I see mention of "fake 3D" ocasionally on here. What is it, and what are the differences
  3 / 5    
Here is a similar image to the one we've looked at, but I changed it to be 1920x1080 to make it clear that it's not low resolution problems. This one is 1920x1080, with the alt-F1 set to save a JPS at 85% quality level, not that frickin' damn stupid 50% level it defaults to. I uploaded it to my server unchanged, so you can see it directly. In game, I set the 3D slider to 100% (which as we know is not NVidia 100%). The slider reverts to 50% on some changes, so that might be adding confusion. [url]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/Crysis203_85.jps[/url] Please take a look at this shot in StereoPhotoMaker (free app), use F5 for alignment mode, and left/right arrows to align different parts of the image. Shift-Left/Right for single pixel movement. If I align the Statue of Liberty to be perfectly clear, the fence is still fuzzy and diverging. What do you see?
Here is a similar image to the one we've looked at, but I changed it to be 1920x1080 to make it clear that it's not low resolution problems.

This one is 1920x1080, with the alt-F1 set to save a JPS at 85% quality level, not that frickin' damn stupid 50% level it defaults to. I uploaded it to my server unchanged, so you can see it directly. In game, I set the 3D slider to 100% (which as we know is not NVidia 100%). The slider reverts to 50% on some changes, so that might be adding confusion.

http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/Crysis203_85.jps


Please take a look at this shot in StereoPhotoMaker (free app), use F5 for alignment mode, and left/right arrows to align different parts of the image. Shift-Left/Right for single pixel movement.

If I align the Statue of Liberty to be perfectly clear, the fence is still fuzzy and diverging.

What do you see?

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

#31
Posted 08/23/2013 08:47 AM   
Mate That image has synced perfectly. Look at the life ring in the foreground and the statue. [url]http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/andysonofbob/image/5217259a0f35308b4f00009b/[/url] It looks like there are three levels. The HUD level, a bit just outside of the HUD (in this case it reaches the start of the metal railings in the foreground) and then the 2D at depth level. Excellent right nvidia? ;o)
Mate

That image has synced perfectly. Look at the life ring in the foreground and the statue.
http://photos.3dvisionlive.com/andysonofbob/image/5217259a0f35308b4f00009b/

It looks like there are three levels. The HUD level, a bit just outside of the HUD (in this case it reaches the start of the metal railings in the foreground) and then the 2D at depth level.

Excellent right nvidia? ;o)

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

#32
Posted 08/23/2013 09:10 AM   
There is a 24 pixel/frame difference in the background on bo3b's last image, unfortunately the gif I made is over 20MB so I can't upload it to ImageShack without scaling it and if you're viewing it scaled in any way shape or form, either by me, your monitor, or because it's in a window, then you're not getting the whole picture. The smaller it is the less actual pixel shifts you're seeing. Besides the halos at close range and on a big screen it doesn't look that bad, looks much better than the PS3 version I played. Sure, it'll never have the stereo "sweet spot" that I can achieve in Dishonored, but for what it is it does a [s]Excellent![/s] ... jk :) ... a decent job. Sure it could be even better, like I wonder how much more power it would take to render the scene partially in 3D for instance, like 'mipmaping' or LOD but for 3D, just render the stuff that matters in 3D, all the close stuff, and then fake the rest. edit: ... them faking the 3D on the gun is what makes it look the absolute worst, if they just rendered the scene w/o the gun and did the gradual pixel shifts off into the distance and then overlaid the gun over that scene without the gun halos it would look much better.
There is a 24 pixel/frame difference in the background on bo3b's last image, unfortunately the gif I made is over 20MB so I can't upload it to ImageShack without scaling it and if you're viewing it scaled in any way shape or form, either by me, your monitor, or because it's in a window, then you're not getting the whole picture. The smaller it is the less actual pixel shifts you're seeing.

Besides the halos at close range and on a big screen it doesn't look that bad, looks much better than the PS3 version I played. Sure, it'll never have the stereo "sweet spot" that I can achieve in Dishonored, but for what it is it does a Excellent! ... jk :) ... a decent job. Sure it could be even better, like I wonder how much more power it would take to render the scene partially in 3D for instance, like 'mipmaping' or LOD but for 3D, just render the stuff that matters in 3D, all the close stuff, and then fake the rest.

edit: ... them faking the 3D on the gun is what makes it look the absolute worst, if they just rendered the scene w/o the gun and did the gradual pixel shifts off into the distance and then overlaid the gun over that scene without the gun halos it would look much better.
#33
Posted 08/23/2013 12:33 PM   
@andysonofbob: If those are aligned perfectly, my question is why does the railing and sidewalk diverge into the distance? If there are only 1 or 2 levels, how is it possible to diverge at all? Wouldn't 2 levels look like a step function, with parallel lines? For more evidence, here's a couple of images from StereoPhotomaker. These are shrunk down from their 1920x1080 size because of how StereoPhotoMaker works, but I saved them as PNG to make them lossless. I aligned the original 1920x1080 images by zooming in to 100%, where 1 pixel in original is 1 pixel on my screen to avoid any artifacting. Then I used the pixel by pixel move to align the images. The first one here is with the Statue of Liberty aligned, as the farthest pixel at depth. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/libertyalign.PNG[/img] Next one is reverse it, with the fence in the foreground aligned. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/fencealign.PNG[/img]
@andysonofbob: If those are aligned perfectly, my question is why does the railing and sidewalk diverge into the distance? If there are only 1 or 2 levels, how is it possible to diverge at all? Wouldn't 2 levels look like a step function, with parallel lines?


For more evidence, here's a couple of images from StereoPhotomaker. These are shrunk down from their 1920x1080 size because of how StereoPhotoMaker works, but I saved them as PNG to make them lossless.

I aligned the original 1920x1080 images by zooming in to 100%, where 1 pixel in original is 1 pixel on my screen to avoid any artifacting. Then I used the pixel by pixel move to align the images.


The first one here is with the Statue of Liberty aligned, as the farthest pixel at depth.

Image


Next one is reverse it, with the fence in the foreground aligned.

Image

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

#34
Posted 08/23/2013 04:11 PM   
@Bo3b "my question is why does the railing and sidewalk diverge into the distance?" Are you thinking about the lower image here? If so, did you see my optical illusion image of Wargames. I think that explains why the it looks like it seporates as it gets further away. The separation remains the same but the line/railing is getting thinner as it goes into the background making it look like it is beginning to separate. The image you have chosen for Crysis is very similar to the one I chose for Sleeping Dogs you mentioned. I couldn't believe it either. See here: [url]http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13181:sleeping-dogs&catid=38&Itemid=76[/url] Your top picture above though. I think we agree the foreground is rendered in 3D, so can we ignore it? It really shouldn't matter where we focus the scene, as it should separate where-ever. Look at the nearest boat (You can only see the side of it, on the far right, just over half way up the image), then the statue. That looks synced to me. Both look equally sharp. That little black rectangle (whatever that is) looks pretty sharp to me certainly comparable to other objects further out. [url]http://speedy.sh/FkP5e/Separated-Crysis.png[/url] I have used your lossless one again, separated the two channels but have not merged them. If you can open .png images you should be able to move them (arrow keys). I have drawn a vector path around the areas I think we all agree are 3D. The whole rest of the scene seems to sync to me - no matter where you start. TsaebehT mentioned 24pixel difference. I think that is the separated depth. If that number was higher, I imagine the background looking more distant. I could be wrong though. Regardless, the fact we are debating pixels worth of separation with everything bar the foreground shows how poor the 3D is. If the link doesn't work I will try to upload it else where. Sigh.
@Bo3b

"my question is why does the railing and sidewalk diverge into the distance?" Are you thinking about the lower image here? If so, did you see my optical illusion image of Wargames. I think that explains why the it looks like it seporates as it gets further away. The separation remains the same but the line/railing is getting thinner as it goes into the background making it look like it is beginning to separate. The image you have chosen for Crysis is very similar to the one I chose for Sleeping Dogs you mentioned. I couldn't believe it either. See here: http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13181:sleeping-dogs&catid=38&Itemid=76

Your top picture above though. I think we agree the foreground is rendered in 3D, so can we ignore it? It really shouldn't matter where we focus the scene, as it should separate where-ever. Look at the nearest boat (You can only see the side of it, on the far right, just over half way up the image), then the statue. That looks synced to me. Both look equally sharp. That little black rectangle (whatever that is) looks pretty sharp to me certainly comparable to other objects further out.

http://speedy.sh/FkP5e/Separated-Crysis.png

I have used your lossless one again, separated the two channels but have not merged them. If you can open .png images you should be able to move them (arrow keys). I have drawn a vector path around the areas I think we all agree are 3D. The whole rest of the scene seems to sync to me - no matter where you start.

TsaebehT mentioned 24pixel difference. I think that is the separated depth. If that number was higher, I imagine the background looking more distant. I could be wrong though.

Regardless, the fact we are debating pixels worth of separation with everything bar the foreground shows how poor the 3D is.

If the link doesn't work I will try to upload it else where. Sigh.

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

#35
Posted 08/23/2013 08:12 PM   
Well, I'm back. That forum outage only slowed me down a bit. I really appreciate people helping to think these things through. I'm genuinely interested in how all this works, and what other people are seeing that might contradict what I think I know. I think I have a pretty compelling answer now. @andysonofbob: I went ahead and aligned my full resolution picture at the life ring, like you suggested. Here is the image as PNG, no compression, but it's smaller than the original 1920x1080: [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/liferingalign.PNG[/img] Pretty compelling right? Seems like a clear indication that the Statue of Liberty is same alignment as the lifering, and thus 2D from there on back. But wait, here's a picture zoomed in, so that it's 1:1 ratio of original pixel to screen. Still PNG so it's not compressed. This is now what you'd actually see on screen. You can see that the life ring is still cleanly aligned, but Liberty is looking fuzzy. Also note the mast on the boat closer to the life ring, and how fuzzy it looks. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/liferingzoom.PNG[/img] Here's the original left eye image, zoomed into that same spot. Note how clear Liberty is relative to that prior shot. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/lefteyezoom.PNG[/img] So, even though the image is offset only slightly, it's still offset. I think this pretty conclusively shows that there is in fact separation from the life ring on back to Liberty. It's only maybe 3 pixels, but it's still there. If that's true, then this is definitely not 2D at depth. It's not a backdrop like in a theater show, it's true 3D. So, it's what TsaebehT said earlier, which is that if you shrink the image in any way, or add compression, or even look at it on the forum page instead of fully zoomed in another window- then you aren't getting the real story, and can come to the wrong conclusion.
Well, I'm back. That forum outage only slowed me down a bit. I really appreciate people helping to think these things through. I'm genuinely interested in how all this works, and what other people are seeing that might contradict what I think I know.

I think I have a pretty compelling answer now.


@andysonofbob: I went ahead and aligned my full resolution picture at the life ring, like you suggested. Here is the image as PNG, no compression, but it's smaller than the original 1920x1080:

Image

Pretty compelling right? Seems like a clear indication that the Statue of Liberty is same alignment as the lifering, and thus 2D from there on back.


But wait, here's a picture zoomed in, so that it's 1:1 ratio of original pixel to screen. Still PNG so it's not compressed. This is now what you'd actually see on screen. You can see that the life ring is still cleanly aligned, but Liberty is looking fuzzy. Also note the mast on the boat closer to the life ring, and how fuzzy it looks.

Image


Here's the original left eye image, zoomed into that same spot. Note how clear Liberty is relative to that prior shot.

Image


So, even though the image is offset only slightly, it's still offset. I think this pretty conclusively shows that there is in fact separation from the life ring on back to Liberty. It's only maybe 3 pixels, but it's still there. If that's true, then this is definitely not 2D at depth. It's not a backdrop like in a theater show, it's true 3D.

