Blind and Visually Impaired Community
↑
6
↓
[Review] ESight 3, electronic glasses, demo recap. (self.Blind)
submitted by BARDLover
To start, I was born with cone rod dystrophy. I have some vision, enough to see a page has words, but not enough to make out what they're saying. I can see if there is someone standing near me, usually, but not enough to see their facial features.
A few weeks ago I went to $1 office over in Toronto, ON, CA.
The demo started in the "Wizard of Oz" room. They give you the device and help you put it on, as well as show you the basics of the remote.
They have pictures set up to look at, as well as an eye chart.
With the glasses, I went from not being able to tell there was an eye chart set up, to being able to read the 20/20, smallest line, at the very bottom, with the assistance of inverted colors.
Next, we tried plugging the device in to a TV to watch the Wizard of Oz, and play some football video game. This is where the unit didn't live up to my expectations.
With the black background and bright white text in high contrast, I could zoom in and read the letters on the wall, slowly at first, but in time I'd build up speed.
With a full color image, I realized just how small the screens are in the glasses, as well as just how far away from the eye they were.
We tried a larger strap, which moved them slightly closer, but the device still wasn't able to assist me in these feature.
Moving over to the window of their office, a few stories high, with my regular vision I could see trucks on the ground, and people on the sidwalk. Using ESight, I could zoom in on them, and make out a bit more detail, such as telling men from women, cars from SUV's, and trucks from big bins.
Between tests, I looked around the office / room with the glasses, and between zooming in on things, and the sharper contrast on the screens than I normally see, I was able to see a a fair bit more than normal. Where I'd have no idea a dark color chair was on the dark carpet against a relatively dark wall, I could make out a pair of 4 legged chairs, for example.
Lastly, we tried messing with the brightness ... something we were unable to do smoothly. The person heading my demo brought someone in to the office, a member of the C staff if I recall, and he was able to walk her through turning the brightness up. I say walk her through it, because the due to the small and far away screens, I was unable read anything on the menu, even when the colors were adjusted and text made larger.
Eventually the brightness was turned up a bit, and it did make a difference, but since I would need to adjust brightness quickly, and by myself, the non usable menu option was an issue.
Now, in their defense, I do believe the menu has an audio feedback system, but the person giving the demo did not know how to enable this feature.
When we had finished, my primary concern was with the screen size and distance, both of which were dismissed by the host as motion sickness inducing, and an impossibility.
This did leave a sour taste in my mouth, and that combined with the issue itself, I do not think that ESight is a valuable product for myself, and couldn't justify the $10,000 price tag.
That being said, I do see the value in it, and I do understand how diverse the features are. While the screen placement is a deal breaker for me, I would highly that people test the product.
To give an idea of what the menu looked like for me, open your IPhones setting menu, put your thumb to the outside corner of your eye, fingers side by side, put the phone against the palm side of your pinky, facing your eye. That is how the text looked to me. For me, I cant' read my phone at this distance, and I couldn't read the menu either.
I can't see to watch The Walkign Dead, it's too dark. Using my phone as a camera, I can lighten the screen up well enough to see just as well as my sighted friends, I'll normally hold my phone at middle or pointer finger distance though, to be able to make out the details. Watching the TV and playing the video game was more like holding it at the tip of my pink if I were to outstretch it. If you can see a show through your phone screen at that distance, again, I'd recommend testing this device.
**TL:DR,** ESight 3 won't work for me due to the screen distance and size. I'd love to get the device if the company could work with me to make a custom set, but the presenter was adamant that if the screens were closer people, I, would get motion sick, no ifs ands or buts, and no acceptance that different people have different vision, and have different thresholds for what makes them motion sick. That being said, if looking through your phone screen at a few inches away helps you quite a bit, this product will probably help you in a far more easy to use, professional looking, and funcitonal, manner.
P.S. I know people have different hand sizes. I count a pink as about 3.5 inches, middle finger at about 1.75, and pointer at about 1.25. I don't have a ruler to check exactly though, so ... I had to eye ball it.
A few weeks ago I went to $1 office over in Toronto, ON, CA.
The demo started in the "Wizard of Oz" room. They give you the device and help you put it on, as well as show you the basics of the remote.
They have pictures set up to look at, as well as an eye chart.
With the glasses, I went from not being able to tell there was an eye chart set up, to being able to read the 20/20, smallest line, at the very bottom, with the assistance of inverted colors.
Next, we tried plugging the device in to a TV to watch the Wizard of Oz, and play some football video game. This is where the unit didn't live up to my expectations.
With the black background and bright white text in high contrast, I could zoom in and read the letters on the wall, slowly at first, but in time I'd build up speed.
With a full color image, I realized just how small the screens are in the glasses, as well as just how far away from the eye they were.
