I have a theory. When you play 3D you are really "training" some eye muscles, and it may be good for some people, and may strain/hurt other (like any other exercice in life). At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refreshrate (max. is 60hz), so you literally are playing a not totally smooth flickering game, and that hurts if you play a lot of time. Compared with somebody playing in 2D with todays g-sync/freesync tech, the difference seems to be biiiiig. And now you have to add the ghost anyoing things. So..., yes, you can get used to playing 3D, but it probably always strain your eyes sooner or later.
Of course high convergence and depth are supposed to increase strain, as you are forcing your eye muscles more than usual in life. In other words, 3D tech is not perfect, but you can get used to it and have fun, and probably it will worth the cons..., or maybe not, you will decide. In this forum we can read people who agree with the decission that playing with 3D is worthy, but of course there are other people that do not agree and you can not read them just because they never came over here anymore.
I have a theory. When you play 3D you are really "training" some eye muscles, and it may be good for some people, and may strain/hurt other (like any other exercice in life). At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refreshrate (max. is 60hz), so you literally are playing a not totally smooth flickering game, and that hurts if you play a lot of time. Compared with somebody playing in 2D with todays g-sync/freesync tech, the difference seems to be biiiiig. And now you have to add the ghost anyoing things. So..., yes, you can get used to playing 3D, but it probably always strain your eyes sooner or later.
Of course high convergence and depth are supposed to increase strain, as you are forcing your eye muscles more than usual in life. In other words, 3D tech is not perfect, but you can get used to it and have fun, and probably it will worth the cons..., or maybe not, you will decide. In this forum we can read people who agree with the decission that playing with 3D is worthy, but of course there are other people that do not agree and you can not read them just because they never came over here anymore.
For sure, here are only people who stood with 3D eventually for years.
Nad many of us went through some drawbacks from 3D first time playing. But we all here are live evedence that there is no real problem or danger in using 3D.
Regarding FPS you are right. Because of that all people who intend to play 3D are awared they need stronger PC than needed for 2D playing of course.
Anyway 60 stable FPS is more then just enough. You need no 120 FPS if you are not cybersportsman. But no 3D in any sport disciplines. 3D is only for fun
For sure, here are only people who stood with 3D eventually for years.
Nad many of us went through some drawbacks from 3D first time playing. But we all here are live evedence that there is no real problem or danger in using 3D.
Regarding FPS you are right. Because of that all people who intend to play 3D are awared they need stronger PC than needed for 2D playing of course.
Anyway 60 stable FPS is more then just enough. You need no 120 FPS if you are not cybersportsman. But no 3D in any sport disciplines. 3D is only for fun
Some people consider that playing 2D is enough, somepeople don't. Some people think that playing with only 60hz is enough, and some people don't. Who is right?
And of course, we all here are live evedence that we "are not dead" because of this tech. Anyway if anybody died before because of playing 3D, we probably wouldn't realize of that. I mean, we believe what we want to believe.
Some people consider that playing 2D is enough, somepeople don't. Some people think that playing with only 60hz is enough, and some people don't. Who is right?
And of course, we all here are live evedence that we "are not dead" because of this tech. Anyway if anybody died before because of playing 3D, we probably wouldn't realize of that. I mean, we believe what we want to believe.
Let's finalize this discuss that seems not so constructive: no medical conclusions that this technology keeps danger for users. Playing is the same as watching stereo pictures basicly.
If you have some material or facts - please give a links.
Let's finalize this discuss that seems not so constructive: no medical conclusions that this technology keeps danger for users. Playing is the same as watching stereo pictures basicly.
If you have some material or facts - please give a links.
Lol..., do you have proof that God does not exist? I do not need medical proofs of something I know perfectly because I have experienced many times and I have read opinions of other people feeling something similar.