So, it's what TsaebehT said earlier, which is that if you shrink the image in any way, or add compression, or even look at it on the forum page instead of fully zoomed in another window- then you aren't getting the real story, and can come to the wrong conclusion.

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

#36
Posted 08/25/2013 09:50 AM   
[quote="andysonofbob"]The image you have chosen for Crysis is very similar to the one I chose for Sleeping Dogs you mentioned. I couldn't believe it either. See here: [url]http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13181:sleeping-dogs&catid=38&Itemid=76[/url][/quote]I'm still not convinced. I understand what Neil was saying, but I'm still unconvinced that doing the overlay approach while ignoring the HUD is a valid approach. (If you use the image tag, instead of URL tag, it will show up inline. Have to get past the 'download' page though.) [quote="andysonofbob"] [img]http://www.speedyshare.com/FkP5e/download/Separated-Crysis.png[/img] I have used your lossless one again, separated the two channels but have not merged them. If you can open .png images you should be able to move them (arrow keys). I have drawn a vector path around the areas I think we all agree are 3D. The whole rest of the scene seems to sync to me - no matter where you start.[/quote]Not sure I understand here. When I open that PNG, I already see them merged together. Also the image seems to be my initial feeble attempt with 1024x768 image, which I'm suggesting might lead to making it seem less 3D. Maybe try the experiment again with the 1920x1080 image. When I play with that image, I cannot align the entire image even from the life ring on back.
andysonofbob said:The image you have chosen for Crysis is very similar to the one I chose for Sleeping Dogs you mentioned. I couldn't believe it either.
See here: http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13181:sleeping-dogs&catid=38&Itemid=76
I'm still not convinced. I understand what Neil was saying, but I'm still unconvinced that doing the overlay approach while ignoring the HUD is a valid approach.

(If you use the image tag, instead of URL tag, it will show up inline. Have to get past the 'download' page though.)
andysonofbob said:
Image

I have used your lossless one again, separated the two channels but have not merged them. If you can open .png images you should be able to move them (arrow keys). I have drawn a vector path around the areas I think we all agree are 3D. The whole rest of the scene seems to sync to me - no matter where you start.
Not sure I understand here. When I open that PNG, I already see them merged together. Also the image seems to be my initial feeble attempt with 1024x768 image, which I'm suggesting might lead to making it seem less 3D.

Maybe try the experiment again with the 1920x1080 image. When I play with that image, I cannot align the entire image even from the life ring on back.

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

#37
Posted 08/25/2013 10:09 AM   
Thanks for trying that image syncing method Bo3b. OK. Those 1080 shots do suggest some separation. 3 pixels shift between the life ring <5 m from you and the statue >1km. Thats less than 0.16% of your screen width at 1920! I am suprised they bothered. But if it is any consolation to nvidia, I can understand that Excellent now. [Sarcasm] I'm not suprised my eyes felt like they do when I now try to game in 2D. [i]If anyone cares, the pixel difference in Wargames, on the second lowest possible 3D setting, was between 3 and 4 pixels at a width of 1680 which is between 0.18 and 0.29%. Baring in mind the end of the road was a lot closer than the statue... [/i] Crysis 3 now...
Thanks for trying that image syncing method Bo3b.

OK. Those 1080 shots do suggest some separation.

3 pixels shift between the life ring <5 m from you and the statue >1km. Thats less than 0.16% of your screen width at 1920! I am suprised they bothered. But if it is any consolation to nvidia, I can understand that Excellent now. [Sarcasm] I'm not suprised my eyes felt like they do when I now try to game in 2D.

If anyone cares, the pixel difference in Wargames, on the second lowest possible 3D setting, was between 3 and 4 pixels at a width of 1680 which is between 0.18 and 0.29%. Baring in mind the end of the road was a lot closer than the statue...

Crysis 3 now...

