The downside of a wide angle lens

  • Thread starter Deleted member 37895
  • Start date
Crop the video down to what you consider normal angle and re-post, then see what people think...

Any video editor can reduce the field of view to exactly as it would be seen by a narrower lens.

I have no idea of the rules in your part of the world, we don't have this type of junction, but it appears to me that she did her stop (not 100% stopped but still a partial attempt at one) and then set off again before you set off, she crossed the stop line and entered the junction before you? I also find it odd that a quick look to your right shortly after you set off and before turning wouldn't have seen that there was an issue, she was always in line of sight, only explanation seems to be that maybe your view was blocked by your excessively thick A-pillar? That is your problem, not hers.

Seems rather like tunnel vision from both parties!
Even if it is not a legal requirement to avoid accidents, it is sensible and saves a lot of inconvenience.

The vehicle that hit me was the second vehicle. The first one went through when it was his turn, then I went, then the Seqouia was supposed to pull up to the stop sign and stop which she didn't

I'll crop it in Adobe Premiere later. I measured my field of view through my glasses as beyond that is just a blur since I'm -6 prescription. I got 82 degrees horizontally. I overlaid that onto the direction of my car when she was entering the intersection going over the white line
 

Attachments

  • view_41.JPG
    view_41.JPG
    149 KB · Views: 9
The vehicle that hit me was the second vehicle. The first one went through when it was his turn, then I went, then the Seqouia was supposed to pull up to the stop sign and stop which she didn't

I'll crop it in Adobe Premiere later. I measured my field of view through my glasses as beyond that is just a blur since I'm -6 prescription. I got 82 degrees horizontally. I overlaid that onto the direction of my car when she was entering the intersection going over the white line
Am I right in thinking that the stop line is the first thick white line than only crosses 1 lane? Because I think she crossed that before you passed the stop sign... but only a little before.

With good vision, people can see movement out to about 180 degrees, so 82 seems quite narrow, maybe she is even worse, that would explain things - you need to turn your head and check, not assume that everyone is doing what you expect them to do, or assume that everyone else can see as well as you can!
 
Am I right in thinking that the stop line is the first thick white line than only crosses 1 lane? Because I think she crossed that before you passed the stop sign... but only a little before.

With good vision, people can see movement out to about 180 degrees, so 82 seems quite narrow, maybe she is even worse, that would explain things - you need to turn your head and check, not assume that everyone is doing what you expect them to do!

You have to stop after the person ahead of you, two cars can't cross a 4 way stop at once, it's not like a roundabout

Imagine I crossed intersections constantly looking back to make sure the next car at all sides chose to stop. Imagine I saw her when she reached the line and kept going. Remember that would be the first point where I'd know she wasn't going to stop. Driving forward is not wrong, that's what is supposed to happen. You drive forward after the car ahead of you and then you stop. At that point I was already a few feet from her path and 2 seconds away from collision. How could I stop? The only chance to avoid the collision would have been to swerve to the left, and then I would have hit the car coming from the left to the stop sign. Or I could have braked which would result in her hitting my front fender and wheel at a more perpendicular angle which would have been worse

BTW she doesn't wear glasses and told me that she "knew it was a 4 way stop but wasn't expecting anybody to be coming from the apartments"-- Exact words.
 

Attachments

  • n hills cr overlay 2.jpg
    n hills cr overlay 2.jpg
    118.7 KB · Views: 6
Last edited by a moderator:
BTW she doesn't wear glasses...
That is quite likely to be the main problem! She should certainly have seen you with sufficient time to avoid a collision, I still think that you should have seen her, but given your narrow FOV you would have needed to look to your right, which I think you should have done, but for her there was no need to move her head.
 
I measured my field of view through my glasses as beyond that is just a blur since I'm -6 prescription. I got 82 degrees horizontally.

