I think the 1 arc second threshold is too strict by about an order of magnitude.
I think the 1 arc second threshold is too strict by about an order of magnitude.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-convert-arc-seconds-to-mete...
"One degree is an angular measurement. 1/60th of a degree is an arc minute. 1/60th of an arc minutes is an arc second, a rather small angle but an angle none the less.
(...)
1 arc second subtends 1 meter at a distance of 205,787 meters (I did say it was a small angle)."
Which should mean that 1 arc second subtends one millimetre at ~200 meters? Do we really have that high visual acuity?
100 pixels per millimeter at 2m? 200 at 1m? That's ~25 * 200 = 5000 pixels per inch at 1m. I would think 1200 dpi would be more than sufficient at 1m...
[ed: missed the bit about: "from standard viewing distances" - still sounds rather extreme]
1 arcminute is a more realistic size for what people can reliably resolve I think. I guess we need significantly better than that to avoid a subjective feeling it is blurry but, that is about what we can actually reliably tell the difference between I think. We cannot tell the difference below 25 arcseconds or so though, it is not possible without larger pupils.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/Raylei.htm...