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

#38
Posted 08/25/2013 07:12 PM   
Back for another Crysis 2 comparison. My impression (could be wrong), is that Crysis 2 does not have substantially different depth as compared to other games I play. I know other people disagree. Please take a look at this comparison to Metro Last Light. Metro LL is good in 3D, right? No serious problems with depth? Convergence is locked, but otherwise it's real-3D, right? Here are shots I took from in game that we can use for comparisons. These are the full size 1920x1080 shots, JPG compression at 85%. In Crysis2, I set the maximum in-game separation. In MetroLL, I set NVidia (ctrl-F4) to 100%. Neither has any convergence set, because neither supports convergence without mods. I left them both with zero convergence, so the screen is at 0. [url]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/MetroLL23_85.jps[/url] [url]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/Crysis203_85.jps[/url] Now, zooming in to 100% so that 1 pixel on your screen is 1 pixel in the original image, here is the Metro long distance, focusing upon the towers in the far distance for maximum separation. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/Metroseparation.PNG[/img] Here is the comparable shot in Crysis 2, where it's 1:1 pixel, long distance, focusing upon Liberty's torch. [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/crysis2zoom.PNG[/img] Here is a direct on screen comparison, where I align the long distance items, then take a screen snip. Notice how Liberty's torch and the towers in Metro align? Aren't these at the same width apart and hence aren't they at the same apparent depth? [img]http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/metcrycomparison.PNG[/img] What do you think? Am I missing something?
Back for another Crysis 2 comparison. My impression (could be wrong), is that Crysis 2 does not have substantially different depth as compared to other games I play. I know other people disagree.

Please take a look at this comparison to Metro Last Light. Metro LL is good in 3D, right? No serious problems with depth? Convergence is locked, but otherwise it's real-3D, right?

Here are shots I took from in game that we can use for comparisons. These are the full size 1920x1080 shots, JPG compression at 85%. In Crysis2, I set the maximum in-game separation. In MetroLL, I set NVidia (ctrl-F4) to 100%. Neither has any convergence set, because neither supports convergence without mods. I left them both with zero convergence, so the screen is at 0.

http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/MetroLL23_85.jps
http://bo3b.net/Crysis2/Crysis203_85.jps


Now, zooming in to 100% so that 1 pixel on your screen is 1 pixel in the original image, here is the Metro long distance, focusing upon the towers in the far distance for maximum separation.

Image


Here is the comparable shot in Crysis 2, where it's 1:1 pixel, long distance, focusing upon Liberty's torch.

Image


Here is a direct on screen comparison, where I align the long distance items, then take a screen snip. Notice how Liberty's torch and the towers in Metro align? Aren't these at the same width apart and hence aren't they at the same apparent depth?

Image


What do you think? Am I missing something?

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

#39
Posted 08/29/2013 05:23 AM   
I have Metro but didn't get on with it because of the fixed convergence (playing too low convergence and 2D now make my eyes feel funny). Your screeny of Metro looks like there is little to no convergence, which is causing the lack of separation. [u][b]Rubbish real 3D is just as bad as fake 3D IMO.[/b][/u] Right nvidia? ;) As I have said before, a programmer may be awesome at coding and writing games but suck at playing them; nvidia is great at creating 3D hardware and software but sucks at rating them. I can not stand nvidia laughable ratings. Sigh! Bo3b Have you got JC2? If you haven't, next time it is about £2 on Steam (probably next week as it's always on offer), I'll gift it to you. Take some screenies of that. Even Skyrim, which doesn't have high convergence when played 1st person, has enough to show separation. edit Didn't Chiri fix the locked convergence issue with Metro? I think Res Evil 5 had the same problem - locked convergence, set so low it was practically 2D at depth. I think Chiri may have fixed that too.
I have Metro but didn't get on with it because of the fixed convergence (playing too low convergence and 2D now make my eyes feel funny). Your screeny of Metro looks like there is little to no convergence, which is causing the lack of separation. Rubbish real 3D is just as bad as fake 3D IMO. Right nvidia? ;)

As I have said before, a programmer may be awesome at coding and writing games but suck at playing them; nvidia is great at creating 3D hardware and software but sucks at rating them. I can not stand nvidia laughable ratings. Sigh!

