As I already use my mobile phone for such tasks (and it has also been useful for getting at the really awkwardly positioned labels on installed equipment) there is little incentive for me to purchase one.
Paul E. Bennett IEng MIET Systems Engineer
Paul E. Bennett IEng MIET.....
Contrast enhancement and/or thresholding is a possible advantage of a computer aided magnifying app (although this one is seriously overpriced). This can help people with very limited vision.
There are plenty of similarly overpriced low vision aid gadgets of various levels of usefulness. You have to count your fingers before and after when dealing with disability salesmen - they make double glazing salesmen look like saints.
Check out the prices of wheelchair batteries for instance (and compare to the obvious unit that they have rebadged to sell for 4x the price).
I wouldn't suggest *anyone* purchase one -- even if suffering from low vision problems! Most assistive technology is *incredibly* overpriced; $750 four-function calculators, $15,000 laptops; $5,000 power chairs; etc.
I've often wondered why the pricing -- a consequence of "subsidies"? Or, a true reflection of the cost of doing business? (special needs customers tend to need more hand-holding, more paperwork, etc.).
I also note many assistive tech companies change hands regularly. Either cash cows *or* flailing businesses!
A magnifying glass won't "discard chroma" on command. Try reading a silver label on a field of yellow.
A magnifying glass won't enhance contrast -- it just makes the images "bigger".
A magnifying glass won't convert to false color (folks with vision problems can often see yellow (text) on a field of black far better than black text on a field of white, etc.
A magnifying glass won't "take a snapshot".
(most) magnifying glass won't "stand" in a fixed position while you work
*behind* it. E.g., have it "watch" while I solder a fine pitch SMT device... or, dig a splinter out of a fingertip (cases where both hands are in use).
A (generic) magnifying glass is usually ineffective sitting *on* the material you want to magnify -- like a newspaper, magazine, etc. (my first use of this was to read the *insanely* fine print -- on the order of *3* pt -- on the package of NiMH cells that I purchased for it).
[Folks with one "disability" are often prone to having *other* disabilities. E.g., folks with macular degeneration are most likely to be older and, thus, higher incidence of ET or PT. Ditto diabetic retinopathy.]
(some) magnifying glass don't illuminate their subjects. Non (?) dynamically vary that illumination to compensate for ambient light levels.
The brightness of a magnifier's image isn't easily controlled (even with subject illumination).
Most magnifying glasses are "low power" and/or introduce distortions at close range.
A digital camera (to be used as a magnifying glass) tends to require the user to *view* the subject of interest (e.g., you can't just reach behind your computer *under* your desk and take a snapshot to see which way the network jack is oriented) to know that it is in focus and at the desired level of magnification. Nor can most of them focus at half an inch (none of mine can -- the optics just "hunt" forever!).
Yup. The point of my post was that this is a no-brainer idea. I.e., as soon as cameras were available and small LCD's, *this* should have appeared. In much the same way "electronic readers" (instead of those relying on optics) should have exploited TV/monitor interfaces (why sell the user another monitor AND A PLACE TO STORE IT when he's already got something similar?)
I'm not sure it is all "flim flam". See my comments elsewhere this thread. I don't see many such companies publicly traded and selling at big multiples. Rather, they all seem to be struggling to stay afloat. Small markets, high per-sale cost, high support cost, etc.
KCP was fortunate Xerox came in and rescued them. And note that Xerox didn't see the future as "reading assistance" but, rather, document prep.
Yup. But the same is also true of UPS batteries. Even the $5 I paid for the magnifying glass (the cost of the batteries to power it) was "outrageous" (reflecting their presumed *value* and not *cost* + decent margin!)
Not sure what you mean by that. The magnifying glass zooms but *after* the fact -- like taking a photo and *then* zooming in on portions of it.
Cameras can zoom *while* framing the shot -- but, you need to see whats
*in* the shot via viewfinder, etc.
It's already at least second generation (mine is an earlier model). I doubt it will *ever* be under $100 simply because of the market that it is targeting.
Pray you never need "specialized kit" -- the prices alone will give you a coronary and the limitations of that kit will leave you *really* wishing you'd spent your career working on things like that, instead! ("Sheesh! There has GOT to be a better way to do this!!") When you discover that you've got essentially *no* choice in the matter (and things are headed downhill from here!)... :<
Subsidies? Subsidies would make it cheaper, not more expensive.
You seem to think the price depends on the cost. Cost and price are two different things separated by profit. Sell to a small, targeted market where the supply is low and you can price it as you see fit.
I wasn't "in the market". I have a steroscope, here, that I use for close-up work. And, an inspection camera on a gooseneck (tied to my PC) -- which I can also position at one of the eyepieces for the stereoscope.
This was headed for the trash (it's "mostly plastic") so I rescued it and invested $5 in some NiMH cells.
My first thought was to use it to view the backs of my workstations. All are on the floor, under my work tables, with their back ends pretty close to the wall -- so, almost impossible to *see* behind them to see the connectors (moving them is problematic due to all the cables mated to them -- many not having useful service loops). I figure I could crawl under the table, point the "magnifier" at the rear of the machine in question, snap a photo and then pull it out to see what's there -- without having to worry about focusing, zooming to get the required detail, etc.
[I always have trouble taking close-in *photos*... things are never in focus, too bright or too dark, etc.]
As it's got a "lanyard" attached to it, I could just hang it under one of the tables on a hook -- much like the small maglite that's hanging, network tap tester, etc.
Things like using it in place of the stereoscope (which has a relatively large circle of confusion/shallow depth of field)
I need to think about that, ever since they started Obamacare subsides, my insurance premium has gone up. On the other hand, I'm paying $7,752 for my family's policy. The subsidized Obamacare policy, very equivalent to my $7,752 policy costs $13,800.
Ok, my thinking is done, clearly subsidies make things more expensive.
However the taxpayers want* to pay part for me, $7,440 so I only need to pay $6,360 for the Obamacare policy. I could save $1,392 this year if I bought the Obamacare policy. I don't know how long that can last.
want-- bet you didn't know you wanted to subsidize me. A fellow taxpayer earning a good living, putting 30 to 40 thousand dollars into investments every year. And you stupid Americans "want" to do that for me. Consider yourselves Gruberized :-)
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.