Originally Posted by
Archer1440
Just a few thoughts on shooting with occluded optics:
I feel like there’s little practical difference between the process of shooting a 1x RDS occluded, and using a 3.5x ACOG at close distance with both eyes open, target focused, ignoring the fuzzy magnified image from the dominant eye but seeing the illuminated reticle superimposed on the desired target impact point- IF your RDS when occluded actually allows some light to come through the optic.
My thought was that a full black occlusion on an RDS may yield different results than a translucent white occluder for some shooters. (None of this is to be confused with the Bindon aiming concept for the ACOG, which is more about situational awareness and then a focus back to the reticle for a magnified optic)
Now, in Olympic rifle shooting, a white translucent occluder (on the non dominant eye) generally creates a more relaxed visual experience than a solid black occluder, at least for some shooters, and that seems to be because both pupils can receive the same general light level. Obviously this involves an occluder on the eye itself, so the pupillary dilation factor doesn’t apply for our discussion of the RDS, but I found myself wondering if the general principle might apply to an RDS for a different reason. I wondered if the reduced apparent visual contrast from occlusion with the same overall light transmission through the RDS, but with no possibility of focus beyond the RDS lens, might make a positive difference.
I have personally found that occluding the RDS with translucent Mylar tape (Scotch magic transparent tape) does produce a different “feeling” than using blue painter tape or black tape on the RDS. Not necessarily “better”, but “different”. For me, it seems a bit easier to achieve faster visual collimation of the superimposed dot using the translucent occlusion.
Some people having trouble with occluded RDS work might find benefit from experimenting with this.