This would go a long way to explaining why you didn't see them. But knowing of your limitation, you need to try more to compensate for it. Where most folks can hear a car beside them or the tooting of a horn half a block away, often I cannot which is another reason why I look around so diligently. I can still hear adequately enough to drive safely but I can't tell from where sounds come from- I have to look around to figure it out. Would extra diligence on JP's part have helped here? I really don't know but it might have. Regardless he bears no legal fault which I can see.

4-way stops can work very well as long as everyone followstherules and maintains the traffic patterns when their turn comes. Roundabouts follow suit there. But all it takes is one idiot then everyone loses, which is why I'm adamant about keeping idiots off the road except as passengers.

Phil
 
but for her there was no need to move her head.

Are we sure there was anything in her head to begin with other than cobwebs? :eek: :ROFLMAO: She wasn't looking where she was going for certain, and anyone who drives like that cannot possibly be a safe driver.

It would not do for me to be a Traffic Court Judge as she'd be getting at least a year's suspension from me based on that aspect alone.

Phil
 
Rather than crop the dashcam I just took a video from my iPhone starting from a stop at the stop sign. You can see how fast the car at the stop sign at the right transitions to the A pillar and then side window https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/V9Dt2vkxYMlmZ1y2h0VNSJKR91vWbbpHJ9DFV8YRopx
OK, you couldn't see the other car set off.

If other people are criticising you for not seeing the other car set off and thus not avoiding an avoidable accident, it is likely because they would have seen it, because they have twice the field of view that you do.

Personally, I think you should have turned your head at least once to check, and if you didn't have time to do so, that is because you were driving too fast. Just because some other people drive that fast and do so safely doesn't mean that you are capable of driving that fast safely, there is nothing wrong with slowing down and taking more care.

Of course the other driver did have a much better view of the approaching accident and should have seen you and avoided the accident, so either wasn't looking or is suffering from tunnel vision. But if we assume she does suffer from tunnel vision and so didn't see you until too late, who is then most at fault? We probably have to go back to Dashmellow's argument that you are supposed to give way to your right...
 
I think none of the drivers were looking far ahead and prepared for an accident. Looking far ahead gives you ample times to avoid accidents and in the worst case find a place to drive off the road.
This has saved me from a head on crash where speeds were high and the car appeared in front of me. I had seen the car earlier along the fjords far away and he overtook a truck.
I could not brake, so I just left the road on to the grass field. He missed me by inches.
I have driven millions of kilometres without the any damage to my car or mototcycle.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
JP was primarily focused on where he was going- the proper thing to do- even if he might have done better. The girl was not focused on where she was going so she should not have been in motion at all. I've seen what attorneys do with facts like that in a courtroom :rolleyes: My attorney would have her looking like a child murderer in mere minutes :eek:

I think we've pretty much covered all the angles on this and answered JP's question, so rather than dragging this out I'm going to sit back and wait until we hear of the outcome from JP, which I do hope will be in his favor. Good luck my fellow dashcammer (y)

Phil
 
OK, you couldn't see the other car set off.

If other people are criticising you for not seeing the other car set off and thus not avoiding an avoidable accident, it is likely because they would have seen it, because they have twice the field of view that you do.

Personally, I think you should have turned your head at least once to check, and if you didn't have time to do so, that is because you were driving too fast. Just because some other people drive that fast and do so safely doesn't mean that you are capable of driving that fast safely, there is nothing wrong with slowing down and taking more care.

Of course the other driver did have a much better view of the approaching accident and should have seen you and avoided the accident, so either wasn't looking or is suffering from tunnel vision. But if we assume she does suffer from tunnel vision and so didn't see you until too late, who is then most at fault? We probably have to go back to Dashmellow's argument that you are supposed to give way to your right...

I feel like I've gone through this multiple times.

Even if I turned my head to check all around my vehicle instead of looking where I was driving to *while driving through an intersection with frequent pedestrian traffic* I would not have known she wasn't stopping until I was already almost in her path.

To reiterate: She was not doing anything wrong in pulling forward. Pulling forward is not when I would have known she wasn't going to stop. That is how vehicles get to the stop sign, by driving forward. It was only when she failed to actually stop when it was her turn that I would have any indication that something was wrong.

