Bill, I appreciate your comments on the new Optacon versus the old. I
had a conversation with Jim Bliss yesterday and he also said the
threshold adjustment on the newer optacon was a major problem. But, he
also thought that the smaller tactile array was a problem. THe smaller
array was the result of Cannon in Japan doing the re-design. In Japan
they don't use decenders in their written language so they didn't feel
the need for the larger array. However even in Japan users complain
about the smaller array.
Users seem to be divided by this issue.
Deane
On Thu, 8 Feb 1996, Bill Gerrey wrote:
>
>
>
> On the matter of the new Optacon (models A, B, C, and D versus
> E):
>
> Many folks think that the disadvantage of the new Optacon is that
> it has fewer tactors (fewer vibrating pins. Nah!
> Smith-Kettlewell experiments showed that you could greatly reduce
> the resolution of the tactile display with little degradation in
> performance.
>
> The real advantage in models A through D was the "soft threshold"
> inherent in the analog nature of detection of dark spots under
> the camera. With the threshold control, the user could
> "cheat" the system for thick lettering -- such as bold type --
> and, by tollerating missing portions of the letters, reduce the
> stimulous so as to increase the chances of picking out critical
> detail (grapling with the lower-case e a s o confusion, for
> example).
>
> The model E has a hard threshold, brought to us by the magic of
> digital detection of the camera's image. Either a dark spot
> actuates a stimulator, or it does not. This alows no "fuzziness"
> to be selected by the user to make thick print -- with
> insignificant gaps in thick/bold presentation -- tactually
> perceivable.
>
> The model E is a much nicer package. The replaceable battery
> takes away the most failure-prone component that made us send in
> our classic units. Model E still works for some print styles,
> and with this instrument, one can "bottle feed" a flat-bed
> reading machine to get what =U:9QjU
> I9j|
> I don't know what to do about the demise of the Optacon, but I,
> and Harvey Lauer at Hines VA, believe in "direct-translation
> reading aids" as a tool, even if you have the latest scanner-type
> things. As Lauer put it in 1978, "Some vehicles are built for
> good smooth roads, and you should use those wherever possible.
> However, on trails and rough terrain, a bicycle may work where
> nothing else will do."
>
> As we are confronted with graphic displays, some of which will
> not allow us electronic access, "direct translation" reading aids
> will always be with us, and we'll find ways to build them.
>
> Bill Gerrey
> bilge@skivs.ski.org
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST