Can someone explain the occluded dot?
How can you have a target focus when you cannot see through the optic? Isn't that what a target focus is, you focus on the target through the optic?
Can someone explain the occluded dot?
How can you have a target focus when you cannot see through the optic? Isn't that what a target focus is, you focus on the target through the optic?
Are you loyal to the constitution or the “institution”?
People get the dot wrong in a number of different ways. One I see fairly often is closing the support side eye which is almost always indicative of someone who is trying to focus on the dot like it's a front sight. If you occlude the optic they can't do that anymore.
We teach occluded optic in class as a "what happens if you can't see through the optic but still see a dot" exercise, but invariably there's at least one person in the class who suddenly starts shooting better with their optic taped up. That's usually because they were forced to stop focusing on the dot for the first time. It's also useful for people with some eye dominance issues as giving the two eyes different things to see helps them learn to deconflict what's going on in their heads.
3/15/2016
First you have to have both eyes open. You can see the effect right now, look at this word with both eyes open, but then put your hand in front of your dominant eye. You can see your hand, but you are "looking through it" because your brain is putting both eyes images together. Now imagine your hand is an optic/gun with a red dot. If using an occluded dot, your brain will still superimpose the dot and target that your eyes are looking at. This was how the original "red dots" worked, as far as I've looked into it. Even as far back as the Son Tay Raid, where occluded red dot sights were hose clamped on to carry handles.
Your eyes each take in information independently, and the brain combines those images, one of the benefits to this is depth perception, but that ability makes being able to target focus, and still see the dot possible.
When using a "red dot," with both eyes open, and focusing on the target, one eye is still getting the information through the optic, but your focus is still on the target.
For me, the way this appears, is I'm vaguely aware the optic and pistol are there, but dot just seems to float on the target, and the target is sharply in focus.
With the dot occluded, I know if I've lost target focus because I see the "blue screen of death." Without the dot occluded, if I notice the gun and optic window are sharp in my vision, then I know I'm no longer target focused. In both cases, it becomes more likely I will "lose the dot," than if I stay target focused.
_______________
"Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8
Content of this video is the reason why I've been tuning out, for some time now, when people said they tracked their dots in recoil.
Doesn't read posts longer than two paragraphs.
Same concept as to why some don't need suppressor height sights. They simply look through them, as long as there is some definition of the sights, be it serrations, white dots, or fibers against the can. With monovision, the only very narrow set of circumstances in which regular sights didn't work behind a can, was when shooting through the slats of my deck. My left eye was blocked by the slats, but even then, backing up slightly provided a different angle and the sight picture appeared.
Participation does not equal Proficiency
- Mike Pannone
I'm still not getting the occluded optic? How are you confirming you're on target when you cannot look through the optic? It's like diving with an occluded windshield.
What am I missing?
Are you loyal to the constitution or the “institution”?
If you have a red dot on your pistol or rifle, just go experiment with it.
ETA. Oh and what’s gonna bake your noodle is, you can do the same thing with iron sights.
Last edited by David S.; 02-23-2024 at 06:53 AM.
David S.