Taking the Lane In Front of Big Rigs

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:41:25 PM UTC-4, Clive George wrote:
On 29/10/2014 19:35, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need to turn my head to look behind me.

I've been following this little subthread with some amusement. Do I
guess right that you use a bar-mounted mirror? Frank and Joe are talking
about eyeglass mounted mirrors - I'd expect it to be impossible to use
them with both eyes.

No, I use a helmet mounted mirror not bar end mirrors as I mentioned in an earlier post. I use the helmet mirror because I can glance into it whilst still keeping an eye on traffic ahead of me and the bar end mirroes I've tried on my road bike are blocked by my arm. Other pluses for the helmet mirror is that I can scan behind me and I can use it on any bicycle I ride. People who can't see into their mirrors with two eyes must be doing something a LOT different than what I am.

Cheers

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:34:25 PM UTC-4, JoeRiel wrote:
Clive George writes:

On 29/10/2014 19:35, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need to turn my head to look behind me.

I've been following this little subthread with some amusement. Do I
guess right that you use a bar-mounted mirror? Frank and Joe are
talking about eyeglass mounted mirrors - I'd expect it to be
impossible to use them with both eyes.

He previously said it was helmet mounted. I didn't think the location
would be much different from an eyeglass mounted mirror, but don't know.
Is it convex? That might allow seeing the same thing with both eyes,
but would hurt the depth perception.

As Frank has noted, the binocular effect is probably not significant for
judging distances of overtaking vehicles. I just returned from driving
a car. My left outside mirror is adjusted so that I have to move my
head to the left to see straight behind me. I notice that, when using
it, I normally just move far enough so that my left eye can see the
lane.

--
Joe Riel

Correct in that it's a helmet mounted mirror. It's a flat mirror that sows objects where they actually are not further back like a wide angle convex mirror does. That might be why i can judge how far back objects are and how fast they're approaching.

Cheers

Sir Ridesalot writes:

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:41:25 PM UTC-4, Clive George wrote:
On 29/10/2014 19:35, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need
to turn my head to look behind me.
I've been following this little subthread with some amusement. Do I
guess right that you use a bar-mounted mirror? Frank and Joe are
talking about eyeglass mounted mirrors - I'd expect it to be
impossible to use them with both eyes.

No, I use a helmet mounted mirror not bar end mirrors as I mentioned
in an earlier post. I use the helmet mirror because I can glance into
it whilst still keeping an eye on traffic ahead of me and the bar end
mirroes I've tried on my road bike are blocked by my arm. Other pluses
for the helmet mirror is that I can scan behind me and I can use it on
any bicycle I ride. People who can't see into their mirrors with two
eyes must be doing something a LOT different than what I am.

Apparently. Maybe you have the mirror mounted farther forward than is
typical. I just tried my wife's eyeglass mounted mirror. I cannot see
the mirror with my right eye. Even if I could, the angle is so much
different that I would be looking in two completely different
directions.

--
Joe Riel

On 10/29/2014 3:35 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:13:11 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:


In fact, for a typical eyeglass mirror 4" ahead of my eyes, if it's at
all visible to my right eye, it has to be almost directly in front of my
left eye. That can't work.

As has been mentioned, distance estimation by binocular vision tops out
at about 20 feet. Beyond that, one's brain uses other clues. See, for
example, "Monocular cues - 3D information from a single eye" at
http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Conte...pth-perception

--
- Frank Krygowski

Contrary son of a gun aren't you? Every time someone says something that woks
for tthem you then post a disagreement unless thaeir post agrees with
one of
your stances.

Well, in this case the disagreement seems to be mostly over simple
geometry. You do seem to have some confusion about perception of
distance, as explained in the article above, but perhaps that's not the
main point.


When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need to turn my head to look behind me.

Perhaps you need a better mirror?

Oh, my mirror works fine. I can scan left to right behind me, and I can
judge distance and speed of upcoming traffic.

However, I see objects in it using only my left eye. The mirror is out
of sight of my right eye. And it's hard for me to see how a practical
helmet mirror could give a useful image of the same object to both eyes.

Trying some possibilities sitting here at my desk, a 3" x 3" mirror can
do that if it's held at about arm's length; but arms length is pretty
impractical for a helmet mirror. Anything smaller and closer gives
unworkable views. For example, a mirror 1" square and 12" away shows
completely different objects to my left and right eye. AFAIK there's no
way binocular vision can decode that to judge distance.

Perhaps there's something we're not understanding here. Why not give
the dimensions of your helmet-mounted mirror, how far away it is from
your eyes, and perhaps a description of its position?

Meanwhile, was there something you didn't understand in the article I
linked above?


--
- Frank Krygowski

In article ,
Sir Ridesalot wrote:

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:41:25 PM UTC-4, Clive George wrote:
On 29/10/2014 19:35, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need to turn
my head to look behind me.

I've been following this little subthread with some amusement. Do I
guess right that you use a bar-mounted mirror? Frank and Joe are talking
about eyeglass mounted mirrors - I'd expect it to be impossible to use
them with both eyes.

No, I use a helmet mounted mirror not bar end mirrors as I mentioned in an
earlier post. I use the helmet mirror because I can glance into it whilst
still keeping an eye on traffic ahead of me and the bar end mirroes I've
tried on my road bike are blocked by my arm. Other pluses for the helmet
mirror is that I can scan behind me and I can use it on any bicycle I ride.
People who can't see into their mirrors with two eyes must be doing something
a LOT different than what I am.

