3 ms·
I think you'd be surprised what a small variation there would be on pupil location given a mounting point like a nose and a pair of ears. I'm guessing the stan
by brc 16y ago
I think you'd be surprised what a small variation there would be on pupil location given a mounting point like a nose and a pair of ears. I'm guessing the standard deviation for normal people would be very small, and a fudge factor added to the blackout spot would cover 95% of the population. This could also be also catered for by a range of say, 3 sizes, narrow, wide and normal. George Bush gets a narrow, Uma Thurman gets a wide. It would be a snap to try on each size and work out which one was best.
- 6ren 16y agoMy comment was mainly about when glasses shift slightly on your face, especially moving down the bridge. For conventional sunglasses, a small change in location has little effect, but for these, even a millimeter could correspond to over 10 pixels (depending on the dpi). The pane is very close to the eye, so small changes are amplified if lines are extended outward into the scene being viewed. Actually, to be more accurate, it wouldn't depend on the location of the pupil, but on the center of the eye (because the geometry is that when the eye looks in different directions, it rotates about this center). The pupil moves quite a lot, as you glance left and right.
- brc 16y agoYes, you're right. So effectively the black spot is going to be of a sufficient size to create a shaded area over 95% of the area that the pupil is likely to be at any one time. That's going to be difficult without having internally looking cameras that monitor the pupil.