We tried a larger strap, which moved them slightly closer, but the device still wasn't able to assist me in these feature.
Moving over to the window of their office, a few stories high, with my regular vision I could see trucks on the ground, and people on the sidwalk. Using ESight, I could zoom in on them, and make out a bit more detail, such as telling men from women, cars from SUV's, and trucks from big bins.
Between tests, I looked around the office / room with the glasses, and between zooming in on things, and the sharper contrast on the screens than I normally see, I was able to see a a fair bit more than normal. Where I'd have no idea a dark color chair was on the dark carpet against a relatively dark wall, I could make out a pair of 4 legged chairs, for example.
Lastly, we tried messing with the brightness ... something we were unable to do smoothly. The person heading my demo brought someone in to the office, a member of the C staff if I recall, and he was able to walk her through turning the brightness up. I say walk her through it, because the due to the small and far away screens, I was unable read anything on the menu, even when the colors were adjusted and text made larger.
Eventually the brightness was turned up a bit, and it did make a difference, but since I would need to adjust brightness quickly, and by myself, the non usable menu option was an issue.
Now, in their defense, I do believe the menu has an audio feedback system, but the person giving the demo did not know how to enable this feature.
When we had finished, my primary concern was with the screen size and distance, both of which were dismissed by the host as motion sickness inducing, and an impossibility.
This did leave a sour taste in my mouth, and that combined with the issue itself, I do not think that ESight is a valuable product for myself, and couldn't justify the $10,000 price tag.
That being said, I do see the value in it, and I do understand how diverse the features are. While the screen placement is a deal breaker for me, I would highly that people test the product.
To give an idea of what the menu looked like for me, open your IPhones setting menu, put your thumb to the outside corner of your eye, fingers side by side, put the phone against the palm side of your pinky, facing your eye. That is how the text looked to me. For me, I cant' read my phone at this distance, and I couldn't read the menu either.
I can't see to watch The Walkign Dead, it's too dark. Using my phone as a camera, I can lighten the screen up well enough to see just as well as my sighted friends, I'll normally hold my phone at middle or pointer finger distance though, to be able to make out the details. Watching the TV and playing the video game was more like holding it at the tip of my pink if I were to outstretch it. If you can see a show through your phone screen at that distance, again, I'd recommend testing this device.
**TL:DR,** ESight 3 won't work for me due to the screen distance and size. I'd love to get the device if the company could work with me to make a custom set, but the presenter was adamant that if the screens were closer people, I, would get motion sick, no ifs ands or buts, and no acceptance that different people have different vision, and have different thresholds for what makes them motion sick. That being said, if looking through your phone screen at a few inches away helps you quite a bit, this product will probably help you in a far more easy to use, professional looking, and funcitonal, manner.
P.S. I know people have different hand sizes. I count a pink as about 3.5 inches, middle finger at about 1.75, and pointer at about 1.25. I don't have a ruler to check exactly though, so ... I had to eye ball it.
-shacklebolt- 2 points 5y ago
Thanks for sharing your review!
I didn't get to do a full demo of esight, but I did briefly try them at a conference. While I was impressed with how far away I could see objects with it, the view was very narrow and grainy to me (at the high level of magnification needed.) Nothing about it seemed like $10,000 worth.
I've seen compliants online previously from people who claimed that they weren't able to make use of the devices and had trouble returning them, although I've obviously never bought the device so I can't personally say if this is the case.
Plus, I just don't like their advertising. For example, their site states:
> "eSight is a comprehensive customized medical device that can replace all the many single-task assistive devices that are currently available but do not provide actual sight (e.g. white canes, magnifying devices, service animals, Braille machines, CCTV scanners, text-to-speech software)."
Now how in the hell is a pair of zooming glasses going to replace a white cane or guide dog? What are you going to do, carefully scan around with the glasses before taking every single step? And how do magnifiers and CCTVs not "provide actual sight" as opposed to what seems like basically a fancy glasses-mounted CCTV system?
Also, the idea that low vision tools (like this) can fully replace non-visual tools (like text to speech or braille) in partially sighted people is wrong and harmful to partially sighted people, even those on the "more sighted" end of the spectrum. Imagine a child who might be made to read with exclusively magnification tools. How much faster (and with less eye strain and pain over long periods of time) might they read if they were given adequate access to audio or braille?
They really seem to be trying to sell up how "unique" and "revolutionary" these systems are, probably to encourage family members, donors, and organizations to pay that much money! For example, the site also has a section of "moments" which are videos of people using the glasses. They have titles such as "Christian sees for the first time," "10-year-old Sophie gets the gift of sight for Christmas," and "John has been blind his whole life. But he can finally see!"
Yuck.
I didn't get to do a full demo of esight, but I did briefly try them at a conference. While I was impressed with how far away I could see objects with it, the view was very narrow and grainy to me (at the high level of magnification needed.) Nothing about it seemed like $10,000 worth.
I've seen compliants online previously from people who claimed that they weren't able to make use of the devices and had trouble returning them, although I've obviously never bought the device so I can't personally say if this is the case.
Plus, I just don't like their advertising. For example, their site states:
> "eSight is a comprehensive customized medical device that can replace all the many single-task assistive devices that are currently available but do not provide actual sight (e.g. white canes, magnifying devices, service animals, Braille machines, CCTV scanners, text-to-speech software)."
Now how in the hell is a pair of zooming glasses going to replace a white cane or guide dog? What are you going to do, carefully scan around with the glasses before taking every single step? And how do magnifiers and CCTVs not "provide actual sight" as opposed to what seems like basically a fancy glasses-mounted CCTV system?
Also, the idea that low vision tools (like this) can fully replace non-visual tools (like text to speech or braille) in partially sighted people is wrong and harmful to partially sighted people, even those on the "more sighted" end of the spectrum. Imagine a child who might be made to read with exclusively magnification tools. How much faster (and with less eye strain and pain over long periods of time) might they read if they were given adequate access to audio or braille?
They really seem to be trying to sell up how "unique" and "revolutionary" these systems are, probably to encourage family members, donors, and organizations to pay that much money! For example, the site also has a section of "moments" which are videos of people using the glasses. They have titles such as "Christian sees for the first time," "10-year-old Sophie gets the gift of sight for Christmas," and "John has been blind his whole life. But he can finally see!"
Yuck.
Amonwilde 2 points 5y ago
Yes, I don't like the messaging either. Their home page says that people have seen with the esight for the first time. How does that work? It's not a brain interface, you need to be able to see to use the device.
BARDLover [OP] 2 points 5y ago
I'm with you on all counts.
Their website makes it seem like they really want to work with people, to get them what they need.
When I told them that their product wouldn't work for me as it is, they made it seem like there was something wrong with me, not their device, and were unwilling to talk about modifying it.
One of the higher ups emailed me to see how the demo went, and I let them know everything, including what I would need done to make it work for me, as in, only having one eye piece instead of covering both, or at least having them work independently of each other, and was very specific that the price wasn't an issue, and I know it would cost more ... and I was completely okay with paying more ... their response? "Well, we are orking on making a larger strap that will let it sit a little closer to your face."
They just do not listen to customers.
Also, they were emailing me for a long while before I went to demo them, and gave the impression that this could give me enough sight to not need a cane, and talked about how many of their staff members use it instead of a cane. When I show up? "If you have a cane, you need to use it, and do not rely on this device. In fact, take it off, or out of your line of sight, while walking, so it doesn't distract you."
I'm very put off.
I'd pay $1,000 for it, as something to use from time to time as a mobile CCTV, but that's it.
Their website makes it seem like they really want to work with people, to get them what they need.
When I told them that their product wouldn't work for me as it is, they made it seem like there was something wrong with me, not their device, and were unwilling to talk about modifying it.
One of the higher ups emailed me to see how the demo went, and I let them know everything, including what I would need done to make it work for me, as in, only having one eye piece instead of covering both, or at least having them work independently of each other, and was very specific that the price wasn't an issue, and I know it would cost more ... and I was completely okay with paying more ... their response? "Well, we are orking on making a larger strap that will let it sit a little closer to your face."
They just do not listen to customers.
Also, they were emailing me for a long while before I went to demo them, and gave the impression that this could give me enough sight to not need a cane, and talked about how many of their staff members use it instead of a cane. When I show up? "If you have a cane, you need to use it, and do not rely on this device. In fact, take it off, or out of your line of sight, while walking, so it doesn't distract you."
I'm very put off.
I'd pay $1,000 for it, as something to use from time to time as a mobile CCTV, but that's it.
Amonwilde 2 points 5y ago
Years ago I tried an early Vuzix product and had a similar complaint. It seemed that you actually needed pretty good vision to take advantage of this product for people with low vision. The screens felt very far away. It's too bad, since, for example, I can much better through my iPad camera than I can unaided, but tiny screens far away don't really help.
BARDLover [OP] 1 points 5y ago
And no matter how much I begged, pleaded, and offered to pay far above asking price, they were unwilling to customize one, or do anything beyond offer me a slightly better strap they plan to make, eventually.
They were completely unwilling to listen to their customers.
They were completely unwilling to listen to their customers.
[deleted] 1 points 5y ago
[deleted]
This nonprofit website is run by volunteers.
Please contribute if you can. Thank you!
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large-
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
©2023 HumbleCat Inc • HumbleCat is a 501(c)3 nonprofit based in Michigan, USA.