can someone explain how this works?

[Jerhew]

how exactly is that pro-dot of any use whatsoever?

[McSweedish]

When you use both eyes it like eh, transfers to your other eye and stuff. I can't explain it hehe

[Mr. Grumble]

keep both eyes open.
look down range with one eye and through the sight with the other.
one eye 'sees' the field in front of you, the other 'sees' a blank area with a red dot floating in the middle of it (the sight picture)
your brain combines the two pictures to give you an image of the field with a red dot floating in it.
functions similar to a poor-man's heads-up targeting display.

Mr. Grumble

[Doc Nickel]

Technically it's called an "occluded eye gunsight" and the concept predates the illuminated red-dot type scopes by a good number of years.

With an OEG like the Armson or the very early Aimpoints, you don't look through the sight, like a telescope. Rather, the sight provides a black or at least dark background and superimposes a brightly-colored dot on it.

Your brain always sees two entirely different images of the world- assuming you have two eyes. Your brain combines these images and gives you what we call "depth perception".

However, the brain is also very good at filtering out extraneous information- for you glasses wearers, when's the last time you actually noticed your frames? For the rest of you, how long has it been since you realized you can actually see the side of your own nose?

Thus, what happens is literally, one eye is looking at the back of the sight, and seeing a black circle with a little bright dot in the middle of it. While the other eye sees an unimpeded view of the target.

Your brain combines these images, and since the target is important but the black circle is not, the brain essentially disregards that circle.

The practical result is, you see a clear, virtually unblocked view of the target, with a red dot sort of floating out in space (visually) indicating where the shot will go.

With practice, the sight is very fast to use- indeed, it was designed as a close-quarters-combat sight for submachine guns. But like any sight, the accuracy of the sight is orders of magnitude better than the accuracy of the paintball gun, and thus is something of a waste in this sport.

Doc.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Doc Nickel
Technically it's called an "occluded eye gunsight" and the concept predates the illuminated red-dot type scopes by a good number of years.

With an OEG like the Armson or the very early Aimpoints, you don't look through the sight, like a telescope. Rather, the sight provides a black or at least dark background and superimposes a brightly-colored dot on it.

Your brain always sees two entirely different images of the world- assuming you have two eyes. Your brain combines these images and gives you what we call "depth perception".

However, the brain is also very good at filtering out extraneous information- for you glasses wearers, when's the last time you actually noticed your frames? For the rest of you, how long has it been since you realized you can actually see the side of your own nose?

Thus, what happens is literally, one eye is looking at the back of the sight, and seeing a black circle with a little bright dot in the middle of it. While the other eye sees an unimpeded view of the target.

Your brain combines these images, and since the target is important but the black circle is not, the brain essentially disregards that circle.

The practical result is, you see a clear, virtually unblocked view of the target, with a red dot sort of floating out in space (visually) indicating where the shot will go.

With practice, the sight is very fast to use- indeed, it was designed as a close-quarters-combat sight for submachine guns. But like any sight, the accuracy of the sight is orders of magnitude better than the accuracy of the paintball gun, and thus is something of a waste in this sport.

Doc.

[deathstalker]

I've never heard of that and do find it very interesting, Shartley. Has an optometrist or neurologist ever commented on it? I always thought that everyone who has vision in both eyes would have depth perception and stereoscopic vision. I would also think that lack of depth perception would also make some activities, especially driving, very unsafe because you cannot accurately judge the distance of objects in front of you.

I'd think the medical community would be very interested in you, unless this is something that is more common than one would think. You sound like you have lizard eyes. There's also a lot of us with stereoscopic vision who can't get those darn 3-D images either.

[shartley]

Originally posted by deathstalker
I've never heard of that and do find it very interesting, Shartley. Has an optometrist or neurologist ever commented on it? I always thought that everyone who has vision in both eyes would have depth perception and stereoscopic vision. I would also think that lack of depth perception would also make some activities, especially driving, very unsafe because you cannot accurately judge the distance of objects in front of you.

I'd think the medical community would be very interested in you, unless this is something that is more common than one would think. You sound like you have lizard eyes. There's also a lot of us with stereoscopic vision who can't get those darn 3-D images either.

[Jerhew]

hehe
actually this thread turned out to be much more informative than i expected to be honest...
i just thought it looked a little silly to have a sight that you can't see your target through
i mean, i get it now
but i always thought it was stupid to have a sight rail on a vert feed gun
i guess they're just there in case you want to have an oeg

i also agree that trying to aim a paintball gun with anything more than your naked eye is kind of a waste

[Doc Nickel]

Um, Sharts? If both your eyes function more or less properly and point more or less in the same direction, and you're not missing some ganglion that link the optic nerves to both the brain and each other, then you have fairly normal depth perception.

Merely not being able to see the "magic images" pictures hardly means you have a weird condition or no depth perception- the people who print them say that sometimes as many as half the viewers can't "make it work".

I'm sure you mean Astigmatism, the inability of the eye to focus properly, usually meaning due to a nonsymmetrical deformation of the cornea (as opposed to a properly shaped cornea, but with an improper, but uniform, focal length.)

"Stigmatism" is by definition "proper eyesight."

Astigmatism is simply a mild but terribly common condition where the cornea doesn't focus all the light to the same spot. Unlike a lens that's symmetrical, but too thick or too thin (so the focal point would be ahead of or behind the retina) the optometrist has to compensate for both the focal length error and the distortion when creating the lens of the glasses.

It's hardly a unique or strange condition, easily corrected, and doesn't in the least affect things like driving and shooting, etc.

Doc.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Doc Nickel
Um, Sharts? If both your eyes function more or less properly and point more or less in the same direction, and you're not missing some ganglion that link the optic nerves to both the brain and each other, then you have fairly normal depth perception.

Merely not being able to see the "magic images" pictures hardly means you have a weird condition or no depth perception- the people who print them say that sometimes as many as half the viewers can't "make it work".

I'm sure you mean Astigmatism, the inability of the eye to focus properly, usually meaning due to a nonsymmetrical deformation of the cornea (as opposed to a properly shaped cornea, but with an improper, but uniform, focal length.)

"Stigmatism" is by definition "proper eyesight."

Astigmatism is simply a mild but terribly common condition where the cornea doesn't focus all the light to the same spot. Unlike a lens that's symmetrical, but too thick or too thin (so the focal point would be ahead of or behind the retina) the optometrist has to compensate for both the focal length error and the distortion when creating the lens of the glasses.

It's hardly a unique or strange condition, easily corrected, and doesn't in the least affect things like driving and shooting, etc.

Doc.

[Jonno06]

those posts were too long to read^^ so if someone said it already..sorry.


roll up a piece of paper, put out one hand,and put the paper on the side of your hand. look throught the paper with one eye, and keep the other eye open. it will look like the paper goes right through your hand.

[Aegis]

At the ripe old age of 40, I went to see a real eye doc instead of the lenscrafter type. He asked if I had a problem with depth perception, to which I replied that I stink at basketball (cant shoot) and baseball (can't tell if a ball is going to land in front or behind) and also park by brail when trying to get the Suburban in the garage.

He came up with a prism grind on my glasses that made the world look 3D for a while. A HUGE difference. Like shartley said, estimating range for hunting, driving, etc no problem but there was a serious issue with depth perception.

Brian

[ignatz]

shartley - What do you see when you use the Armson sight? Does it work for you? What's the test for depth perception like?

[shartley]

Originally posted by ignatz
shartley - What do you see when you use the Armson sight? Does it work for you? What's the test for depth perception like?