SIDE MIRROWS - HARD TO SEE - blind spot

[Kamuelaflyer]

If focal length to the rear view mirror is a problem, then so is focal length to the dashboard. Speed is large enough to see, but other information tends to be smaller than the car behind you in the rear view mirror.

They can be. Some folks need trifocal glasses.

I thought about this while driving to the dentist yesterday. The inside rearview mirror is about a book's length away. That means a camera version would have the same issue as a book and require reading glasses. The current setup (no camera "mirror") is fine as the focal length on that is to the object reflected, not the distance to the mirror. It's a bit easier for the nearsighted among us, as they tend to wear glasses all the time.

The IPC and sync screen are at roughly (actually slightly closer) the same distance as the instrument panel in an MD-11. That's an intermediate distance, and many people have issues with it. That's where trifocals come in. The large top portion corrects for distance issues (nearsighted), the bottom for close-in (farsighted) correction, and there's a small sliver between the two for intermediate distance corrections. I flew with a few copilots who wore trifocals; there would be a subtle nodding and raising of the head when they scanned the panel, then switched to outside cues. The same would be true for driving.

Progressive lenses do not have a sudden change between the distance and close-in corrections. That area can be used for intermediate distance for those who need it, as @E90alex alluded to.

I wasn't aware there was a way to switch to a real mirror on the Bolt. That's a perfect solution imo. Or add a subscription-based service to have the camera mirror correct based on your glasses prescription. I'm kidding, please don't do that. The real issue comes when you get cars like the upcoming new model Polestar (I think), where there is no real mirror at all, just the camera mirror, because the rear window more or less points at the sky.

And some of this is a matter of degree. As I aged out of the airline industry, I found I needed a mild set of bifocals. The difference between having them or not was extremely subtle when driving a car or landing an airplane. I choose to wear prescription sunglasses while flying or driving, and still do. I just switched to reading glasses (usually granny glasses) when I needed to brief an approach or read a checklist. I keep those same granny glasses in the mach-e.

Sponsored

 

[Sikkun]

Or add a subscription-based service to have the camera mirror correct based on your glasses prescription.

Well now that’s what we are getting!

I’ve always wondered for VR helmets why they can’t auto adjust like the machine we stare at with the hot air balloon or the farmhouse picture at the eye doctor that auto focuses the image.

Probably a good reason, reason is probably money. But it would be cool to have auto adjusting screens.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

it would be cool to have auto adjusting screens.

Yes. A 1 time fee. Let's not go all BMW on subscriptions, though.

I recall when passenger airlines went to rent a blanket programs on red eye flights. It was to "enhance your blanket experience." An actual quote from USAir btw. Better door handles on the mach-e? "Enhancing your door experience." For a fee. Return of the kick-to-open trunk? "Enhancing your ligtgate experience." For a fee. We could go on and on!

 

[Blue highway]

They can be. Some folks need trifocal glasses.

I thought about this while driving to the dentist yesterday. The inside rearview mirror is about a book's length away. That means a camera version would have the same issue as a book and require reading glasses. The current setup (no camera "mirror") is fine as the focal length on that is to the object reflected, not the distance to the mirror. It's a bit easier for the nearsighted among us, as they tend to wear glasses all the time.

The IPC and sync screen are at roughly (actually slightly closer) the same distance as the instrument panel in an MD-11. That's an intermediate distance, and many people have issues with it. That's where trifocals come in. The large top portion corrects for distance issues (nearsighted), the bottom for close-in (farsighted) correction, and there's a small sliver between the two for intermediate distance corrections. I flew with a few copilots who wore trifocals; there would be a subtle nodding and raising of the head when they scanned the panel, then switched to outside cues. The same would be true for driving.

Progressive lenses do not have a sudden change between the distance and close-in corrections. That area can be used for intermediate distance for those who need it, as @E90alex alluded to.

I wasn't aware there was a way to switch to a real mirror on the Bolt. That's a perfect solution imo. Or add a subscription-based service to have the camera mirror correct based on your glasses prescription. I'm kidding, please don't do that. The real issue comes when you get cars like the upcoming new model Polestar (I think), where there is no real mirror at all, just the camera mirror, because the rear window more or less points at the sky.

And some of this is a matter of degree. As I aged out of the airline industry, I found I needed a mild set of bifocals. The difference between having them or not was extremely subtle when driving a car or landing an airplane. I choose to wear prescription sunglasses while flying or driving, and still do. I just switched to reading glasses (usually granny glasses) when I needed to brief an approach or read a checklist. I keep those same granny glasses in the mach-e.

You hit on the reason why having screens replace mirrors in a car is "great" only if you are under say 40 or so... but if you are older than that, they are terrible... especially the rear view mirror. With mirrors you look at them with your eye focusing at a long distance (infinity)... with screens you are focusing at the distance of the screen. Everyone eventually gets stiff lenses... (presbiopia) and this becomes less comfortable and eventually needs correction.

Car makers miss this when their product managers are young, but their buying segment is old.

 

[astrorob]

by the way, i did lease a bolt some years back and despite only being in my late 40s at the time and mildly nearsighted (which allows me to see near if i take my glasses off), the bolt 'camera rear view' was unusable for me. not only because i couldn't focus that close to my face with my glasses on, but also because the camera was down low and the view given was nothing like looking out the back window thru a mirror. maybe i would have gotten used to that, but it felt unnatural.

overall i feel like these screens that try to replace mirrors are a lose. i do like having the backup camera, etc on the big center screen but on the smaller surfaces they are just no good. IMO anyway.

 

[ChrisO]

This talk about the Bolt mirror reminded me that my problem with the Maza Tribute wasn't just the passenger side mirror distorting the distance perception. But the second part was "self-induced". We had added a dashcam that you mounted in front of your rearview mirror, and its backup camera became the rearview.

Anyone that has seen a rear camera will recognize that they are very "wide-angle" and have the same problem.

But that leads me to realize that there is a real trade off of whatever is being used to do the viewing.

Your rear-view mirror starts its view angle from the dashboard. This allows you to see more of the back without a wide-angle view. But of course, it has the downside that since you are looking through the car, anything in the car can block the view, including of course the car frame. But if you stick a camera at the back, to cover the same viewing area you must have a wide-angle view len.

Given that experience I certainly wouldn't want to have "camera only" rear view mirror again if it is mounted at the back of the car.

 

[phil]

You hit on the reason why having screens replace mirrors in a car is "great" only if you are under say 40 or so... but if you are older than that, they are terrible... especially the rear view mirror.

I am WAY over 40, but have no problem seeing near and far -- I have one eye for each.

But yes, some old people would need glasses or contact lenses for this. Many, probably most, but by no means all.

 

[phil]

Or add a subscription-based service to have the camera mirror correct based on your glasses prescription. I'm kidding, please don't do that.

Won't be necessary. Several companies are coming out with 'auto-focusing' eyeglasses that will enable presbyopic people to focus at a wide range of distances. I think there are already a few such products available, though the focus change might currently require a button tap. In the near future, it should be automatic, like young eyes.

What will they think of next?

Sponsored