field of view is in focus on a sunny day, and you can see far more in focus by looking through a pinhole. Or there's the video game argument mentioned by CUViper. Of course, since we see in stereo, images will still only be aligned when we're looking at them with both eyes. And our eyes really only see detail in a tiny area (a few degrees). Having everything in focus is a negligible gain over having all distances you look at in focus.
rlpb 16y ago
> It must be a trip to have an entire field of view in focus all at the same time. I'm not sure that this is possible. Even if the lens system allows it, your retina isn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea

by mey 16y ago

bpodgursky 16y ago

Even if the whole field is in focus, only the parts of the image hitting the fovea (in the center of the retina) will be in detail. That said, I'd still be curious to see how it looks...

ggchappell 16y ago

> Currently my brain is wired to have focus one on area at a time. Good point. Using this technology might have all kinds of unexpected effects on life.

_delirium 16y ago
For people with fairly good vision, the brain is already good at doing synthesis, so you have a whole scene effectively "available" to you, even if your eye can't simultaneously focus on all of it--- as you scan across a scene, your iris is constantly opening/closing, and the lens is changing focal depths, but you perceive it as effectively one scene. Sort of a fancy real-time version of HDR plus focus aggregation. It's possible that being able to actually see it simultaneously will make a big difference, but it's possible that much of it won't be that noticeable, because it'll just be implementing in hardware what we can already composite in "software" fairly well. Although, I can imagine one difference might be at wildly different focus depths, e.g. when I'm sitting at my desk, I don't simultaneously perceive my monitor and the tree 100ft away out the window as being in focus. It's hard to say, because there's also a center-of-vision / peripheral-vision distinction involved there, which would still exist even if all distances were simultaneously in focus.
- ggchappell 16y ago
  I'm wondering if this technology might make it easier to perform certain tasks. For example, consider the various kinds of security or military work that essentially require someone to give attention simultaneously to a large area. (And I imagine there are other examples ....)

CUViper 16y ago

In a lot of video games, the entire scene is in focus, presumably because the developers can't know where you're actually looking. In that context, it doesn't feel weird at all (though I wonder if that's part of why some people get sick watching 3D games). Anyway, I don't know if that would translate to real life, since a 2D monitor doesn't give you any stereopsis hints, but it seems not too much of a stretch...

rlpb 16y ago
When I look at my screen, only a part of it is in focus. The computer doesn't need to know where I'm looking; my eyes are blurring those other bits for me.

andrewvc 16y ago

Not really, whenever you're looking at a landscape far away (focussing at infinity) everything is in focus. In fact, any situation where everything in front of you is equidistant from your eyes will mimic this everything is in focus situation.

Groxx 16y ago

Not so much. An enormous field of view is in focus on a sunny day, and you can see far more in focus by looking through a pinhole. Or there's the video game argument mentioned by CUViper. Of course, since we see in stereo, images will still only be aligned when we're looking at them with both eyes. And our eyes really only see detail in a tiny area (a few degrees). Having everything in focus is a negligible gain over having all distances you look at in focus.

rlpb 16y ago

> It must be a trip to have an entire field of view in focus all at the same time. I'm not sure that this is possible. Even if the lens system allows it, your retina isn't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea