Stereoscopic 3D question


Garrett

Advanced Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
1,255
Location
Workington, Cumbria, UK
I'm quite literally clueless as far as anything 3D is concerned, so please forgive me if this is glaringly obvious.


Messing about with the options on my GTX 670 I noticed the set up Stereoscopic 3D option, I'm guessing I would need glasses of some description, but do I need a specific monitor as well..? (it's a iiyama Prolite E2607WS 1920x1200)


Thanks.


If I just need the glasses, could people recommend some decent ones that don't cost a fortune.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
if you can pick up the Tool album "10,000 Days" the CD case itself is a stereoscopic camera with appropriate lenses and some freaky images too, you should be able to use this with any stereoscopic 3d image. if you're looking for glasses you can actually wear very few sereoscopic cameras where made like that (it's victorian technology so they tended to be big fixed units with enclosed viewing material)
 
if you can pick up the Tool album "10,000 Days" the CD case itself is a stereoscopic camera with appropriate lenses and some freaky images too, you should be able to use this with any stereoscopic 3d image. if you're looking for glasses you can actually wear very few sereoscopic cameras where made like that (it's victorian technology so they tended to be big fixed units with enclosed viewing material)

Not quite sure I understand what you are saying here (told you I was clueless)


I'm looking to play some 3D games on the PC & thought that the set up Stereoscopic 3D option on my GPU would enable this with the help of some appropriate glasses.


Or is there a lot more to it than that..?
 
Did you try turning the feature on to see what it does?


There's basically 3 ways 3D could be displayed: either it can tint the two channels different colours and mash them together into a single image leading to the classic red-blue 3D images, but red-blue glasses are pretty cheap; it can alternate the refresh, displaying first the one eye then the other back and forth, and for this you would need special glasses that can cost a lot of money but your monitor would have no problem working with them; finally it can alternate columns and use a "lenticular" overlay on the monitor to give a 3D image without the need for glasses but definitely the need for a specific monitor.


There's also a fourth way, it could polarize the images, but for that you'd need both special monitor and special glasses and I highly doubt it would do that.


My guess is that it'll either give you red-blue output, or worst case it'll expect the special 3D monitor and will just cause the image to look weird on a regular monitor. It may even give an option, or simply pop up a dialog saying that your monitor isn't supported. In any case, you've got nothing to lose by trying.
 
Did you try turning the feature on to see what it does?


There's basically 3 ways 3D could be displayed: either it can tint the two channels different colours and mash them together into a single image leading to the classic red-blue 3D images, but red-blue glasses are pretty cheap; it can alternate the refresh, displaying first the one eye then the other back and forth, and for this you would need special glasses that can cost a lot of money but your monitor would have no problem working with them; finally it can alternate columns and use a "lenticular" overlay on the monitor to give a 3D image without the need for glasses but definitely the need for a specific monitor.


There's also a fourth way, it could polarize the images, but for that you'd need both special monitor and special glasses and I highly doubt it would do that.


My guess is that it'll either give you red-blue output, or worst case it'll expect the special 3D monitor and will just cause the image to look weird on a regular monitor. It may even give an option, or simply pop up a dialog saying that your monitor isn't supported. In any case, you've got nothing to lose by trying.

Many thanks for the explanation


Done a little more research & I don't think I'll be bothering just yet, Nvidia 3D vision requires a 120Hz monitor (mine is 60Hz) and their own glasses.


The technology does seem to function pretty well though, pretty much all the reviews & customer feedback is generally positive especially with the mk 2 glasses and newer drivers.


I'm also quite surprised by how many games are supported, especially the older/classic stuff.


I'll definitely be giving it serious consideration when I'm in the market for a new monitor.


Has anyone here experience of Nvidia 3D vision.. is it worth the price of admission?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Done a little more research & I don't think I'll be bothering just yet
Why not? Worst thing that'll happen is it'll make the screen "blurry". Most likely what it'll do is simply fail to work. At least then you'll know what it is that it's trying to do.
 
Done a little more research & I don't think I'll be bothering just yet
Why not?

The glasses I could justify (just about) but my current monitor is absolutely fine & I just can't afford the £100 approx for the glasses, and however much a decent 120Hz monitor would cost.


Ah, just realised what you meant, I'll give it a try.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I mean why not just turn it on. It's an option, flick it on and see what it does. Either it does something indicative that will tell you exactly what you need to do or it won't work.