I do not say that playing 3D games is going to kill your eyes, but I have serious dudes (and it would be a good idea to have a serious study) about the posibility of any kind of consequence when playing for many hours/day during weeks/months, even years, in the conditions we usually use to play (polarized glasses in front of a superbright monitor, receiving flickering images all the time with anomalies, building a fictional 3D world similar but not equal to real world, in which each one of us makes his own tricks to change convergence/depth to adjust to his liking and therefore deforming that 3D fiction for as long as the game last). Maybe if you adjust the parameters in a ideal way you notice less the effects..., but everybody does it?
Lol..., do you have proof that God does not exist? I do not need medical proofs of something I know perfectly because I have experienced many times and I have read opinions of other people feeling something similar.
I do not say that playing 3D games is going to kill your eyes, but I have serious dudes (and it would be a good idea to have a serious study) about the posibility of any kind of consequence when playing for many hours/day during weeks/months, even years, in the conditions we usually use to play (polarized glasses in front of a superbright monitor, receiving flickering images all the time with anomalies, building a fictional 3D world similar but not equal to real world, in which each one of us makes his own tricks to change convergence/depth to adjust to his liking and therefore deforming that 3D fiction for as long as the game last). Maybe if you adjust the parameters in a ideal way you notice less the effects..., but everybody does it?
b4thman, You have to remember that 2D is extremely unnatural, especially when it's used to simulate 3D (because your eyes 'want' to look in the distance, even though everything is at screen depth). It's a completely man-made way of viewing the world that exists almost nowhere in nature. Some doctors recommend that children stay away from screens in their first 2 years because it may harm their normal depth perception development.
And as you know, people who stare into 2D TVs or computer screens all day tend to get eye damage eventually and have to wear glasses (as anyone who's worked at an office can attest)
3D is probably harder on the eyes in some ways, but in other ways I'm certain it's easier on them. I know that when I switch from 3D to 2D, the artificial depth simulation of 2D strains my eyes for at least a day or two of using it.
So, is 3D bad for your eyes? Probably. Is it worse than 2D? Maybe, though probably not. Does it matter either way? Not really - people have been damaging their eyes with screens for 70 years, and no one's head has exploded yet.
b4thman, You have to remember that 2D is extremely unnatural, especially when it's used to simulate 3D (because your eyes 'want' to look in the distance, even though everything is at screen depth). It's a completely man-made way of viewing the world that exists almost nowhere in nature. Some doctors recommend that children stay away from screens in their first 2 years because it may harm their normal depth perception development.
And as you know, people who stare into 2D TVs or computer screens all day tend to get eye damage eventually and have to wear glasses (as anyone who's worked at an office can attest)
3D is probably harder on the eyes in some ways, but in other ways I'm certain it's easier on them. I know that when I switch from 3D to 2D, the artificial depth simulation of 2D strains my eyes for at least a day or two of using it.
So, is 3D bad for your eyes? Probably. Is it worse than 2D? Maybe, though probably not. Does it matter either way? Not really - people have been damaging their eyes with screens for 70 years, and no one's head has exploded yet.
[quote="Pirateguybrush"][quote="b4thman"]I have serious dudes[/quote][/quote]... and what Volnaiskra said. :)
If you're getting eyestrain, dial it back a bit ... if you already have other vision issues then 3D might not be for you.
The biggest thing is knowing yourself and not to push yourself beyond your limits, I jumped right in at 100%/IPD on a 65" DLP. I was playing limited console 3D for a few months prior, did it help? Who knows, I played on a Legacy rig with a 19" CRT years ago and couldn't bump up the depth/separation much at all. Screen size/distance may or may not have anything to do with it, I'm not sure ... I would like to test the old legacy hardware out again sometime if it all still works.
If you're getting eyestrain, dial it back a bit ... if you already have other vision issues then 3D might not be for you.
