Silencer Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Cameras and such devices are rated by their resolution, or how many pixels they cram into a specific area (DPI). I was wondering, what is the resolution of the human eye? When do you think we'll be able to create cameras that see better than us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 From here: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4555 We get this: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html link which gives us an answer, but not quite the answer... lets see what others say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokele Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 From the above website, peak density seems to be about 175,000/mm. But light has to pass through the lens, so I'm not sure how that translates into whether we can distinguish pixels or the like at a certain distance. I never was very good at Optics. Mokele Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 The Rayleigh criterion places a physical limit due to diffraction. That limit, combined with a "near point" of the eye of 15-25 cm, gives a limit of around 300-400 dots per inch, which is what is considered good (print or photo) quality. At that level you are at the threshold of losing the ability to tell that the picture is analog or digital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 gnuh: fizix I was wondering, what is the resolution of the human eye? When do you think we'll be able to create cameras that see better than us?arent eletron-microscopes essentially cameras with a better resolution than the human eye due to there use of eletrons, which have a smaller wavelength than light (and which also possibly changes the rayleigh criterion allowing for better resolution in a theorietical 'perfect' EM, although im crap at phisics so im not sure)? or do you mean cameras as in kodak? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mag Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 At that level you are at the threshold of losing the ability to tell that the picture is analog or digital. whats analog and digital? *feels dumb* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 whats analog and digital?*feels dumb* analog is continuous, digital is discrete. A conventional photo is considered analog, since the size of the emulsion grains are so much smaller than we can detect with our eye. A digital photo is (surprise!) digital, since there are a set amount of pixels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad89 Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Cameras and such devices are rated by their resolution' date=' or how many pixels they cram into a specific area (DPI). I was wondering, what is the resolution of the human eye? When do you think we'll be able to create cameras that see better than us?[/quote'] I wonder, would the resolution of the human eye be the amount of photons that we can cram into our field of vision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad89 Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 By the way, for a camera to be able to see better than us is impossible, because we would never know due to we would be the ones to look at its image, making its picture the same as our eye. Also, I guess that you could say that it would be able to see past our visible spectrum, but that already exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icheb Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 By the way, for a camera to be able to see better than us is impossible, because we would never know due to we would be the ones to look at its image, making its picture the same as our eye. Also, I guess that you could say that it would be able to see past our visible spectrum, but that already exists. Actually, you can . If you take a picture with a camera that is supposedly better than your eyes, you can try to zoom in to the picture. If the picture quality stays the same, the camera is better . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Actually, you can . If you take a picture with a camera that is supposedly better than your eyes, you can try to zoom in to the picture. If the picture quality stays the same, the camera is better . Exactly. Cameras have to be better than our eyes for this reason. You don't want to see the limitations of the camera in the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now