Wouldn't you feel silly if you saved up enough for a new monitor and new glasses and excitedly turned it on only to find out it simply tints the scene red-blue? :p
 
Ah, boo. Ah well, good effort. Now start saving up for fancy glasses and monitors. :p
 
I just wanted to mention that more recent color-based 3D glasses use red and cyan (as this works better with color images, red&blue is used for black and white).


I know at least 2 Games that support these kind of glasses: Trackmania United and eduke32. Can't say that it really improves the gaming-experience though.


A fun thing to do, however, is to make your own 3D images. All you need is a digital camera, a steady hand and a Anaglyph software: http://3d-photos.wikispaces.com/3d.softwares (Sorry, don't know if there's also a software that works under Linux ...)


It's a lot of fun. And sometimes a normal foto just can't reproduce the beauty of a certain scene, but a 3D foto can.
 
i thought you where refering to stereoscopic 3D (two near identical images side by side) which requires transparent lenses a certain distance apart and a certain distance from the viewing material, providing a full colour 3-dimensional effect, if your refering to colour-based 3D (red/cyan or red/green double images) this is a different matter entirely.


Stereoscopic camera 3D:


4818081625_4c10edd5f8_b.jpg



Colour Based 3D:


3dface.jpg
 
Having read quite a number of exhilarating reviews I finally took the plunge. Stuff should arrive tomorrow. I opted for a 144Hz BenQ XL2720Z and those nvidia glasses. If it works well and looks as good as people say, I'll have a great reason to come back to a lot of older titles. Can't wait, giggity.

Excuse me for digging out this lvl 2 zombie, didn't want to start another thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When free-viewing a stereoscopic image pair like the cow Monkfish posted, I tend to try viewing it wide-eyed first unless instructed otherwise. In this case though the cow image is a cross-eyed pair, so the effect was kind of trippy... The grass moving further into the foreground as it should have been receding, and the cow recessed into it. :)

- Neelix
 
No further than usual which is probably around 50 cm.

I can view it wide-eyed quite comfortably at that distance.

On the other hand I always find cross-eyed free-viewing slightly uncomfortable, whatever the distance. I also find that cross-eyed viewing reduces the perceived size of the image for some reason.

- Neelix
 
I noticed that high DPI screens work much better for free-viewing stereoscopic images. Pandora's screen is like twice the DPI of my monitor so it works a lot better.
 
Well, high DPI means the images are smaller, so closer together. On this netbook I've only got a 1024x600 screen, and while it's only a nine inch screen, that means the pixels are visible from a couple of feet away, and I'd have to be a long way from this screen to make those two cow images any closer than my eyes are apart.


I've always found cross-eyed images more natural than wide-eyed ones, in spite of all the old magic eye pictures training me to use the wide-eyed approach. I guess I find it easier to pretend to focus on something closer than the image I'm trying to view that beyond it and through the actual image, but I guess it varies between people. Makes sense that cross-eyed images are smaller though, as you'll visualise them as being closer to your eyes via the sense of convergence, though not according to the sense of accomodation (hope I've got those the right way round), so your brain might see it as being closer but not any bigger, thus smaller. Personally I seem to use the sense of lens accomodation more though, and see both types of images as being the same size.
 
Reporting awesomeness. There's a lot of eye-and brain strain at first. But once you're used to it, you're in for a real treat. Bought Crysis 2 and 3, currently enjoyiny the former. The HUD alone is gorgeous, you feel like wearing the Nano suit seeing the indicators etc. float right in front of you.


And the 120Hz and low input lag are just great for competitive FPS, Even the desktop is soo smooth now. Soothing for the eyes.
 
No further than usual which is probably around 50 cm.


I can view it wide-eyed quite comfortably at that distance.


On the other hand I always find cross-eyed free-viewing slightly uncomfortable, whatever the distance. I also find that cross-eyed viewing reduces the perceived size of the image for some reason.


- Neelix
I tried seeing the cow in 3d the other day from normal distance and couldn't get it to work.  Today I tried again and found that I need to be at least 4 times my normal viewing distance for it to not be irritating and work.  After that I tried again from normal distance and it hurts.  They are pretty cool though.

I found some wide eyed images and can't get them to work.  I tried looking "through" them and looking at something far away and moving the images in front of my eyes.  Do you have any tips?
 
Back
Top