The biggest thing is knowing yourself and not to push yourself beyond your limits, I jumped right in at 100%/IPD on a 65" DLP. I was playing limited console 3D for a few months prior, did it help? Who knows, I played on a Legacy rig with a 19" CRT years ago and couldn't bump up the depth/separation much at all. Screen size/distance may or may not have anything to do with it, I'm not sure ... I would like to test the old legacy hardware out again sometime if it all still works.
[quote="b4thman"]I have a theory. When you play 3D you are really "training" some eye muscles, and it may be good for some people, and may strain/hurt other (like any other exercice in life). At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refreshrate (max. is 60hz), so you literally are playing a not totally smooth flickering game, and that hurts if you play a lot of time. Compared with somebody playing in 2D with todays g-sync/freesync tech, the difference seems to be biiiiig. And now you have to add the ghost anyoing things. So..., yes, you can get used to playing 3D, but it probably always strain your eyes sooner or later.[/quote]
OK, let's use your theory. We know that exercise is good for everyone right? Anybody, no matter how young or old, fit or not, will improve their health with exercise, right?
The only real question is 'how much?' You don't want to run out the door and run for 50 kilometers. Or lift 150 kilograms on your first day. But how about 2 kilograms? Can we agree that anybody still breathing could do 5 reps with 2 kilograms? And that would actually be quite a lot better for them than just sitting around? As long as you don't overdo it, all exercise is beneficial.
If we use that same idea for your eye muscles- if you aren't exercising them, then you are gradually ruining your eyesight, just like your other muscles. As long as you don't overdo it, exercising your eyes is going to keep them healthier, longer.
3D is very much exercise for your eyes. As long as you don't do overdo it, it's going to help.
And just like any exercise, as you get stronger, you can do more, or last longer.
b4thman said:I have a theory. When you play 3D you are really "training" some eye muscles, and it may be good for some people, and may strain/hurt other (like any other exercice in life). At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refreshrate (max. is 60hz), so you literally are playing a not totally smooth flickering game, and that hurts if you play a lot of time. Compared with somebody playing in 2D with todays g-sync/freesync tech, the difference seems to be biiiiig. And now you have to add the ghost anyoing things. So..., yes, you can get used to playing 3D, but it probably always strain your eyes sooner or later.
OK, let's use your theory. We know that exercise is good for everyone right? Anybody, no matter how young or old, fit or not, will improve their health with exercise, right?
The only real question is 'how much?' You don't want to run out the door and run for 50 kilometers. Or lift 150 kilograms on your first day. But how about 2 kilograms? Can we agree that anybody still breathing could do 5 reps with 2 kilograms? And that would actually be quite a lot better for them than just sitting around? As long as you don't overdo it, all exercise is beneficial.
If we use that same idea for your eye muscles- if you aren't exercising them, then you are gradually ruining your eyesight, just like your other muscles. As long as you don't overdo it, exercising your eyes is going to keep them healthier, longer.
3D is very much exercise for your eyes. As long as you don't do overdo it, it's going to help.
And just like any exercise, as you get stronger, you can do more, or last longer.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607 Latest 3Dmigoto Release Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
[quote="b4thman"]At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refresh-rate (max. is 60hz)[/quote]Agreed. 3D gamers stare at a flickering image at 60hz (because our 120hz monitors are divided by 2 eyes). And sometimes with a framerate lower than 60.
That kind of reminds of someone:
-The majority of 2D PC gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often between 40-50)
-Console gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often closer to 30)
-American TV viewers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-European TV viewers (50hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-Filmgoers (48 or 72hz flickering image, with framerates usually at 24)
Every one of these practices, most of which have been practiced for people's entire lives, are unquestionably bad for your eyes if used in excess (which - don't let anyone kid themselves - they usually are).
Broadly speaking, there are then three potential responses to this. But first, let's briefly look at another issue......
Living in a city exposes people to various pollutants, some of which are known to cause cancer. This is a legitimate cause of worry. People typically take one of three responses:
(a)Move to the country. This comes at a cost to convenience and opportunity, but a gain to health, and a reduction in worry. It can be considered an extreme, but rational response.
