3 ms·
That's the size that is relevant to foveated rendering. But note that your actual physical fovea is even smaller than this, due to saccades.
by fudged71 6y ago
That's the size that is relevant to foveated rendering. But note that your actual physical fovea is even smaller than this, due to saccades.
- jessriedel 6y agoBy what factor does it increase the apparent fovea size?
- fudged71 6y agoI couldn't tell you a scientific answer. However, I have a vision condition where I can't see blue in my actual fovea. And that point is incredibly small. Maybe 3-4 times smaller than what you are seeing here.
- vanattab 6y agoI was under the impression that everyone was blue blind in the fovea due to a lack of short wavelength cones in the fovea. This paper seems to confirm this but it is from 1967 and I am have trouble finding other references. https://www.osapublishing.org/josa/abstract.cfm?uri=josa-57-11-1289#:~:text=An%20area%20at%20the%20center,entirely%20lacking%20blue-sensitive%20cones https://www.osapublishing.org/josa/abstract.cfm?uri=josa-57-....
- jessriedel 6y agoNote that this paper describes a lack of blue cones in only the very center of the fovea, corresponding to 7-8 angular minutes (or 0.03-0.04 mm). That's much smaller than the fovea as a whole, which is about 5 degrees or 1.5 mm. It's unclear whether fudged71 just has this normal condition, or actually has blue blindness over a wider region.