Cheers

Count me among those unable to use the mirror with both eyes. I can
barely see half of it with my right eye, and there's no way on earth I
could see anything useful reflected in it. Perhaps, Sir R., you could
google "helmet mounted mirror image" and find a picture of your setup,
and pass it along, so the rest of us could understand how it works for
you.

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 7:50:04 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/29/2014 3:35 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:13:11 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:


In fact, for a typical eyeglass mirror 4" ahead of my eyes, if it's at
all visible to my right eye, it has to be almost directly in front of my
left eye. That can't work.

As has been mentioned, distance estimation by binocular vision tops out
at about 20 feet. Beyond that, one's brain uses other clues. See, for
example, "Monocular cues - 3D information from a single eye" at
http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Conte...pth-perception

--
- Frank Krygowski

Contrary son of a gun aren't you? Every time someone says something that woks
for tthem you then post a disagreement unless thaeir post agrees with
one of
your stances.

Well, in this case the disagreement seems to be mostly over simple
geometry. You do seem to have some confusion about perception of
distance, as explained in the article above, but perhaps that's not the
main point.


When I look into my mirror I do so with both eyes and do not need to turn my head to look behind me.

Perhaps you need a better mirror?

Oh, my mirror works fine. I can scan left to right behind me, and I can
judge distance and speed of upcoming traffic.

However, I see objects in it using only my left eye. The mirror is out
of sight of my right eye. And it's hard for me to see how a practical
helmet mirror could give a useful image of the same object to both eyes.

Trying some possibilities sitting here at my desk, a 3" x 3" mirror can
do that if it's held at about arm's length; but arms length is pretty
impractical for a helmet mirror. Anything smaller and closer gives
unworkable views. For example, a mirror 1" square and 12" away shows
completely different objects to my left and right eye. AFAIK there's no
way binocular vision can decode that to judge distance.

Perhaps there's something we're not understanding here. Why not give
the dimensions of your helmet-mounted mirror, how far away it is from
your eyes, and perhaps a description of its position?

Meanwhile, was there something you didn't understand in the article I
linked above?


--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank, neither I nor others who post here need to prove what works for us to you!

I've decided that you're just a very contrary person who delights in arguing about anything and everything.

Cheers

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:59:36 PM UTC-4, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Frank, neither I nor others who post here need to prove what works for us to you!

I've decided that you're just a very contrary person who delights in arguing about anything and everything.

Sir, it's not just me! There are several people here who can't understand
how you can use any typical helmet mirror to see an oncoming vehicle with
both eyes. The geometry doesn't appear to make any sense.

Unless you have some unusual setup or unusual explanation, it's going to be pretty clear that you were simply wrong. Why else would you not clear
this up?

- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:49:51 PM UTC-4, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 29 Oct 2014
21:10:02 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:59:36 PM UTC-4, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Frank, neither I nor others who post here need to prove what works for us to you!

I've decided that you're just a very contrary person who delights in arguing about anything and everything.

Sir, it's not just me! There are several people here who can't understand
how you can use any typical helmet mirror to see an oncoming vehicle with
both eyes. The geometry doesn't appear to make any sense.

Unless you have some unusual setup or unusual explanation, it's going to be pretty clear that you were simply wrong. Why else would you not clear
this up?

- Frank Krygowski

Sir obviously lives in that magical hollywood universe, where the
camera has a perfect view in a mirror of the person who is supposed to
be using it, the set behind them, but no view of the camera or
cameraman at all.

**** YOU AND YOUR DAMN INSULTS FRANK!

On 31/10/2014 01:49, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:49:51 PM UTC-4, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 29 Oct 2014
21:10:02 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:59:36 PM UTC-4, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Frank, neither I nor others who post here need to prove what works for us to you!

I've decided that you're just a very contrary person who delights in arguing about anything and everything.

Sir, it's not just me! There are several people here who can't understand
how you can use any typical helmet mirror to see an oncoming vehicle with
both eyes. The geometry doesn't appear to make any sense.

Unless you have some unusual setup or unusual explanation, it's going to be pretty clear that you were simply wrong. Why else would you not clear
this up?

- Frank Krygowski

Sir obviously lives in that magical hollywood universe, where the
camera has a perfect view in a mirror of the person who is supposed to
be using it, the set behind them, but no view of the camera or
cameraman at all.

**** YOU AND YOUR DAMN INSULTS FRANK!

That's not Frank.

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:13:18 PM UTC-4, Clive George wrote:
On 31/10/2014 01:49, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:49:51 PM UTC-4, Phil W Lee wrote:
Frank Krygowski considered Wed, 29 Oct 2014
21:10:02 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 8:59:36 PM UTC-4, Sir Ridesalot wrote:


Frank, neither I nor others who post here need to prove what works for us to you!

I've decided that you're just a very contrary person who delights in arguing about anything and everything.

Sir, it's not just me! There are several people here who can't understand
how you can use any typical helmet mirror to see an oncoming vehicle with
both eyes. The geometry doesn't appear to make any sense.

Unless you have some unusual setup or unusual explanation, it's going to be pretty clear that you were simply wrong. Why else would you not clear
this up?

- Frank Krygowski

Sir obviously lives in that magical hollywood universe, where the
camera has a perfect view in a mirror of the person who is supposed to
be using it, the set behind them, but no view of the camera or
cameraman at all.

**** YOU AND YOUR DAMN INSULTS FRANK!

That's not Frank.

Thanks, Sorry and I apologize to Frank.

Cheers