(b)Stay in the city, accept that the pros outweigh the cons, and stop worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero cost to convenience and opportunity, and a reduction in worry. This can be considered a compromised, but rational response.
(c)Stay in the city, but keep worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero reduction to convenience and opportunity, and zero reduction to worry. This can be considered a net-loss response, as it allows two harmful effects to remain, despite one or both being preventable. Of the three, this is the least rational response.
b4thman said:At the same time you are actually playing with half of your normal framerates (beacuse of the hardware demanding of 3D) and half of your normal refresh-rate (max. is 60hz)
Agreed. 3D gamers stare at a flickering image at 60hz (because our 120hz monitors are divided by 2 eyes). And sometimes with a framerate lower than 60.
That kind of reminds of someone:
-The majority of 2D PC gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often between 40-50)
-Console gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often closer to 30)
-American TV viewers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-European TV viewers (50hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-Filmgoers (48 or 72hz flickering image, with framerates usually at 24)
Every one of these practices, most of which have been practiced for people's entire lives, are unquestionably bad for your eyes if used in excess (which - don't let anyone kid themselves - they usually are).
Broadly speaking, there are then three potential responses to this. But first, let's briefly look at another issue......
Living in a city exposes people to various pollutants, some of which are known to cause cancer. This is a legitimate cause of worry. People typically take one of three responses:
(a)Move to the country. This comes at a cost to convenience and opportunity, but a gain to health, and a reduction in worry. It can be considered an extreme, but rational response.
(b)Stay in the city, accept that the pros outweigh the cons, and stop worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero cost to convenience and opportunity, and a reduction in worry. This can be considered a compromised, but rational response.
(c)Stay in the city, but keep worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero reduction to convenience and opportunity, and zero reduction to worry. This can be considered a net-loss response, as it allows two harmful effects to remain, despite one or both being preventable. Of the three, this is the least rational response.
My own experience when new to 3D:
Day 1: Eyes nearly fell out of my head with amazement. Played around with depth for a bit, after 6 hours playing Batman Arkham City got a small headache and went to bed. Was fine the next morning.
Day 2: Played 8 hours straight, got a very slight headache, went to sleep because it was late anyway.
Every day for the next 4 weeks: Zero headaches, no eye strain, bumped up depth and convergence, went to bed most mornings at 3am due to playing all my games to see which ones worked and which ones didn't.
I can play 18 hours straight in 3D without any issues, other than naturally becoming tired.
It's important to realise everyone has a different tolerance to 3D. In some games my friends couldn't even focus in 3D and could only see two separate stereo images until I reduced the depth down significantly, and could only stand the 3D for about 15 minutes.
If you get eye strain or headaches or dizziness just have a break for a while. You will build up tolerance to 3D naturally over time, so start with lower depth and convergence and gradually increase them over time.
Personally on my monitor (27" screen and sat roughly 23" away) 3D looks distorted and unnatural at 100% even though I have no problems focussing on it. 60% seems more natural, but that is probably more to do with my IPD. I know there are some people here who always want 100% depth or more.
Day 1: Eyes nearly fell out of my head with amazement. Played around with depth for a bit, after 6 hours playing Batman Arkham City got a small headache and went to bed. Was fine the next morning.
Day 2: Played 8 hours straight, got a very slight headache, went to sleep because it was late anyway.
Every day for the next 4 weeks: Zero headaches, no eye strain, bumped up depth and convergence, went to bed most mornings at 3am due to playing all my games to see which ones worked and which ones didn't.
I can play 18 hours straight in 3D without any issues, other than naturally becoming tired.
It's important to realise everyone has a different tolerance to 3D. In some games my friends couldn't even focus in 3D and could only see two separate stereo images until I reduced the depth down significantly, and could only stand the 3D for about 15 minutes.