Bo3b
Have you got JC2? If you haven't, next time it is about £2 on Steam (probably next week as it's always on offer), I'll gift it to you. Take some screenies of that. Even Skyrim, which doesn't have high convergence when played 1st person, has enough to show separation.

edit
Didn't Chiri fix the locked convergence issue with Metro? I think Res Evil 5 had the same problem - locked convergence, set so low it was practically 2D at depth. I think Chiri may have fixed that too.

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

#40
Posted 08/29/2013 09:59 AM   
Chiri's unlocker does indeed fix MetroLL. I played it that way. The screenshot is with it disabled, as shipped though. What I'm trying to understand is what constitutes a 'good' 3D image. NVidia specifically disables convergence to start with, and I know that as long time S3D gamers we use it always. I'm just hesitant to label a game with no convergence as rubbish, since that's the default playing style. Also adding convergence will in general shrink the separation, because of the so called parallax budget. It might however feel a lot better psychologically. I've got JC2, but haven't played it. I'll install it and take some shots for comparison. I can also unlock convergence on Metro if you think that would be interesting.
Chiri's unlocker does indeed fix MetroLL. I played it that way. The screenshot is with it disabled, as shipped though.

What I'm trying to understand is what constitutes a 'good' 3D image. NVidia specifically disables convergence to start with, and I know that as long time S3D gamers we use it always.

I'm just hesitant to label a game with no convergence as rubbish, since that's the default playing style.

Also adding convergence will in general shrink the separation, because of the so called parallax budget. It might however feel a lot better psychologically.


I've got JC2, but haven't played it. I'll install it and take some shots for comparison. I can also unlock convergence on Metro if you think that would be interesting.

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

#41
Posted 08/29/2013 11:07 AM   
I only really used Chiri's tool to drop the convergence when aiming, I thought the default convergence was perfectly fine in Last Light ... I think this whole debate is a bit off due to screen size differences. If you're (andysonofbob) really only using a 22" screen, as your sig suggests, anything you (bo3b) post is going to look extremely lackluster to him, because IIRC you have over an extra 100" on him. :) Even at 120" vs 22" it's roughly a 5.4:1 ratio which would roughly make 100% on the 22" equal to about 18% on the 120" ... therefore anything someone with a 120" screen would post would be equivalent to dropping your depth down to 18%. ... I'm somewhere in the middle with a 65" DLP.
I only really used Chiri's tool to drop the convergence when aiming, I thought the default convergence was perfectly fine in Last Light ... I think this whole debate is a bit off due to screen size differences. If you're (andysonofbob) really only using a 22" screen, as your sig suggests, anything you (bo3b) post is going to look extremely lackluster to him, because IIRC you have over an extra 100" on him. :)

Even at 120" vs 22" it's roughly a 5.4:1 ratio which would roughly make 100% on the 22" equal to about 18% on the 120" ... therefore anything someone with a 120" screen would post would be equivalent to dropping your depth down to 18%.

