3D Vision driver NEEDS view offset/shift option!
  3 / 3    
[quote name='Osobari' date='02 January 2012 - 06:43 PM' timestamp='1325551396' post='1350755']
I don't play enough FPS games to know what it's like to switch to an aiming mode, but could the problem be solved by creating a different profile specifically for that viewpoint? If so, it would be wise of NVIDIA allowed you to create multiple profiles for one game, which you could easily swap between with a hotkey of your choosing. For example, the hotkey could be the same button that triggers this different viewpoint.
[/quote]

While I definitely support a hotkey to toggle Shift mode in-game, there's really no need to turn it on/off once you've decided whether to use it or not. Generally you just turn it on for games that use ironsights, and leave it off for everything else if you want.
On my iZ3D system, I simply enable Left Shift globally, and never even worry about it. It doesn't affect anything other than ironsights enough to notice a difference, and those games already have keys that bring up your ironsights to aim with. It's just like playing without, except your sight actually appears where it's supposed to when you pull it up. You don't have to toggle it as you play.
[quote name='Osobari' date='02 January 2012 - 06:43 PM' timestamp='1325551396' post='1350755']

I don't play enough FPS games to know what it's like to switch to an aiming mode, but could the problem be solved by creating a different profile specifically for that viewpoint? If so, it would be wise of NVIDIA allowed you to create multiple profiles for one game, which you could easily swap between with a hotkey of your choosing. For example, the hotkey could be the same button that triggers this different viewpoint.





While I definitely support a hotkey to toggle Shift mode in-game, there's really no need to turn it on/off once you've decided whether to use it or not. Generally you just turn it on for games that use ironsights, and leave it off for everything else if you want.

On my iZ3D system, I simply enable Left Shift globally, and never even worry about it. It doesn't affect anything other than ironsights enough to notice a difference, and those games already have keys that bring up your ironsights to aim with. It's just like playing without, except your sight actually appears where it's supposed to when you pull it up. You don't have to toggle it as you play.

#31
Posted 01/03/2012 12:54 AM   
Well, i still want this option for special cases, but i think i may reverse my stance on its usefulness for a couple reasons. One is that red dot sights are designed to be used with both eyes open, one of their huge, real-world benefits. I'd want to maintain full 3D for those types of sights. However, in general, i think people are trained to shoot with both eyes open. I remember hearing this when i was learning to use my handgun. For close/medium range use, you just use your front sight. Although im sure there are exceptions, this seems to be the consensus according to my massive 5 minutes of googe research.

[url="http://policelink.monster.com/topics/35114-one-eye-or-both-for-shooting/posts"]http://policelink.mo...-shooting/posts[/url]

[url="https://www.google.com/search?q=cops+shoot+both+eyes+open&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=1eu&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&source=hp&q=military+shoot+both+eyes+open&pbx=1&oq=military+shoot+both+eyes+open&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=480294l481838l0l482064l8l8l0l0l0l3l197l1289l1.7l8l0&bav=on.2"]https://www.google.c....7l8l0&bav=on.2[/url],or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4b3c420078196b39&biw=1070&bih=1004
Well, i still want this option for special cases, but i think i may reverse my stance on its usefulness for a couple reasons. One is that red dot sights are designed to be used with both eyes open, one of their huge, real-world benefits. I'd want to maintain full 3D for those types of sights. However, in general, i think people are trained to shoot with both eyes open. I remember hearing this when i was learning to use my handgun. For close/medium range use, you just use your front sight. Although im sure there are exceptions, this seems to be the consensus according to my massive 5 minutes of googe research.



http://policelink.mo...-shooting/posts



https://www.google.c....7l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4b3c420078196b39&biw=1070&bih=1004

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV as desktop monitor, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D PNG screens - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia tech support online form - Nvidia support: 1-800-797-6530

#32
Posted 01/03/2012 02:06 AM   
[quote name='Libertine' date='02 January 2012 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1325556380' post='1350785']
Well, i still want this option for special cases, but i think i may reverse my stance on its usefulness for a couple reasons. One is that red dot sights are designed to be used with both eyes open, one of their huge, real-world benefits. I'd want to maintain full 3D for those types of sights. However, in general, i think people are trained to shoot with both eyes open. I remember hearing this when i was learning to use my handgun. For close/medium range use, you just use your front sight. Although im sure there are exceptions, this seems to be the consensus according to my massive 5 minutes of googe research.

[url="http://policelink.monster.com/topics/35114-one-eye-or-both-for-shooting/posts"]http://policelink.mo...-shooting/posts[/url]

[url="https://www.google.com/search?q=cops+shoot+both+eyes+open&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=1eu&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&source=hp&q=military+shoot+both+eyes+open&pbx=1&oq=military+shoot+both+eyes+open&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=480294l481838l0l482064l8l8l0l0l0l3l197l1289l1.7l8l0&bav=on.2"]https://www.google.c....7l8l0&bav=on.2[/url],or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4b3c420078196b39&biw=1070&bih=1004
[/quote]

I'm not really sure where folks are getting the idea that there are strange tricks or behaviors involved -- this feature is what lets you use your sights the same way you would in reality, with both eyes open, giving you the advantage of unobstructed left-eye view which is part of what's so important about leaving both eyes open in real life. That's what's so nice about Left/Right Shift. Literally the only difference between this and reality is that some games like to make a slight FoV adjustment when you pull up your sights, which will occur regardless of the method used for using ironsights/reddots, and is up to the game. This can be disabled or configured in some of those. Your sights appear in 3D exactly as normal; they just align with your right eye properly when you pull them up as well. Your left eye will see exactly what your left eye sees in real life when you raise your sights.
[quote name='Libertine' date='02 January 2012 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1325556380' post='1350785']

Well, i still want this option for special cases, but i think i may reverse my stance on its usefulness for a couple reasons. One is that red dot sights are designed to be used with both eyes open, one of their huge, real-world benefits. I'd want to maintain full 3D for those types of sights. However, in general, i think people are trained to shoot with both eyes open. I remember hearing this when i was learning to use my handgun. For close/medium range use, you just use your front sight. Although im sure there are exceptions, this seems to be the consensus according to my massive 5 minutes of googe research.



http://policelink.mo...-shooting/posts



https://www.google.c....7l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=4b3c420078196b39&biw=1070&bih=1004





I'm not really sure where folks are getting the idea that there are strange tricks or behaviors involved -- this feature is what lets you use your sights the same way you would in reality, with both eyes open, giving you the advantage of unobstructed left-eye view which is part of what's so important about leaving both eyes open in real life. That's what's so nice about Left/Right Shift. Literally the only difference between this and reality is that some games like to make a slight FoV adjustment when you pull up your sights, which will occur regardless of the method used for using ironsights/reddots, and is up to the game. This can be disabled or configured in some of those. Your sights appear in 3D exactly as normal; they just align with your right eye properly when you pull them up as well. Your left eye will see exactly what your left eye sees in real life when you raise your sights.

#33
Posted 01/03/2012 02:48 AM   
[quote name='pir0zhki' date='02 January 2012 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1325549124' post='1350743']
[/quote]
Did you register a new account just to re-present this idea on this forum? Could've swore I had this same conversation about a year ago lol. I'm not going to argue you with you over your preferences, because they're just that, personal preferences.

But best of luck getting Nvidia to implement this for you, I doubt they will for reasons already presented. Maybe after you've actually tried 3D Vision games that render crosshairs, ironsights, scopes etc. in 3D for both eyes, you'll understand why left-shift just isn't that big of a priority for them.

I'll leave you with a few screenshots with MW2 (sorry didn't bother with MW2.5) to see ironsights work fine in most games once you tweak convergence a bit. You'll find the 3D implementation is even better in 3D Vision Ready games like BFBC2 and BF3. The only FPS games that are a real problem are the ones that don't allow you to disable in-game 2D crosshairs.
[quote name='pir0zhki' date='02 January 2012 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1325549124' post='1350743']



Did you register a new account just to re-present this idea on this forum? Could've swore I had this same conversation about a year ago lol. I'm not going to argue you with you over your preferences, because they're just that, personal preferences.



But best of luck getting Nvidia to implement this for you, I doubt they will for reasons already presented. Maybe after you've actually tried 3D Vision games that render crosshairs, ironsights, scopes etc. in 3D for both eyes, you'll understand why left-shift just isn't that big of a priority for them.



I'll leave you with a few screenshots with MW2 (sorry didn't bother with MW2.5) to see ironsights work fine in most games once you tweak convergence a bit. You'll find the 3D implementation is even better in 3D Vision Ready games like BFBC2 and BF3. The only FPS games that are a real problem are the ones that don't allow you to disable in-game 2D crosshairs.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

#34
Posted 01/03/2012 03:15 AM   
[quote name='chiz' date='02 January 2012 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1325560523' post='1350807']
Did you register a new account just to re-present this idea on this forum? Could've swore I had this same conversation about a year ago lol. I'm not going to argue you with you over your preferences, because they're just that, personal preferences.[/quote]
Indeed I did -- I just got three Asus 3D displays, got them all set up and ready to rock, and found myself so absolutely dumbfounded when I discovered my favorite feature missing. I had to at least see if someone knew of a third-party fix or something =)

I probably should've researched beforehand to make sure, but it felt like such a basic and obvious feature to me that the thought didn't even occur to me.

[quote name='chiz']
But best of luck getting Nvidia to implement this for you, I doubt they will for reasons already presented. Maybe after you've actually tried 3D Vision games that render crosshairs, ironsights, scopes etc. in 3D for both eyes, you'll understand why left-shift just isn't that big of a priority for them.[/quote]
From what I've seen in the previous postings, the one single guy who responded didn't even seem to know what the poster was talking about, so that sounds about right.

[quote name='chiz']
I'll leave you with a few screenshots with MW2 (sorry didn't bother with MW2.5) to see ironsights work fine in most games once you tweak convergence a bit. You'll find the 3D implementation is even better in 3D Vision Ready games like BFBC2 and BF3. The only FPS games that are a real problem are the ones that don't allow you to disable in-game 2D crosshairs.
[/quote]
That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.

The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.

Meanwhile, I appreciate the suggestion regarding 3D Vision Ready games, but frankly so far I can't get interested in any of them. BC2 didn't hold my attention long enough when I played it a while back, and I'm not touching Origin with a ten-foot pole. If it doesn't work with the games I play, what use is it to me? Left-Shift doesn't care what the game is; it works with everything. I'll see if there are any other titles that might interest me, but I'm still wary of it, especially with what I had read about companies locking convergence and whatnot.

I do want to thank you for sticking it out with me in this discussion though, for real. I appreciate that. The solutions just don't make for anything close to the quality experience I have on the iZ3D, solely because of this one feature. It's that critical to me. None of the other workarounds or approximations come close. I require an experience that allows all objects in the 3d environment to be sized realistically (if a car doesn't appear to be the size of an actual car, it's wrong), and immerses me in the environment as much as possible (ironsights are used like ironsights are supposed to be used, any other way requires approximations that break the previous point).

As strange as it sounds, Left Shift alone makes all the difference in both points, and I got spoiled on it, so getting used to anything else is going to be very difficult. I'll keep researching Direct3D hooks in the meantime,
and pray that a random NVIDIA coder with a few hours of spare time is paying attention or something... But I won't hold my breath. Better make sure I get these screens registered and keep an eye on alternatives in the meantime.

I plan on getting some more images and screenshots together to further illustrate some points if anyone's interested. This is a very serious issue for me and I want to get it out where people can see it. iZ3D had a bunch of great innovations that are being swept under the rug along with their screen, and it's going to suck if I'm going to end up forced into an inferior experience no matter where else I go. It's already bad enough to have to watch a great product/company die.
[quote name='chiz' date='02 January 2012 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1325560523' post='1350807']

Did you register a new account just to re-present this idea on this forum? Could've swore I had this same conversation about a year ago lol. I'm not going to argue you with you over your preferences, because they're just that, personal preferences.

Indeed I did -- I just got three Asus 3D displays, got them all set up and ready to rock, and found myself so absolutely dumbfounded when I discovered my favorite feature missing. I had to at least see if someone knew of a third-party fix or something =)



I probably should've researched beforehand to make sure, but it felt like such a basic and obvious feature to me that the thought didn't even occur to me.



chiz said:

But best of luck getting Nvidia to implement this for you, I doubt they will for reasons already presented. Maybe after you've actually tried 3D Vision games that render crosshairs, ironsights, scopes etc. in 3D for both eyes, you'll understand why left-shift just isn't that big of a priority for them.


From what I've seen in the previous postings, the one single guy who responded didn't even seem to know what the poster was talking about, so that sounds about right.



chiz said:

I'll leave you with a few screenshots with MW2 (sorry didn't bother with MW2.5) to see ironsights work fine in most games once you tweak convergence a bit. You'll find the 3D implementation is even better in 3D Vision Ready games like BFBC2 and BF3. The only FPS games that are a real problem are the ones that don't allow you to disable in-game 2D crosshairs.



That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.



The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.



Meanwhile, I appreciate the suggestion regarding 3D Vision Ready games, but frankly so far I can't get interested in any of them. BC2 didn't hold my attention long enough when I played it a while back, and I'm not touching Origin with a ten-foot pole. If it doesn't work with the games I play, what use is it to me? Left-Shift doesn't care what the game is; it works with everything. I'll see if there are any other titles that might interest me, but I'm still wary of it, especially with what I had read about companies locking convergence and whatnot.



I do want to thank you for sticking it out with me in this discussion though, for real. I appreciate that. The solutions just don't make for anything close to the quality experience I have on the iZ3D, solely because of this one feature. It's that critical to me. None of the other workarounds or approximations come close. I require an experience that allows all objects in the 3d environment to be sized realistically (if a car doesn't appear to be the size of an actual car, it's wrong), and immerses me in the environment as much as possible (ironsights are used like ironsights are supposed to be used, any other way requires approximations that break the previous point).



As strange as it sounds, Left Shift alone makes all the difference in both points, and I got spoiled on it, so getting used to anything else is going to be very difficult. I'll keep researching Direct3D hooks in the meantime,

and pray that a random NVIDIA coder with a few hours of spare time is paying attention or something... But I won't hold my breath. Better make sure I get these screens registered and keep an eye on alternatives in the meantime.



I plan on getting some more images and screenshots together to further illustrate some points if anyone's interested. This is a very serious issue for me and I want to get it out where people can see it. iZ3D had a bunch of great innovations that are being swept under the rug along with their screen, and it's going to suck if I'm going to end up forced into an inferior experience no matter where else I go. It's already bad enough to have to watch a great product/company die.

#35
Posted 01/03/2012 04:05 AM   
[quote name='pir0zhki' date='02 January 2012 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1325563545' post='1350818']

From what I've seen in the previous postings, the one single guy who responded didn't even seem to know what the poster was talking about, so that sounds about right.[/quote]
If AndrewF responded, he has used the competing solutions so he is definitely familiar with what was being discussed. I remember he specifically dismissed the idea previously because we don't need to squint to aim even in 2D, and while you've repeatedly stated you don't need to squint to resolve or overlook the off-focus ironsights your left eye will see, not everyone will be able to, just as not everyone is able to aim effectively with both eyes vs. one.


[quote]That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.[/quote]
Huh, no the entire scene has depth, the gun is obviously still closer to you than any other object with each layer of soldiers further away. The relative size of objects does not change at all as I adjust convergence, the only thing that changes is the amount of pop-out as the point of convergence shifts from near to far but that also breaks focus of objects behind the ironsights. I know what you're talking about where pushing the point of convergence to the rear of your depth budget can result in a flat scene overall (Deus Ex HR does this and doesn't let you adjust), but you don't have to get anywhere close to that to get objects to align with ironsights, you only need to set them far enough in front so that you can focus on and resolve objects behind the ironsights.

[quote]The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.[/quote]
Yes but what you're describing is how our eyes and brain work in reality, this method just pushes the near field objects further out so they aren't out of focus and appear aligned in 3D. The same can be done with a simple test sitting at your computer. If you extend your arm and hold your finger in front of your face, you'll see a double image of your finger if you focus on a door 20 ft away. If you place a stationary object like a pencil 10ft away from you then focus on the door, both will seem in focus. This is why its important not to over-emphasize reality, especially not if it results in the same kind of out-of-focus issues that are typically the biggest complaint about stereo 3D. Also, in reality, far objects appear more 2D than near objects as depth perception decreases the further you go, so in that sense this method is more accurate than artificial 3D with extreme amounts of convergence.

Also, this is why I would advocate different convergence profiles for different camera views, as many games already change convergence while aiming to help compensate. You'd still be able to have your extreme convergence settings for pop-out while hip firing and moving about, but when aiming, especially down scopes, the view is pushed out far enough that everything aligns perfectly. The only problem is objects between the point of convergence and the sights, but usually much less of an issue because the doubled-sights will still allow you to hit accurately for large targets in the near field. Laser sights will also usually adjust dynamically to objects between the camera and the sight.

[quote]That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.

The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.

Meanwhile, I appreciate the suggestion regarding 3D Vision Ready games, but frankly so far I can't get interested in any of them. BC2 didn't hold my attention long enough when I played it a while back, and I'm not touching Origin with a ten-foot pole. If it doesn't work with the games I play, what use is it to me? Left-Shift doesn't care what the game is; it works with everything. I'll see if there are any other titles that might interest me, but I'm still wary of it, especially with what I had read about companies locking convergence and whatnot.

I do want to thank you for sticking it out with me in this discussion though, for real. I appreciate that. The solutions just don't make for anything close to the quality experience I have on the iZ3D, solely because of this one feature. It's that critical to me. None of the other workarounds or approximations come close. I require an experience that allows all objects in the 3d environment to be sized realistically (if a car doesn't appear to be the size of an actual car, it's wrong), and immerses me in the environment as much as possible (ironsights are used like ironsights are supposed to be used, any other way requires approximations that break the previous point).

As strange as it sounds, Left Shift alone makes all the difference in both points, and I got spoiled on it, so getting used to anything else is going to be very difficult. I'll keep researching Direct3D hooks in the meantime,
and pray that a random NVIDIA coder with a few hours of spare time is paying attention or something... But I won't hold my breath. Better make sure I get these screens registered and keep an eye on alternatives in the meantime.

I plan on getting some more images and screenshots together to further illustrate some points if anyone's interested. This is a very serious issue for me and I want to get it out where people can see it. iZ3D had a bunch of great innovations that are being swept under the rug along with their screen, and it's going to suck if I'm going to end up forced into an inferior experience no matter where else I go. It's already bad enough to have to watch a great product/company die.


[/quote]
Yep np, there's not just 3D Vision Ready games but they're generally the best examples. MW2 isn't 3D Vision Ready, its only rated Excellent but I think most of the COD4+ games are similar in terms of compatibility. There's also Borderlands that does a good job with both ironsights and crosshairs and I know most of the Source games are compatible with Nvidia's 3D laser sights.

As for the rest, it is probably best if you post pics to help illustrate your point, but again, I think you'll find many will reject the implementation given some of the comments and common complaints around here regarding disturbing artifacts, out-of-focus objects, or objects only rendering in one eye. Like I said I probably would not use it even if it were implemented but wouldn't be opposed to to it as more options are better than fewer. In the end, as with anything else with 3D, the user will ultimately decide what they prefer with their eyes and brains.
[quote name='pir0zhki' date='02 January 2012 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1325563545' post='1350818']



From what I've seen in the previous postings, the one single guy who responded didn't even seem to know what the poster was talking about, so that sounds about right.

If AndrewF responded, he has used the competing solutions so he is definitely familiar with what was being discussed. I remember he specifically dismissed the idea previously because we don't need to squint to aim even in 2D, and while you've repeatedly stated you don't need to squint to resolve or overlook the off-focus ironsights your left eye will see, not everyone will be able to, just as not everyone is able to aim effectively with both eyes vs. one.





That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.


Huh, no the entire scene has depth, the gun is obviously still closer to you than any other object with each layer of soldiers further away. The relative size of objects does not change at all as I adjust convergence, the only thing that changes is the amount of pop-out as the point of convergence shifts from near to far but that also breaks focus of objects behind the ironsights. I know what you're talking about where pushing the point of convergence to the rear of your depth budget can result in a flat scene overall (Deus Ex HR does this and doesn't let you adjust), but you don't have to get anywhere close to that to get objects to align with ironsights, you only need to set them far enough in front so that you can focus on and resolve objects behind the ironsights.



The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.


Yes but what you're describing is how our eyes and brain work in reality, this method just pushes the near field objects further out so they aren't out of focus and appear aligned in 3D. The same can be done with a simple test sitting at your computer. If you extend your arm and hold your finger in front of your face, you'll see a double image of your finger if you focus on a door 20 ft away. If you place a stationary object like a pencil 10ft away from you then focus on the door, both will seem in focus. This is why its important not to over-emphasize reality, especially not if it results in the same kind of out-of-focus issues that are typically the biggest complaint about stereo 3D. Also, in reality, far objects appear more 2D than near objects as depth perception decreases the further you go, so in that sense this method is more accurate than artificial 3D with extreme amounts of convergence.



Also, this is why I would advocate different convergence profiles for different camera views, as many games already change convergence while aiming to help compensate. You'd still be able to have your extreme convergence settings for pop-out while hip firing and moving about, but when aiming, especially down scopes, the view is pushed out far enough that everything aligns perfectly. The only problem is objects between the point of convergence and the sights, but usually much less of an issue because the doubled-sights will still allow you to hit accurately for large targets in the near field. Laser sights will also usually adjust dynamically to objects between the camera and the sight.



That looks exactly like one of my previously-discussed alternatives, by cranking convergence into the distance so far that your gun is effectively the only thing with any depth. This is because it's so far in the distance that there's very little difference between the data received by the left and right eyes, like looking at distant buildings on the horizon. By setting convergence like that, not only is everything HUUUUUUGE, but your gun is actually the only thing that has any notable depth to it at all. At that point, I may as well just turn off 3D, since there's not much difference.



The problem just comes down to the way our eyes and brain work. in order to have your sights centered on a target in both eyes, they have to converge at that target's location, which places your weapon at that target's depth -- making it appear huge for distant targets and causing it to conflict with the surrounding terrain. The workaround is to pump the convergence to the point where your gun is so large and the convergence angle is so acute that it doesn't matter what distance your target is at, because your brain can no longer effectively tell the difference and the scene looks generally flat. That's what's happening in those screenshots. only very close objects (including the gun) have any depth because they're the only things for which our eyes receive sufficiently different 2D images.



Meanwhile, I appreciate the suggestion regarding 3D Vision Ready games, but frankly so far I can't get interested in any of them. BC2 didn't hold my attention long enough when I played it a while back, and I'm not touching Origin with a ten-foot pole. If it doesn't work with the games I play, what use is it to me? Left-Shift doesn't care what the game is; it works with everything. I'll see if there are any other titles that might interest me, but I'm still wary of it, especially with what I had read about companies locking convergence and whatnot.



I do want to thank you for sticking it out with me in this discussion though, for real. I appreciate that. The solutions just don't make for anything close to the quality experience I have on the iZ3D, solely because of this one feature. It's that critical to me. None of the other workarounds or approximations come close. I require an experience that allows all objects in the 3d environment to be sized realistically (if a car doesn't appear to be the size of an actual car, it's wrong), and immerses me in the environment as much as possible (ironsights are used like ironsights are supposed to be used, any other way requires approximations that break the previous point).



As strange as it sounds, Left Shift alone makes all the difference in both points, and I got spoiled on it, so getting used to anything else is going to be very difficult. I'll keep researching Direct3D hooks in the meantime,

and pray that a random NVIDIA coder with a few hours of spare time is paying attention or something... But I won't hold my breath. Better make sure I get these screens registered and keep an eye on alternatives in the meantime.



I plan on getting some more images and screenshots together to further illustrate some points if anyone's interested. This is a very serious issue for me and I want to get it out where people can see it. iZ3D had a bunch of great innovations that are being swept under the rug along with their screen, and it's going to suck if I'm going to end up forced into an inferior experience no matter where else I go. It's already bad enough to have to watch a great product/company die.







Yep np, there's not just 3D Vision Ready games but they're generally the best examples. MW2 isn't 3D Vision Ready, its only rated Excellent but I think most of the COD4+ games are similar in terms of compatibility. There's also Borderlands that does a good job with both ironsights and crosshairs and I know most of the Source games are compatible with Nvidia's 3D laser sights.



As for the rest, it is probably best if you post pics to help illustrate your point, but again, I think you'll find many will reject the implementation given some of the comments and common complaints around here regarding disturbing artifacts, out-of-focus objects, or objects only rendering in one eye. Like I said I probably would not use it even if it were implemented but wouldn't be opposed to to it as more options are better than fewer. In the end, as with anything else with 3D, the user will ultimately decide what they prefer with their eyes and brains.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W

#36
Posted 01/03/2012 05:15 AM   
Basically, being able to mimic reality as closely as possible is what I want and expect from a good 3D solution. My weapon separating in the near-field is what I want, because when I hold a rifle and point it at something at a distance, that's how my rifle appears. I can't get a "complete 3D picture" of it without making my eyes converge on it. That's what I expect, and how I tune my convergence/depth. It's also just so much more immersive when you're walking around and everything actually appears to be the correct real-world size. 'Tweaking' convergence defeats this and leaves the 3D experience quite lacking to me.

Changing the convergence has two effects:
1) makes objects appear farther away by bringing the convergence closer to you.
2) makes objects appear larger when interpreted by your brain as you bring the convergence closer to you, and thus take the object farther into the scene.
They don't take up any more pixels on-screen, and perspective doesn't really change, but your brain is seeing an object which is the same size as viewed from either eye, but at a farther distance because in the difference in how it converges your eyes' lines of sight. As a result, it interprets the object/environment as being larger.

It's basically the same effect as using a 19" LCD from 2-3 feet, compared to using a 50" TV at 8-10 feet. The display might appear to be the same size if you close your eye, because it occupies the same amount of physical "space" in your eye's view -- but when you open your other eye, you perceive the depth at which the screen lies, and your brain is able to estimate size based on that.

For me, setting the convergence to levels like those you demonstrated makes the weapon appear 1) far inside the screen, and 2) massive. Ditto everything else. I'm aware of the 2d-izing effect of far-off objects, and that's exactly the effect I'm talking about, but that convergence causes those objects to appear at distances farther off than they should, and with less depth than they would have in reality. That's the only reason that convergence setting works for iron sights -- the convergence *angle* is so acute that it can hit everything in front of it at a roughly straight line. The acute convergence angle has the side-effect of giving the brain little information with which to differentiate left and right eye images of anything that isn't immediately in front of/next to the player, making those not-close objects look flatter than they should. We should be able to discern depth at much farther distances than that allows.

It really is all just personal preference. The separation might not work so well to some people, but for me it's not bothersome at all, and actually makes me feel more like I'm "in the game". And again, having an unobstructed left-eye view (like in real life proper aiming with both eyes) is always good.

No matter which way you cut it, at the very least the Shift option should be dead simple to implement, as I figure the offset-amount code should be some of the most basic code in their entire driver, and implementing the feature is incredibly trivial at that point. I'd be willing to bet it would only take a matter of minutes (maybe a bit more if they want to make it super-customizeable? but that's not really that necessary), and at the very least it would make us folks coming from iZ3D happy.

So, in the meantime I'll spend some time researching direct3d hooks or something, I guess. It seems to be the only remotely realistic option right now. Or I just won't play any ironsight shooters for a while or something.
Basically, being able to mimic reality as closely as possible is what I want and expect from a good 3D solution. My weapon separating in the near-field is what I want, because when I hold a rifle and point it at something at a distance, that's how my rifle appears. I can't get a "complete 3D picture" of it without making my eyes converge on it. That's what I expect, and how I tune my convergence/depth. It's also just so much more immersive when you're walking around and everything actually appears to be the correct real-world size. 'Tweaking' convergence defeats this and leaves the 3D experience quite lacking to me.



Changing the convergence has two effects:

1) makes objects appear farther away by bringing the convergence closer to you.

2) makes objects appear larger when interpreted by your brain as you bring the convergence closer to you, and thus take the object farther into the scene.

They don't take up any more pixels on-screen, and perspective doesn't really change, but your brain is seeing an object which is the same size as viewed from either eye, but at a farther distance because in the difference in how it converges your eyes' lines of sight. As a result, it interprets the object/environment as being larger.



It's basically the same effect as using a 19" LCD from 2-3 feet, compared to using a 50" TV at 8-10 feet. The display might appear to be the same size if you close your eye, because it occupies the same amount of physical "space" in your eye's view -- but when you open your other eye, you perceive the depth at which the screen lies, and your brain is able to estimate size based on that.



For me, setting the convergence to levels like those you demonstrated makes the weapon appear 1) far inside the screen, and 2) massive. Ditto everything else. I'm aware of the 2d-izing effect of far-off objects, and that's exactly the effect I'm talking about, but that convergence causes those objects to appear at distances farther off than they should, and with less depth than they would have in reality. That's the only reason that convergence setting works for iron sights -- the convergence *angle* is so acute that it can hit everything in front of it at a roughly straight line. The acute convergence angle has the side-effect of giving the brain little information with which to differentiate left and right eye images of anything that isn't immediately in front of/next to the player, making those not-close objects look flatter than they should. We should be able to discern depth at much farther distances than that allows.



It really is all just personal preference. The separation might not work so well to some people, but for me it's not bothersome at all, and actually makes me feel more like I'm "in the game". And again, having an unobstructed left-eye view (like in real life proper aiming with both eyes) is always good.



No matter which way you cut it, at the very least the Shift option should be dead simple to implement, as I figure the offset-amount code should be some of the most basic code in their entire driver, and implementing the feature is incredibly trivial at that point. I'd be willing to bet it would only take a matter of minutes (maybe a bit more if they want to make it super-customizeable? but that's not really that necessary), and at the very least it would make us folks coming from iZ3D happy.



So, in the meantime I'll spend some time researching direct3d hooks or something, I guess. It seems to be the only remotely realistic option right now. Or I just won't play any ironsight shooters for a while or something.

#37
Posted 01/03/2012 05:53 AM   
  3 / 3    
Scroll To Top