If I was looking at that vehicle and assessing her every movement and realized she wasn't stopping as early as humanly possible, I would not have been able to stop and avoid the collision. Best case is I would have gotten hit on the front fender instead of the door which would be significantly more likely to result in unibody damage and suspension damage.
 
My insurance adjuster found that I wasn't at fault and she submitted the dashcam video to the other person's insurance. But they have a lengthy process for security checks on external files so they won't view it until next week
 
When i play loud music in my car, intersections have my head swivel left and right numerous times ( even if its green light )
This is due to in the 90ties i was almost T boned by fire trucks and ambulances 2 times in intersections, and due to my ears getting hammered by tree 12 Inch sub-woofers i heard nothing, so i learned when i on purpose limit some of my abilities i better crank up on others.
Maybe also why when i got the license to drive trucks ( CDL i think Americans call it ) the teacher dident have to tell me one time to use my mirrors often, something he constantly had to tell the other people in the class.
 
My insurance adjuster found that I wasn't at fault and she submitted the dashcam video to the other person's insurance. But they have a lengthy process for security checks on external files so they won't view it until next week
If you are not at fault you are luckering out of this. You:

1) Failed to reach a full stop at an all-way stop sign.
2) Failed to yield to the right hand cars (you should have let both cars pass it's not called a 4-way stop crossing for no reason). Also, the second car not stopping does not put you in the clear, especially considering point 1.

In most european countries you would be fully at fault, but since you are american you might get lucky.

I must say though that the other car is a terrible driver and they should have stopped to correct your mistake, especially at that slow speed. But you, you need to take a chill pill when driving and not rush a 4-way stop crossing like that.
 
If you are not at fault you are luckering out of this. You:

1) Failed to reach a full stop at an all-way stop sign.
2) Failed to yield to the right hand cars (you should have let both cars pass it's not called a 4-way stop crossing for no reason). Also, the second car not stopping does not put you in the clear, especially considering point 1.

In most european countries you would be fully at fault, but since you are american you might get lucky.

I must say though that the other car is a terrible driver and they should have stopped to correct your mistake, especially at that slow speed. But you, you need to take a chill pill when driving and not rush a 4-way stop crossing like that.

I don't know what the laws are in your country, but here you do not yield to all cars on the right at a 4 way stop. I'm pretty sure that's how it works in the Netherlands too.

One car goes at a time.

One car goes at a time.

One car goes at a time.

The only reason you can even tell I didn't stop 100% is because of the dashcam video. In real life that's probably how you stop at every stop sign, and how we all stop at every stop sign. Rolling at 0.1mph doesn't mean another driver no longer has to stop at all when it's her turn to stop at the stop sign.

The other drive totally failed to stop, she drove through the stop sign rather than yielding to me when it was my turn.

Again....

One car goes at a time.

What is motivating you to post a lie about our laws?

What do you get out of this?

How do you gain from pretending that multiple cars can go through a 4 way stop?

Done with this forum and the insistence on trolling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No here you do have to yield to all cars if they are on your right at a 4 way stop, i assume it is the same down in Holland.

One of the downsides cuz if your right ( and left ) are the busy road, then you can sit there for a while, not least if you are behind a driver in doubt and so will not go for any smaller gap in traffic from the right.
 
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:
The left giving way to the vehicle on the right is a law that go's back before turn signals, the car on the left can see hand signals on the car on the right, but the car on the right can't see the left drivers hands, therefore that law was passed in the US, actually I thought it was like that in all countries and conditions, live and learn.

As for the roundabout, we call them traffic circles in the US. I was raised in Virginia, at that time the first person in the circle had the right of way in his lane, anyone entering couldn't pass (another vehicle) in the circle, if I was in the left lane in a circle I had to give my signal and/or slow till the right lane was clear to get into and possibly out of the circle. This kept people from trying to cut you off in the circle and gave everyone a safe way to exit the circle. Worked very well when it was obeyed. But if you broke a rule it was an automatic ticket if caught.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top