The downside of a wide angle lens

  • Thread starter Deleted member 37895
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 37895

Guest
Yesterday I was turning left at a 4 way stop, and someone went through the stop sign and hit my passenger front door. I couldn't see her once I was in the intersection looking at where I was going, and even if I did, wouldn't have had enough time to avoid the crash. But I posted my video in a group for my car (VW Alltrack) and almost everyone said I could have avoided the crash if I was paying attention! That's fine, but what if the misleading view provided by the wide angle causes your insurance company to accept fault for a crash? Or what if you were involved in a crash that went to court and the jury doesn't understand "field of view"?

Maybe we should have cameras that capture a view similar to what we see from the driver seat, and make up for it with multiple cameras providing coverage https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/u9wNHQute1lxRrI079tje0lKpVeHAy2e11x9NZ7Dedr
 
Here crashes at 4 way stops usually result in a 50/50 split when it come to fault.
Here you are supposed to stop for people on the right, and they in turn have to make sure the person on their left comply to that, and so if you don't stop for the guy on the right and he don't stop for the guy on the left as he don't comply wit the rule. :rolleyes::unsure:

I have always felt this in the Danish traffic code are a joke, cuz a de facto 50 / 50 split are not a "rule" it is just a patch for the lesser of 2 evils.

Also here you can drive on a "main" road, usually in a residential area, and then have a little side road on your right, a side road that don't have a yield and so you on the "main" road have to stop for people coming from that little side road if its on your right side.
There was many of these traps where my friend use to live and 4 way stops, which are why you often saw driving instructors there, and heard crashes most often at the 4 way stop 100 M down the road.
 
Last edited:
I'd probably say 50/50 as you both started moving forwards at the same time, and 'could' have spotted each other in enough time to avoid the incident. I don't think the angle on your camera is particularly wide, or that it presents a misleading FOV, although I understand your assertion that it was wider than your view of where you were going once you were in the intersection.

EDIT: On reflection, your camera's view does appear rather wide in that it shows quite a lot of both A-pillars and side mirrors and even a small part of your steering wheel. I still don't think it's wide enough to be misleading though.
45620
 
Last edited:
I'd probably say 50/50 as you both started moving forwards at the same time, and 'could' have spotted each other in enough time to avoid the incident. I don't think the angle on your camera is particularly wide, or that it presents a misleading FOV, although I understand your assertion that it was wider than your view of where you were going once you were in the intersection.

EDIT: On reflection, your camera's view does appear rather wide in that it shows quite a lot of both A-pillars and side mirrors and even a small part of your steering wheel. I still don't think it's wide enough to be misleading though.
View attachment 45620

There is nothing abnormal about pulling forward when it's your turn to go up to the stop sign. You would have no reason to think someone is going to fail to stop. When her front wheels hit the white line (which I couldn't see) to when the collision happened was 2 seconds
 

Attachments

  • seq1.jpg
    seq1.jpg
    285.7 KB · Views: 15
  • seq2.jpg
    seq2.jpg
    300.1 KB · Views: 14
The video clearly shows that you were at fault @jackalopephoto. It does have to do with "paying attention" but quite not in the way you are describing. The wide angle coverage of your camera happens to be the "proof" that you were at fault but not because it is "misleading" in any way. It has to do with the traffic regulations regarding "right-of-way" which happened to have been captured by your camera, so it was the opposite of misleading unfortunately.

You were at a four way intersection that had stop signs for all four cars in the intersection. The rules of "right-of way" dictate that, "at a four-way stop, if two vehicles reach the intersection simultaneously, the vehicle on the left (B) must yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right (A)." You were the vehicle on the left (B). You can argue all you want about who got to the intersection first or who was over the line but as the car on the left you are required to yield to the car on your right. I'm confident that any LEO or court of law reviewing your video would find that you did not yield the right of way to the vehicle on your right.

rightoway_2.jpg

https://driversed.com/driving-information/signs-signals-and-markings/right-of-way.aspx
 
The video clearly shows that you were at fault @jackalopephoto. It does have to do with "paying attention" but quite not in the way you are describing. The wide angle coverage of your camera happens to be the "proof" that you were at fault but not because it is "misleading" in any way. It has to do with the traffic regulations regarding "right-of-way" which happened to have been captured by your camera, so it was the opposite of misleading unfortunately.