If you get eye strain or headaches or dizziness just have a break for a while. You will build up tolerance to 3D naturally over time, so start with lower depth and convergence and gradually increase them over time.
Personally on my monitor (27" screen and sat roughly 23" away) 3D looks distorted and unnatural at 100% even though I have no problems focussing on it. 60% seems more natural, but that is probably more to do with my IPD. I know there are some people here who always want 100% depth or more.
@Foulplay99
I think so too.
Your eye's lens and retina are still focusing at screen depth. (As they would if you were gaming in 2D) They are overtly meant to look at a range of distances not just straight in front of you! You should therefore probably look away now and again and try to focus at objects that really are distant.
The 3D glasses are active and so flicker but they flicker at the same speed LCD monitors have been refreshing/flickering for ages. Some people are sensitive to strobing lights. (I can still tell when a CRT's refresh rate is below 72hz.) If you are sensitive to 60hz refresh rate, you would probably have noticed by now. If you feel funny you should probably stop.
I am fully aware I am not doing my eyes any favours by spending most of my life being enclosed by nearby walls, working on my PC, 3D gaming, browsing forums and not eating plenty of carrots (I jest)! But what can you do?
Your eye's lens and retina are still focusing at screen depth. (As they would if you were gaming in 2D) They are overtly meant to look at a range of distances not just straight in front of you! You should therefore probably look away now and again and try to focus at objects that really are distant.
The 3D glasses are active and so flicker but they flicker at the same speed LCD monitors have been refreshing/flickering for ages. Some people are sensitive to strobing lights. (I can still tell when a CRT's refresh rate is below 72hz.) If you are sensitive to 60hz refresh rate, you would probably have noticed by now. If you feel funny you should probably stop.
I am fully aware I am not doing my eyes any favours by spending most of my life being enclosed by nearby walls, working on my PC, 3D gaming, browsing forums and not eating plenty of carrots (I jest)! But what can you do?
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
-------------------
Vitals: Windows 7 64bit, i5 2500 @ 4.4ghz, SLI GTX670, 8GB, Viewsonic VX2268WM
[quote="TsaebehT"]I get more eyestrain reading these forums on my 3DTV than I do actually playing in 3D ... :)[/quote]
+1
HAHAHAHAHA ! Best COMMENT OF THE DAY!!!
+10001
TsaebehT said:I get more eyestrain reading these forums on my 3DTV than I do actually playing in 3D ... :)
+1
HAHAHAHAHA ! Best COMMENT OF THE DAY!!!
+10001
1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc
Of course high convergence and depth are supposed to increase strain, as you are forcing your eye muscles more than usual in life. In other words, 3D tech is not perfect, but you can get used to it and have fun, and probably it will worth the cons..., or maybe not, you will decide. In this forum we can read people who agree with the decission that playing with 3D is worthy, but of course there are other people that do not agree and you can not read them just because they never came over here anymore.
- Windows 7 64bits (SSD OCZ-Vertez2 128Gb)
- "ASUS P6X58D-E" motherboard
- "MSI GTX 660 TI"
- "Intel Xeon X5670" @4000MHz CPU (20.0[12-25]x200MHz)
- RAM 16 Gb DDR3 1600
- "Dell S2716DG" monitor (2560x1440 @144Hz)
- "Corsair Carbide 600C" case
- Labrador dog (cinnamon edition)
Nad many of us went through some drawbacks from 3D first time playing. But we all here are live evedence that there is no real problem or danger in using 3D.
Regarding FPS you are right. Because of that all people who intend to play 3D are awared they need stronger PC than needed for 2D playing of course.
Anyway 60 stable FPS is more then just enough. You need no 120 FPS if you are not cybersportsman. But no 3D in any sport disciplines. 3D is only for fun
And of course, we all here are live evedence that we "are not dead" because of this tech. Anyway if anybody died before because of playing 3D, we probably wouldn't realize of that. I mean, we believe what we want to believe.
