Old 3D vs. New 3D

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by scottwww

I was diagnosed with ambliopia at the age of eight. The guy said that if they had found it when I was a toddler, they could have put a patch over my good right eye to force my left eye to develop the connections. Since it was too late, nothing was done.

Maybe 5 years ago (I am 49 years old now) I started wearing contact lenses because I have become far-sighted (+3.00 for left eye and +0.50 for right eye). Initially, the correction to my left eye did little to improve my vision in that eye. Although the image was sharp, it just wasn't "all there". Today, I have significant improvement and get more work from my weak eye than I ever did. It is a difference of being able to read some with my weak eye where even with correction, it used to have to be a very large font.

So, there may be hope for your weak eye even in later years.

8 is late and studies show thats around the age that plasticity is decreasing. I think it would have been worth a try through to path/atropine therapy. Then vision therapy. The difference in the contact lens prescription is another thing all together. Thats called Anismetropia. Contact lenses are the way around it to help get a more equal sized image on both retinas but the difference in power will still create slightly different sized images on each retina. This may be helping you see better. It depends if that +3 is due to actual refractive error or not.

Either way, glad you are able to see well!

[Freakazoid]

damn sons of bitches.

This thread is enlightening. I always thought 3D just sucked, but apparently my vision is what sucks.

Explains why my one eye sometimes does some crazy shit when flash goes off on a camera too

[timmahh]

Originally Posted by NYCGP

You know how I know you're gay?

penis, tell us..


Oh I meant please, tell us.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

8 is late and studies show thats around the age that plasticity is decreasing. I think it would have been worth a try through to path/atropine therapy. Then vision therapy. The difference in the contact lens prescription is another thing all together. Thats called Anismetropia. Contact lenses are the way around it to help get a more equal sized image on both retinas but the difference in power will still create slightly different sized images on each retina. This may be helping you see better. It depends if that +3 is due to actual refractive error or not.

Either way, glad you are able to see well!

When I first got my contacts, it didn't seem to improve the vision in my left eye enough to make a difference, since my perception of vision from that eye was so little. It's hard to describe. With my right eye closed, and wearing the contact for my left, the image is sharp, but it is like seeing through objects to a blank wall. This effect has dimished a lot over the years since I started wearing contacts.

My eye doctor indicated that my left eye has gone from 20/40 with aided vision to 20/20 with the same prescripion... but that must be barely 20/20 as it is not as good as the sight I have from my right eye. I used to test 20/10 or 20/15 in my right eye as a student. My left was always able to make out just the biggest "E" as I remember it.

Also, my prescription for my right eye was set to improve my near vision at the cost of far vision (which is still 20/20).

For me, it really has made a differnce having vision correction for my weak eye to greatly improve perception beyond just optics. When my doctor started me on contacts, he indicated that it was unlikely this vision would ever improve. Maybe I should thank God for it since the doctor didn't think it would help.

It used to be that I would see a 3D movie with others and they would gush over the effect and I would hardly notice it. Now it is perhaps as good for me as it is for them.

[Freakazoid]

So final question JayKay, with that in mind, I've always considered lasik...any input on that? bad idea?

[carve]

Passive polarized 3d glasses would have to work with a TV that has each row of pixels polarized in a different direction.

I've heard of glasses-less 3d TVs in development. I'm not sure how they'd work, but I'd guess it uses a very narrow viewing angle to project a slightly different image to each eye...kind of like those old moving hologram things.

I think 3d will be pretty limited and widespread at once. Eventually, most TV's will have it at minimal additional cost. However, only big spectacular movies will be in 3D. Comedies aren't any funnier in 3D, for example.

For it to really catch on, movies will have to be photographed differently. For instance, using camera techniques such as shallow depth of field are a big no-no in 3D. If you're focused on the wrong spot on the screen, then the whole screen goes blurry when they do that. It's like 3D done by Xhibit. Yo dawg...

I think the real big app for 3D will be video games. They'll be much more immersive. However, people playing, say, a first person shooter would still have a performance advantage in 2D because they could focus on the whole screen at once, so you'd have to have 3D-specific servers to keep things fair.

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by scottwww

When I first got my contacts, it didn't seem to improve the vision in my left eye enough to make a difference, since my perception of vision from that eye was so little. It's hard to describe. With my right eye closed, and wearing the contact for my left, the image is sharp, but it is like seeing through objects to a blank wall. This effect has dimished a lot over the years since I started wearing contacts.

My eye doctor indicated that my left eye has gone from 20/40 with aided vision to 20/20 with the same prescripion... but that must be barely 20/20 as it is not as good as the sight I have from my right eye. I used to test 20/10 or 20/15 in my right eye as a student. My left was always able to make out just the biggest "E" as I remember it.

Also, my prescription for my right eye was set to improve my near vision at the cost of far vision (which is still 20/20).

For me, it really has made a differnce having vision correction for my weak eye to greatly improve perception beyond just optics. When my doctor started me on contacts, he indicated that it was unlikely this vision would ever improve. Maybe I should thank God for it since the doctor didn't think it would help.

It used to be that I would see a 3D movie with others and they would gush over the effect and I would hardly notice it. Now it is perhaps as good for me as it is for them.

You're probably a hyperope with some residual accommodation left. You usually loose that accommodation somewhere between 40-55. The plus lens will give you little boost on the near while while you still have accommodation left to add to focus at the far point.