You were at a four way intersection that had stop signs for all four cars in the intersection. The rules of "right-of way" dictate that, "at a four-way stop, if two vehicles reach the intersection simultaneously, the vehicle on the left (B) must yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right (A)." You were the vehicle on the left (B). You can argue all you want about who got to the intersection first or who was over the line but as the car on the left you are required to yield to the car on your right. I'm confident that any LEO or court of law reviewing your video would find that you did not yield the right of way to the vehicle on your right.

View attachment 45623

https://driversed.com/driving-information/signs-signals-and-markings/right-of-way.aspx

Watch the video again.

Event 1: The Nissan SUV reached the intersection and stopped
Event 2: I reached the intersection and stopped
Event 3: The Nissan turned right
Event 4: I started driving through the intersection
Event 5: Toyota SUV pulled forward after the Nissan turned
Event 6: Toyota SUV failed to stop at the stop sign and instead kept going
Event 7: Toyota SUV hit me
 
Watch the video again.

Event 1: The Nissan SUV reached the intersection and stopped
Event 2: I reached the intersection and stopped
Event 3: The Nissan turned right
Event 4: I started driving through the intersection
Event 5: Toyota SUV pulled forward after the Nissan turned
Event 6: Toyota SUV failed to stop at the stop sign and instead kept going
Event 7: Toyota SUV hit me

Good luck with that logic in court!

In this case, the law is against you as the issue is not who started to "pull forward" first, one second or so sooner or later, but that fact that both vehicles approached the four way stop intersection at virtually the same time and both entered the intersection at the same time, when it was your legal responsibility to yield to the car on your right and you did not. You even admit that you didn't notice the vehicle to your right. The fact that you didn't notice the vehicle entering the intersection is an admission that you were not paying adequate attention. I mean, how can one fail to notice or look at the traffic coming from all directions at a four way intersection? This is Driver's ED 101!

The other vehicle had the legal right-of-way! The accident was therefore your fault.

Why even ask for people's objective opinions in chat forums and then reject everything you hear? I can't help but notice you do this often no matter what the subject. In this case, it's not a question of others opinions however, it's the law.
 
Last edited:
Good luck with that logic in court!

In this case, the law is against you as the issue is not who started to "pull forward" first, one second or so sooner or later, but that fact that both vehicles approached the four way stop intersection at virtually the same time and both entered the intersection at the same time, when it was your legal responsibility to yield to the car on your right and you did not. You even admit that you didn't notice the vehicle to your right. The fact that you didn't notice the vehicle entering the intersection is an admission that you were not paying adequate attention. I mean, how can one fail to notice or look at the traffic coming from all directions at a four way intersection? This is Driver's ED 101!

The other vehicle had the legal right-of-way! The accident was therefore your fault.

Why even ask for people's objective opinions in chat forums and then reject everything you hear? I can't help but notice you do this often no matter what the subject. In this case, it's not a question of others opinions however, it's the law.

The Toyota didn't reach the intersection at the same time I did. It was BEHIND another vehicle and pulled forward then didn't stop when it was supposed to. You don't get to drive through an intersection following another vehicle and then just choose not to stop. It's called a 4 way stop not a "4 way maybe stop"
 
Here you are supposed to come to a full stop, before you proceed into the 4 way intersection, a fact often neglected by a lot of Danes including yours truly.
 
The Toyota didn't reach the intersection at the same time I did. It was BEHIND another vehicle and pulled forward then didn't stop when it was supposed to. You don't get to drive through an intersection following another vehicle and then just choose not to stop. It's called a 4 way stop not a "4 way maybe stop"

I see what you are saying and it might help you in court but the vehicle to your right at a four way intersection has the right-of-way. You both entered the intersection at the exact same time.
 
Here you are supposed to stop for people on the right, and they in turn have to make sure the person on their left comply to that, and so if you don't stop for the guy on the right and he don't stop for the guy on the left as he don't comply wit the rule. :rolleyes::unsure:
Here in the UK, we don't have multi-way stops, instead we invented the roundabout, and we used the same rule - give way to people on the right :)

Now I'm puzzled, why do you give way to the left on roundabouts but to the right in this case? :unsure:
 
Here in the UK, we don't have multi-way stops, instead we invented the roundabout, and we used the same rule - give way to people on the right :)

Now I'm puzzled, why do you give way to the left on roundabouts but to the right in this case? :unsure:

We have roundabouts too but also many four way intersections, particlarly in residential neigborhoods. More and more of them are being installed in my area but roundabouts only work well if there is enough room for them. They shoe-horned a roundabout into a problematic location where I live and because it is so small it has created a whole new set of problems, especially as it is a location that handles many large tractor-trailers that have a difficult time navigating the small circle.