- Windows 7 64bits (SSD OCZ-Vertez2 128Gb)
- "ASUS P6X58D-E" motherboard
- "MSI GTX 660 TI"
- "Intel Xeon X5670" @4000MHz CPU (20.0[12-25]x200MHz)
- RAM 16 Gb DDR3 1600
- "Dell S2716DG" monitor (2560x1440 @144Hz)
- "Corsair Carbide 600C" case
- Labrador dog (cinnamon edition)
If you have some material or facts - please give a links.
I do not say that playing 3D games is going to kill your eyes, but I have serious dudes (and it would be a good idea to have a serious study) about the posibility of any kind of consequence when playing for many hours/day during weeks/months, even years, in the conditions we usually use to play (polarized glasses in front of a superbright monitor, receiving flickering images all the time with anomalies, building a fictional 3D world similar but not equal to real world, in which each one of us makes his own tricks to change convergence/depth to adjust to his liking and therefore deforming that 3D fiction for as long as the game last). Maybe if you adjust the parameters in a ideal way you notice less the effects..., but everybody does it?
- Windows 7 64bits (SSD OCZ-Vertez2 128Gb)
- "ASUS P6X58D-E" motherboard
- "MSI GTX 660 TI"
- "Intel Xeon X5670" @4000MHz CPU (20.0[12-25]x200MHz)
- RAM 16 Gb DDR3 1600
- "Dell S2716DG" monitor (2560x1440 @144Hz)
- "Corsair Carbide 600C" case
- Labrador dog (cinnamon edition)
And as you know, people who stare into 2D TVs or computer screens all day tend to get eye damage eventually and have to wear glasses (as anyone who's worked at an office can attest)
3D is probably harder on the eyes in some ways, but in other ways I'm certain it's easier on them. I know that when I switch from 3D to 2D, the artificial depth simulation of 2D strains my eyes for at least a day or two of using it.
So, is 3D bad for your eyes? Probably. Is it worse than 2D? Maybe, though probably not. Does it matter either way? Not really - people have been damaging their eyes with screens for 70 years, and no one's head has exploded yet.
If you're getting eyestrain, dial it back a bit ... if you already have other vision issues then 3D might not be for you.
The biggest thing is knowing yourself and not to push yourself beyond your limits, I jumped right in at 100%/IPD on a 65" DLP. I was playing limited console 3D for a few months prior, did it help? Who knows, I played on a Legacy rig with a 19" CRT years ago and couldn't bump up the depth/separation much at all. Screen size/distance may or may not have anything to do with it, I'm not sure ... I would like to test the old legacy hardware out again sometime if it all still works.
[MonitorSizeOverride][Global/Base Profile Tweaks][Depth=IPD]
OK, let's use your theory. We know that exercise is good for everyone right? Anybody, no matter how young or old, fit or not, will improve their health with exercise, right?
The only real question is 'how much?' You don't want to run out the door and run for 50 kilometers. Or lift 150 kilograms on your first day. But how about 2 kilograms? Can we agree that anybody still breathing could do 5 reps with 2 kilograms? And that would actually be quite a lot better for them than just sitting around? As long as you don't overdo it, all exercise is beneficial.
If we use that same idea for your eye muscles- if you aren't exercising them, then you are gradually ruining your eyesight, just like your other muscles. As long as you don't overdo it, exercising your eyes is going to keep them healthier, longer.
3D is very much exercise for your eyes. As long as you don't do overdo it, it's going to help.
And just like any exercise, as you get stronger, you can do more, or last longer.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
That kind of reminds of someone:
-The majority of 2D PC gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often between 40-50)
-Console gamers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often closer to 30)
-American TV viewers (60hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-European TV viewers (50hz flickering image, with framerates often at 24 or 30)
-Filmgoers (48 or 72hz flickering image, with framerates usually at 24)
Every one of these practices, most of which have been practiced for people's entire lives, are unquestionably bad for your eyes if used in excess (which - don't let anyone kid themselves - they usually are).