As for being able to see, there are many distinct neurological processes and pathways when it comes to vision. Amblyopia refers to a decrease in one of the eyes stimulus which will then cause the monocular cells for that eye as well as the binocular cells to decrease growth. You also have processes called rivalry and suppression. When the eye is presented with two different images, such as different contrast/contours with your amblyopic eye, the eye will undergo rivalry and suppression, where it will switch back and forth between the two eyes images and the percept you see will actually be a combination. The amount of suppression/rivalry will depend on both the stimulus your good eye is looking at and the stimulus your bad eye sees and depending on the stimulus to each your brain will create a visual percept. Theres more too it but thats a basic bit on your your brain combines the images.

Now with visual acuity, it only tests a very small portion of your vision. Its using high spatial frequency high contrast optotypes which only makes up a small portion of your vision. In relation to real world translation it will only help you partially. You also have to worry about contrast sensitivity. You may be 20/20 at 100% contrast but 20/80 at 60% contrast. Then you've got different cells and different pathways for movement, high contrast, low contrast, colors, perception, recognition, etc. So you may see an improvement in your high contrast perception with the contact lens you still have problems with other types of perception which would explain the images looking hazy and translucent.

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

So final question JayKay, with that in mind, I've always considered lasik...any input on that? bad idea?

If your vision cant be corrected with glasses in that eye, it wont be corrected with lasik either. If you are happy with the correction you have and you feel that its good enough than lasik is a viable option. OTOH, if you've only got one good eye do you really want to run the risk of ruining it, however small the risk, with a surgery. Other things to consider are dry eye, corneal thickness, etc. which all effect the surgery and what type of surgical procedure you can actually have for correction. If you are really interested in it and you are young, than talk to your optometrist about it. If you are in your 30's than just be aware that you'll probably be back in reading glasses in your 40's. The best time to get it would be your mid 20s once your vision has settled out and hasn't changed for a few years. That will give you the best bang for your buck in terms of longevity of the procedure and you not needing glasses for reading.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

If your vision cant be corrected with glasses in that eye, it wont be corrected with lasik either. If you are happy with the correction you have and you feel that its good enough than lasik is a viable option. OTOH, if you've only got one good eye do you really want to run the risk of ruining it, however small the risk, with a surgery. Other things to consider are dry eye, corneal thickness, etc. which all effect the surgery and what type of surgical procedure you can actually have for correction. If you are really interested in it and you are young, than talk to your optometrist about it. If you are in your 30's than just be aware that you'll probably be back in reading glasses in your 40's. The best time to get it would be your mid 20s once your vision has settled out and hasn't changed for a few years. That will give you the best bang for your buck in terms of longevity of the procedure and you not needing glasses for reading.

interesting, thanks for the insight man.

my one eye truly isn't THAT bad, I'm betting it's extremely minor... (again enough that my vision has never noticeably suffered, etc etc). So that's the redeeming aspect I suppose. although this has now prompted me to schedule an appointment and see if I can actually diagnose this officially

[JayKay335i]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

interesting, thanks for the insight man.

my one eye truly isn't THAT bad, I'm betting it's extremely minor... (again enough that my vision has never noticeably suffered, etc etc). So that's the redeeming aspect I suppose. although this has now prompted me to schedule an appointment and see if I can actually diagnose this officially

Nice. Just tell your doctor that you cant see the 3D in movies as well as you think you should be. Could be something could be nothing.

[scottwww]

Originally Posted by JayKay335i

You're probably a hyperope with some residual accommodation left. You usually loose that accommodation somewhere between 40-55. The plus lens will give you little boost on the near while while you still have accommodation left to add to focus at the far point.

As for being able to see, there are many distinct neurological processes and pathways when it comes to vision. Amblyopia refers to a decrease in one of the eyes stimulus which will then cause the monocular cells for that eye as well as the binocular cells to decrease growth. You also have processes called rivalry and suppression. When the eye is presented with two different images, such as different contrast/contours with your amblyopic eye, the eye will undergo rivalry and suppression, where it will switch back and forth between the two eyes images and the percept you see will actually be a combination. The amount of suppression/rivalry will depend on both the stimulus your good eye is looking at and the stimulus your bad eye sees and depending on the stimulus to each your brain will create a visual percept. Theres more too it but thats a basic bit on your your brain combines the images.

Now with visual acuity, it only tests a very small portion of your vision. Its using high spatial frequency high contrast optotypes which only makes up a small portion of your vision. In relation to real world translation it will only help you partially. You also have to worry about contrast sensitivity. You may be 20/20 at 100% contrast but 20/80 at 60% contrast. Then you've got different cells and different pathways for movement, high contrast, low contrast, colors, perception, recognition, etc. So you may see an improvement in your high contrast perception with the contact lens you still have problems with other types of perception which would explain the images looking hazy and translucent.

Thanks for the information. That helped some, especially the contrast part. I am just very happy that my left eye vision has improved so much beyond what the lens correction provides directly. When I first got the lens, if I tried to read with my left eye only, it was little changed from no lens. Today, I can read this computer screen with resoluition at 1920x1200 from 2 feet away on the standard small fonts. That could not have happend five years ago at all. It's a good thing my left eye is coming to the party now with 3D entertainment becoming commonplace. And as my right eye isn't quite what it used to be.

If I had known then what I know now, I would likely have tried something to make use of my left eye all along.

At the DMV, when doing the vision test, they would test the right eye saying read this line. No problem. Then the screen would go to a blank screen and they would say read this line. I would say, "There isn't any line" I couldn't see any line at all with my left eye. Then they would have me close my right eye and I could see it well enough to pass their tests with no vision correction required. I wonder if the same test now would be possible to complete without closing my right eye.

Thanks for your explanation. That is more information than any eye doctor has told me before.

[JayKay335i]

Glad I could help