As for giving the right-of-way to the left on roundabouts is because that is the direction the vehicles are coming from as they traverse the circle.
 
I see what you are saying and it might help you in court but the vehicle to your right at a four way intersection has the right-of-way. You both entered the intersection at the exact same time.

No we didn't. I was already at the stop sign. She was behind another car and was supposed to pull forward and stop. You can't piggy back on another car through a 4 way stop
 
If they just remove the " make sure the guy on the left stop" that would solve everything, and 100% blame could always be put on some one.
But the current stop for people to the right and make sure people on your left do just that, well just like a few other things in our traffic code its ambiguous, and so you see this 50/50 split.
So just change it to "stop for people to the right", and if people don't get that its pay up sucker time.
Cuz here there are no leeway, say you are pretty much over the intersection, and a guy on your left nick the very back of your car, well that its still a 50/50 split even if the guy hitting the rear of your car was clearly not stopping for the car to the right ( you ) and you was cleanly in the intersection "long" before he was since he hit the very rear of your car.

I just hate ambiguous things as i live in a very black or white / right or wrong world.

4 way stops here are often in places with no room for a roundabout, though we also make those pretty small.
 
No we didn't. I was already at the stop sign. She was behind another car and was supposed to pull forward and stop. You can't piggy back on another car through a 4 way stop

Aside from her rolling through the stop sign the video shows you both entering the intersection at the same time. As I mentioned earlier, whether it is one second before or after makes no difference, this is not a track and field event.

I guess you'll just have to submit your dash cam video to law enforcement and your insurance company and see what determination is made.
 
You can't piggy back on another car through a 4 way stop
No and we also see this happen here, also if a regular intersection have had the light brake down and so 4 way stop go into effect, either that or people seem to think the larger road with the most traffic have the right of way then.
And if its really bad they put a cop in the middle of the intersection to direct traffic by hand signals, in which case Danes are even more clueless though thats also pretty simple.
 
As for giving the right-of-way to the left on roundabouts is because that is the direction the vehicles are coming from as they traverse the circle.
Yes, so the question is why do you not also gave way to the left at stops, then it would be consistent!

We have roundabouts too but also many four way intersections, particlarly in residential neigborhoods. More and more of them are being installed in my area but roundabouts only work well if there is enough room for them. They shoe-horned a roundabout into a problematic location where I live and because it is so small it has created a whole new set of problems, especially as it is a location that handles many large tractor-trailers that have a difficult time navigating the small circle.
Roundabouts do not need to be big, easy for any vehicle that fits on the road to drive over this:
Tiny_mini_roundabout_1_-_Coppermine_-_4700.JPG
 
Aside from her rolling through the stop sign the video shows you both entering the intersection at the same time. As I mentioned earlier, whether it is one second before or after makes no difference, this is not a track and field event.

I guess you'll just have to submit your dash cam video to law enforcement and your insurance company and see what determination is made.

We did not enter at the same time. I was at the stop sign shortly after the Nissan. You can read the law here. It says you must stop. It does not say you can roll through an intersection https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/transportation-code/transp-sect-545-151.html
 
We did not enter at the same time. I was at the stop sign shortly after the Nissan. You can read the law here. It says you must stop. It does not say you can roll through an intersection https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/transportation-code/transp-sect-545-151.html
Before you start pointing fingers be careful because neither of you came to a complete stop. You came close but never achieved a complete stop. If it gets into a legal 'p*ssing match' I'm sure one or both attorneys will be quick to point that out and given the other facts in the case you're likely to come up on the short end there as well.
 
Yes, so the question is why do you not also gave way to the left at stops, then it would be consistent!


Roundabouts do not need to be big, easy for any vehicle that fits on the road to drive over this:
Tiny_mini_roundabout_1_-_Coppermine_-_4700.JPG

That might be fine if you are driving a small vehicle but good luck if you are driving a truck or large vehicle of any size. A large vehicle or truck (such as a moving van or good sized box truck) would simply have to make the turn and ignore the roundabout, assuming there was no other traffic. A typical delivery truck would be far too long to negotiate a circle that small.

A roundabout like that would be laughed at here. In fact, it would never be built.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top