The tolerance range of binocular disparity on a 3D display based on the physiological characteristics of ocular accommodation

Abstract This study investigates the permissible value of horizontal binocular disparity when gazing at a three-dimensional (3D) display based on ocular accommodation function. For the closely perceived image on the 3D display screen, the crossed disparity of +1.0° and of +0.5° were given and for the far image, which gave the image far away from the screen, the uncrossed disparities of −1.0° and of −0.5° were taken. The disparity was 0° when the image was displayed on the screen. When the disparity was +1.0° and the stereoscopic image had been perceived, the accommodative response became significantly larger in comparison to that at 0°. An accommodation lead was observed significantly at a disparity +1.0°. The tolerance of binocular disparity on the 3D display based on the physiological aspect of ocular accommodation is thus suggested to be less than +1.0°.

[1]  W N Charman,et al.  Near vision, lags of accommodation and myopia , 1999, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[2]  J. Seaber,et al.  Pseudomyopia in exodeviations. , 1966, The American orthoptic journal.

[3]  Clifton Schor,et al.  The influence of interactions between accommodation and convergence on the lag of accommodation , 1999, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[4]  Ángel García Muñoz,et al.  Evaluating relative accommodations in general binocular dysfunctions , 2002 .

[5]  M. Bullimore,et al.  Visual acuity and the accuracy of the accommodative response , 2002, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[6]  S Nagata,et al.  The binocular fusion of human vision on stereoscopic displays--field of view and environment effects. , 1996, Ergonomics.

[7]  F. Okano,et al.  Repeated vergence adaptation causes the decline of visual functions in watching stereoscopic television , 2005, Journal of Display Technology.

[8]  F. Toates,et al.  Accommodation function of the human eye. , 1972, Physiological reviews.

[9]  J. Eskridge,et al.  Clinical Procedures in Optometry , 1991 .

[10]  Adrian Glasser,et al.  Amplitude dependent accommodative dynamics in humans , 2003, Vision Research.

[11]  H Ohzu,et al.  Accommodative responses to stereoscopic three-dimensional display. , 1997, Applied optics.

[12]  F. Schaeffel,et al.  Inter‐individual variability in the dynamics of natural accommodation in humans: relation to age and refractive errors. , 1993, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  Yumi Kato,et al.  The use of video refraction to measure the dynamic properties of the near triad in observers of a 3‐D display , 2002, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[14]  Alexander Toet,et al.  Visual comfort of binocular and 3D displays , 2004 .

[15]  K Noro,et al.  Surmised state of accommodation to stereoscopic three-dimensional images with binocular disparity. , 1996, Ergonomics.

[16]  Charlotte A Hazel,et al.  Wavefront Aberration and Its Relationship to the Accommodative Stimulus-Response Function in Myopic Subjects , 2003, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[17]  S. Burns,et al.  Monochromatic aberrations in the accommodated human eye , 2000, Vision Research.