whitex
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2021
- Threads
- 58
- Messages
- 4,959
- Reaction score
- 4,136
- Location
- WA, USA
- Vehicles
- 2023 Taycan TCT, 2024 Q8 eTron P+
More like with matrix headlights detection sensitivity is increased, or car identification certainty threshold is lowered. Perfect it is not, but errors are much more less noticeable. Same issue if traveling on divided highway for example and you cannot see the opposing traffic big rigs lights but they, sitting higher, can see your lights.If I may paraphrase, your statement is that detection is top-notch, but the decision making is more conservative for dumb lights?
Losing 2% or 10% of the beam is not as annoying as losing 50% of the beam (switch to low beam), and when it comes to cars on the opposite side of the road, you have to pay attention to even notice the dark rectangle - typically more noticeable on curves as the opposing traffic is directly in front of you. Another way to think about it, with matrix headlights the percentage of time that an empty lane in front of you is illuminated is much higher than auto-high beam. I wish I could have used matrix headlights on my fly-and-drive trip, so many empty dark highways on which I had to shut off high beams for opposite traffic - would have loved to just have the right side of the high beam always on (nobody in front of me).If the theory is that the error margin for the "lights off" signal can be lower for matrix lights, I'd suspect that turning off swaths of pixels incorrectly/on false positives would be just as annoying or unsettling as turning off completely the dumb lights. (Well, not really off, just low beams.)
Obviously some people don't like it, hence in countries where it is enabled, there is a setting to enable/disable adaptive matrix lights. It could be that in some environments it doesn't work well.But ok, I gather from this that the overall user experience is better with matrix headlights - and that's all that matters. Thanks, all.
Sponsored
Last edited: