What is the Equivalent Megapixel Rating of the Human Eye?

  • Thread starter Thread starter memorygap
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Camera Eye Human
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equivalent megapixel rating of the human eye, with estimates suggesting it could be around 10 to 50 megapixels, depending on comparisons to film negatives. It is noted that the human eye's resolution varies across the visual field, with higher acuity at the fovea due to the density of rods and cones. Research indicates that the adult retina contains approximately 126 million receptors, comprising about 120 million rods and 6 million cones. However, not all receptors are activated simultaneously, as their response varies with lighting conditions. The conversation also touches on the differences between human vision and machine vision, highlighting ongoing interest in developing biological cameras that mimic the eye's processes.
memorygap
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
i was just wondering, what is the equivelent megapixel rating of the human eye? i would expect the back of the eye to be around the size of a 35mm negative commonly rated at around 10mp, it can't be any bigger than a 120 film negative which is rated somewhere around 50mp.
is there any research underway for a biological camera which uses the same processes as the human eye? and if so, how is it underway?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
One thing I can tell you is that the human eye is not the same resolution across your visual field. Acuity is much better at the fovea than at the outer areas. It depends on how densly the neurons in the eye are packed. There is only so much room in there for various rods and cones. I'm not sure how the human eye compares to cameras in terms of resolution. I know that human vision an machine vison in general are very different things.
 
You might be interested in the following figure:
rcdist.gif


about rod and cone density on retina (rods are for aren't color sensitive, but are more sensitive than cones, who ARE color sensitive) on the following website: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html
 
Maybe this site? http://www.wdv.com/Eye/EyeBandwidth/

A Better Approximation: The Eye has 126 Million "Pixels"
According to Dr. John Penn, of the UAMS eye center, the adult retina has 126 million receptors. He points out that not all of these are activated under all lighting conditions, to wit, "as light environment increases in luminance, rod response becomes saturated long before cones are maximally functional."

Washington neuroscience agrees with Dr. Penn. According to this source there are 120 million rods and 6 million cones.
Using the figure of 126 million "pixels" or receptors a display device that met or exceeded the performance of a fixed, staring eye would have 11,225 pixels on an edge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
Back
Top