Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 4, 2026

High-resolution, High-speed, Three-dimensional Video Imaging with Digital Fringe Projection Techniques
Published on: December 3, 2013
A comparison of four projection perimeters
Abstract:
Identical specifications for size and luminance of the target and dome on four projection perimeters-Goldmann, Marco, Topcon, and Rodenstock- seemed to indicate that similar visual fields should be plottable with each instrument. We subjected 30 eyes to perimetry with all four machines. The Rodenstock perimeter was usually unable to map the central field with the I2e target and to identify the presence of most visual field defects. The Goldmann was most capable of demonstrating the presence of existing scotomata and was also able to plot them with the greatest definition. The Topcon was next most sensitive followed closely by the Marco. Analysis of the actual target size and luminance on each machine showed that significant variation existed and was probably responsible for the visual field differences that we found.
Related Concept Videos
Fischer Projections
Parallel-axis Theorem
Parallel-Axis Theorem for an Area
For a flywheel approximated as a solid disc, consider an infinitesimal differential element with an arbitrary distance...
Perpendicular-Axis Theorem
Consider a circular disc of mass M and radius R lying along an x-y plane. The origin lies at the center of the disc, and the z-axis is perpendicular to the disc's plane. All three axes coincide at the disc's center. The moment of inertia of this...
Design Example: Measuring Distance Between Two Points with Obstructions
Theorem of Pappus