Broadly speaking, there are then three potential responses to this. But first, let's briefly look at another issue......
Living in a city exposes people to various pollutants, some of which are known to cause cancer. This is a legitimate cause of worry. People typically take one of three responses:
(a)Move to the country. This comes at a cost to convenience and opportunity, but a gain to health, and a reduction in worry. It can be considered an extreme, but rational response.
(b)Stay in the city, accept that the pros outweigh the cons, and stop worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero cost to convenience and opportunity, and a reduction in worry. This can be considered a compromised, but rational response.
(c)Stay in the city, but keep worrying about pollution. This comes at a cost to health, zero reduction to convenience and opportunity, and zero reduction to worry. This can be considered a net-loss response, as it allows two harmful effects to remain, despite one or both being preventable. Of the three, this is the least rational response.
Day 1: Eyes nearly fell out of my head with amazement. Played around with depth for a bit, after 6 hours playing Batman Arkham City got a small headache and went to bed. Was fine the next morning.
Day 2: Played 8 hours straight, got a very slight headache, went to sleep because it was late anyway.
Every day for the next 4 weeks: Zero headaches, no eye strain, bumped up depth and convergence, went to bed most mornings at 3am due to playing all my games to see which ones worked and which ones didn't.
I can play 18 hours straight in 3D without any issues, other than naturally becoming tired.
It's important to realise everyone has a different tolerance to 3D. In some games my friends couldn't even focus in 3D and could only see two separate stereo images until I reduced the depth down significantly, and could only stand the 3D for about 15 minutes.
If you get eye strain or headaches or dizziness just have a break for a while. You will build up tolerance to 3D naturally over time, so start with lower depth and convergence and gradually increase them over time.
Personally on my monitor (27" screen and sat roughly 23" away) 3D looks distorted and unnatural at 100% even though I have no problems focussing on it. 60% seems more natural, but that is probably more to do with my IPD. I know there are some people here who always want 100% depth or more.
i7 4790k @ 4.6 - 16GB RAM - 2x SLI Titan X
27" ASUS ROG SWIFT, 28" - 65" Samsung UHD8200 4k 3DTV - Oculus Rift CV1 - 34" Acer Predator X34 Ultrawide
Old kit:
i5 2500k @ 4.4 - 8gb RAM
Acer H5360BD projector
GTX 580, SLI 670, GTX 980 EVGA SC
Acer XB280HK 4k 60hz
Oculus DK2
I think so too.
Your eye's lens and retina are still focusing at screen depth. (As they would if you were gaming in 2D) They are overtly meant to look at a range of distances not just straight in front of you! You should therefore probably look away now and again and try to focus at objects that really are distant.
The 3D glasses are active and so flicker but they flicker at the same speed LCD monitors have been refreshing/flickering for ages. Some people are sensitive to strobing lights. (I can still tell when a CRT's refresh rate is below 72hz.) If you are sensitive to 60hz refresh rate, you would probably have noticed by now. If you feel funny you should probably stop.
I am fully aware I am not doing my eyes any favours by spending most of my life being enclosed by nearby walls, working on my PC, 3D gaming, browsing forums and not eating plenty of carrots (I jest)! But what can you do?
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
-------------------
Vitals: Windows 7 64bit, i5 2500 @ 4.4ghz, SLI GTX670, 8GB, Viewsonic VX2268WM
Handy Driver Discussion
Helix Mod - community fixes
Bo3b's Shaderhacker School - How to fix 3D in games
3dsolutionsgaming.com - videos, reviews and 3D fixes
[MonitorSizeOverride][Global/Base Profile Tweaks][Depth=IPD]
+1
HAHAHAHAHA ! Best COMMENT OF THE DAY!!!
+10001
1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc
My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com
(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)