Re: Dominating eye -> stereoblindness ???

[P3D <PTWW@xxxxxxx>]

I wrote:

>>I don't think it is possible to ambiretinal, or whatever you might call
>>it.  I wonder if you're in the "right church, wrong pew?"  I don't see
>>the mere fact that one has a dominant eye, or whether it is right vs.
>>left, as being related to perceiving depth in stereo images.

And Larry Berlin responded:

>As I state in another post, I've developed a significantly higher
>ambi-ocular(?) ability than I started with.<snip>

I regreted making the comparison to ambi-dextrious persons very shortly
after sending it.  Such a person can use either hand equally well, and
can freely switch between them if they care to.  As Larry pointed out,
and I acknowledged, it appears fairly easy to choose which eye's view
should dominate at a given moment.  (So my post was self-contradictory!)

> Maybe it's my extensive use of both eyes, but this method
>doesn't work for me to find the dominant eye. I'm way too aware of each
>eye's view when I point across the room. Any choice of pointing position is
>just that a choice and therefore not a good measure of dominance for me.

With practice, many people could learn, for example, to write equally well
with either hand.  This would not, imho, change the fact that they have an
innate tendency to be right-handed or left-handed.  You may have a highly
developed ability to instanteously switch between left and right eye
perspectives, but if a crisis situation were to demand you react without
time to consciously make a choice, wouldn't your pointing reflect the same
dominant eye tendency you observe using other tests?

>I think the dominant eye process does potentially interfere with stereo
>perception because it's a phenomenon that happens in the visual processing
>centers of the mind, not in the eyes. <snip> An awareness of
>stereopsis isn't necessary for adequate real life activities so it can be
>ignored by habit which is usually automatic and internal or caused by some
>special condition. <snip>

>When the mind accepts one
>eye's information exclusive of the other eye, or fails to process
>comparisons of texture or parallax, then stereo depth awareness is impaired.

I see the point!  But doesn't this go beyond a mere dominant-eye condition,
which I think virtually everyone has, into an "abnormality?" (Sorry I don't
have a more PC term on hand at the momemt.)

Paul Talbot


------------------------------