Premium
Relationship between retinal distance and object field angles for finite schematic eyes
Author(s) -
Suheimat Marwan,
Zhu HaiFeng,
Lambert Andrew,
Atchison David A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
ophthalmic and physiological optics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.147
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1475-1313
pISSN - 0275-5408
DOI - 10.1111/opo.12284
Subject(s) - retinal , retina , schematic , radius of curvature , visual field , curvature , optics , refractive error , visual angle , physics , ophthalmology , optometry , mathematics , geometry , medicine , mean curvature , mean curvature flow , visual acuity , electronic engineering , engineering
Aim Retinal anatomical studies have used the Drasdo & Fowler three‐refracting surface schematic eye to convert between retinal distances and object field angles. We compared its performance at this task with those of more sophisticated four‐refracting surface schematic eyes. Method Raytracing was performed for Drasdo & Fowler, Lotmar, Navarro, Liou & Brennan, Kooijman and Atchison schematic eyes, and some of their variants. Results The Drasdo & Fowler eye gives a greater rate of change of object field angle with retinal distance at the retinal centre of about 5% than the other schematic eyes. This rate of change also increases much more quickly into the peripheral retina for the Drasdo & Fowler eye than for the other eyes. The reason for these differences is only that the Drasdo & Fowler eye is shorter than the other eyes. The relationship between retinal distance and visual field angle appears robust to changes in retinal radius of curvature when the retina is spherical. The retinal asphericity of Kooijman and Atchison eyes appears to play a role beyond 14 mm (~50°). Conclusion Changing the length of the Drasdo & Fowler eye, to match those of the four‐refracting surface schematic eyes, gives similar relationships between retinal distance and object field angle up to a retinal distance of approximately 14 mm (~50°). The relationship will change with refractive error as this is related to axial length and to retinal shape, and this should be taken into consideration for accurate conversions. For distances and angles beyond 14 mm and ~50°, retinal shape should be taken into account.