Don't get this, what's the point in 1 device being corrected while the rest of the real world is blurry?
One use case example was a guy in a car with GPS navigation. So he can then see the GPS nav but how does he drive if he can't see properly!?
Additional details here http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2014/new-display-technology-automa...
Check this out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=180224
One can imagine a pair of normal eyeglasses which have an IMU or accelerometer of some sort in them. When they sense they are being taken off, the users' phone switches profiles, the screen blurs, and the user moves seamlessly from glasses to phone without ever realizing what took place.
Would be a neat touch. I like connected appliances that aren't. (if that makes sense)
I've always thought it would be interesting to correct vision at the brain/neural level rather than the physical level. Can anyone comment on whether this would be possible?
Link to the paper and supplemental information:
I'd love for this to become common, since I have worn glasses for near sightedness since childhood. However, the biggest problem I see with this is that it is customized on a per user basis.
So, while I can use my phone just fine, you can't cause it's calibrated to correct my vision deficiency. I guess that it can be used on something extremely personal; like a phone, but I don't see it becoming main stream for most displays, like a shared tablet or a computer or something.
It's an interesting idea, but even for the narrow use-case of looking at a display it does not replace for everyone the need of wearing glasses/lenses. This kind of display may only "fix" something that affects both eyes in an equal measure. If the image distortion have to be different from one eye to another, then an individual-eye-level correction is needed.
Can this be done at the software level? I.e. feature built in to OS that modifies displayed image in the same way this screen does.
Cool, but I think most of the people with glasses wouldn't want to rely on gadgets even more. If you can see display, but can't see physical controls or paper, that's an issue waiting to happen.
I think this is a great idea, and wonder why it took so long. I'd love to be able to take my glasses off and read in bed, or take my glasses off for a few hours at work while in front of my monitor.
I wonder if there's an analogy to be drawn between the pinhole mask they use and the lithography masks used to etch ICs on silicon.
Sounds like the old "Magic Eye" pictures
I was told the following legend about how shoes were invented. A haughty princess wanted to leave her pristine castle and explore the world. But she found the world very dusty. She told her wise men to come up with a plan to cover the world in a lush carpet. The wise men pondered and said that this could not be done. The princess threw a fit. The wise men pondered some more. Then they said "Princess, we can not cover the world in a large carpet, but we can, however, cover your feet in a small one". And the princess was pleased. And that, kids, is how we got shoes.
If I understand this correctly, this is a light-field display.
The implications are bigger than vision correction - LF display can reconstruct actual 3d images, as opposed to the stereo images being marketed as "3d" today. Stereo displays give two different pictures to two different eyes, but the don't provide perspective shift (the picture doesn't change when you move your head left and right), and they don't provide different focal planes (your eyes focus on the screen plane regardless of how far the object is supposed to be, creating a dissonance between the distance inferred from the angle between the eyes and the focusing distance).