3 ms·
> 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.
by 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 agoFor 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 agoI'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 ....)