... I'm somewhere in the middle with a 65" DLP.
#42
Posted 08/29/2013 12:41 PM   
[quote="bo3b"]What I'm trying to understand is what constitutes a 'good' 3D image. ... I'm just hesitant to label a game with no convergence as rubbish, since that's the default playing style.[/quote] That is an excellent question and something which is clearly very subjective! I think the dudes at MTBS3D have been trying to establish an objective (as you can get practicably) standard for what represents quality 3D and what doesn't. [quote="bo3b"]Also adding convergence will in general shrink the separation, because of the so called parallax budget. It might however feel a lot better psychologically.[/quote] Are you sure adding convervegence shrinks the separation? When I add convergence (F6) I recon it increases the total separation: The range difference of a scene between say -5 (high convergence resulting in popout of near object) and 95 (depth) is greater than a scene with a range difference of 5 (low convergence resulting in near object at depth) and 95 (depth). This is my main complaint of Crysis 2 and Metro LL (it appears). Without this 'range' difference for the parallax budget across the scene, you are relying more on perspective than stereoscopic vision for depth. That's what I think anyway. [quote="bo3b"]I've got JC2, but haven't played it. I'll install it and take some shots for comparison. I can also unlock convergence on Metro if you think that would be interesting. [/quote] Dude! It's a blast! Superman mod. Turns it into a totally different game better than Prototype IMO... :) [url]http://www.justcause2mods.com/mods/other/Parachute/Superman-Flying-Mod-Version-4/[/url] edit [quote="TsaebehT"] Even at 120" vs 22" it's roughly a 5.4:1 ratio which would roughly make 100% on the 22" equal to about 18% on the 120" ... therefore anything someone with a 120" screen would post would be equivalent to dropping your depth down to 18%. ... I'm somewhere in the middle with a 65" DLP.[/quote] Good point, well point! But I think this is a case where size doesn't matter that much. ;) Even scaling up by multiplying the 3 pixel difference (life ring and statue) by 6 would is only 18 pixels. And this to represent the difference of an object less than 5 m from you and a statue likely over 1k away is still pretty weak. I think anyway.
bo3b said:What I'm trying to understand is what constitutes a 'good' 3D image. ...

I'm just hesitant to label a game with no convergence as rubbish, since that's the default playing style.


That is an excellent question and something which is clearly very subjective! I think the dudes at MTBS3D have been trying to establish an objective (as you can get practicably) standard for what represents quality 3D and what doesn't.


bo3b said:Also adding convergence will in general shrink the separation, because of the so called parallax budget. It might however feel a lot better psychologically.


Are you sure adding convervegence shrinks the separation? When I add convergence (F6) I recon it increases the total separation:
The range difference of a scene between say -5 (high convergence resulting in popout of near object) and 95 (depth) is greater than a scene with a range difference of 5 (low convergence resulting in near object at depth) and 95 (depth).

This is my main complaint of Crysis 2 and Metro LL (it appears). Without this 'range' difference for the parallax budget across the scene, you are relying more on perspective than stereoscopic vision for depth. That's what I think anyway.

bo3b said:I've got JC2, but haven't played it. I'll install it and take some shots for comparison. I can also unlock convergence on Metro if you think that would be interesting.

Dude! It's a blast! Superman mod. Turns it into a totally different game better than Prototype IMO... :)
http://www.justcause2mods.com/mods/other/Parachute/Superman-Flying-Mod-Version-4/


edit
TsaebehT said:
Even at 120" vs 22" it's roughly a 5.4:1 ratio which would roughly make 100% on the 22" equal to about 18% on the 120" ... therefore anything someone with a 120" screen would post would be equivalent to dropping your depth down to 18%.

... I'm somewhere in the middle with a 65" DLP.

Good point, well point! But I think this is a case where size doesn't matter that much. ;) Even scaling up by multiplying the 3 pixel difference (life ring and statue) by 6 would is only 18 pixels. And this to represent the difference of an object less than 5 m from you and a statue likely over 1k away is still pretty weak. I think anyway.

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

#43
Posted 08/29/2013 12:59 PM   
Even on my 65" screen there's a ton of screenshots that are completely 'unviewable' for me ... look at it this way, between yours and mine it's roughly a 3:1 ratio ... pixels aside, I'm pretty sure that's effectively like ripping my eyes out of my head and separating them from 3-4" to 9-12" ... :)
Even on my 65" screen there's a ton of screenshots that are completely 'unviewable' for me ... look at it this way, between yours and mine it's roughly a 3:1 ratio ... pixels aside, I'm pretty sure that's effectively like ripping my eyes out of my head and separating them from 3-4" to 9-12" ... :)
#44
Posted 08/29/2013 01:35 PM   
I've got to get me a bigger monitor/proj!
I've got to get me a bigger monitor/proj!

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

#45
Posted 08/29/2013 03:11 PM   
  3 / 5    
Scroll To Top