> Bryn
>
> Yes, but let's not forget that the "data" part of a
> display is only that part
> which needs to be foveated. Peripheral vision is a
> significant part of cueing
> foveation. With properly coordinated head motion and
> display update, a wider
> field of view is desireable. In that respect, no
> adequate HMD exists
> commercially.
>
For manipulative tasks, it has often been demonstrated
that limiting FOV causes degradation to dexterity and
execution time. Although biological data suggests
that we have a sensitive periphery, psychophysical
testing indicates that reducing peripheral detail can
be undertaken, such that the field of view is non
uniform with respect to spatial resolution. This has
been shown to have little effect on manipulative
tasks,
providing the resolution dropoff of the HMD is
comparable to the fall in resolution of the retina
with
optical axis eccentricity. Beyond a certain
eccentricity, I would say that the far peripheral
field has an insignificant contribution to make to
spatial awareness. It is better to employ this
bandwidth for increasing temporal resolution for a HMD
surely, rather than having a big FOV.
Sure, large saccades may target features 700degs away,
and limiting detail may obscure target stimuli, but
the importance of this for most tasks is minimal.
Ian van der Linde.
Anglia Polytechnic University
UK.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|