Another [unusually knowledgeable] user made a comment i found very strange: [quote]You obviously need to keep the infinity depth smaller than the distance between your eyes and with close range monitors you generally don't exceed 50% of the occular distance.[/quote]
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." [url="http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/GDC2011/Stereoscopy.pdf"]http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf[/url] [quote]....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly][/quote]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QIj4iKntwpE#t=451s"]Presidium in Mass Effect[/url].
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
Another [unusually knowledgeable] user made a comment i found very strange:
You obviously need to keep the infinity depth smaller than the distance between your eyes and with close range monitors you generally don't exceed 50% of the occular distance.
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf
....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the Presidium in Mass Effect.
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
Another [unusually knowledgeable] user made a comment i found very strange: [quote]You obviously need to keep the infinity depth smaller than the distance between your eyes and with close range monitors you generally don't exceed 50% of the occular distance.[/quote]
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." [url="http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/GDC2011/Stereoscopy.pdf"]http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf[/url] [quote]....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly][/quote]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QIj4iKntwpE#t=451s"]Presidium in Mass Effect[/url].
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
Another [unusually knowledgeable] user made a comment i found very strange:
You obviously need to keep the infinity depth smaller than the distance between your eyes and with close range monitors you generally don't exceed 50% of the occular distance.
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf
....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the Presidium in Mass Effect.
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
I can only have a little higher distance between far-away objects than my interocular distance until it cause eyestrain and a total disability to focus on the scene. It does make sense for me. However some people might have an easier time to converge their eyes outwards and should probably do this better. Maybe the same as personal preferences for crosseye or walleye freeviewing.
I can only have a little higher distance between far-away objects than my interocular distance until it cause eyestrain and a total disability to focus on the scene. It does make sense for me. However some people might have an easier time to converge their eyes outwards and should probably do this better. Maybe the same as personal preferences for crosseye or walleye freeviewing.
I can only have a little higher distance between far-away objects than my interocular distance until it cause eyestrain and a total disability to focus on the scene. It does make sense for me. However some people might have an easier time to converge their eyes outwards and should probably do this better. Maybe the same as personal preferences for crosseye or walleye freeviewing.
I can only have a little higher distance between far-away objects than my interocular distance until it cause eyestrain and a total disability to focus on the scene. It does make sense for me. However some people might have an easier time to converge their eyes outwards and should probably do this better. Maybe the same as personal preferences for crosseye or walleye freeviewing.
I have no idea how much on-screen seperation I have for distant in-game objects. I will take a look later.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I have no idea how much on-screen seperation I have for distant in-game objects. I will take a look later.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I have no idea how much on-screen seperation I have for distant in-game objects. I will take a look later.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I have no idea how much on-screen seperation I have for distant in-game objects. I will take a look later.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
Well, I don't have time to try and comprehend occular distance and whosa-whatever... all I can say is that I normally play games at maximum depth and adjust convergence to be further out of the screen for a maximum 3D effect. It all depends on the game though and how the character is placed to begin with. With Alice: Madness Returns I have 3D adjusted to a very agressive level. In the Batman games where the character is already much closer to the screen I still adjust convergence but not as much.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
Well, I don't have time to try and comprehend occular distance and whosa-whatever... all I can say is that I normally play games at maximum depth and adjust convergence to be further out of the screen for a maximum 3D effect. It all depends on the game though and how the character is placed to begin with. With Alice: Madness Returns I have 3D adjusted to a very agressive level. In the Batman games where the character is already much closer to the screen I still adjust convergence but not as much.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64
Well, I don't have time to try and comprehend occular distance and whosa-whatever... all I can say is that I normally play games at maximum depth and adjust convergence to be further out of the screen for a maximum 3D effect. It all depends on the game though and how the character is placed to begin with. With Alice: Madness Returns I have 3D adjusted to a very agressive level. In the Batman games where the character is already much closer to the screen I still adjust convergence but not as much.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
Well, I don't have time to try and comprehend occular distance and whosa-whatever... all I can say is that I normally play games at maximum depth and adjust convergence to be further out of the screen for a maximum 3D effect. It all depends on the game though and how the character is placed to begin with. With Alice: Madness Returns I have 3D adjusted to a very agressive level. In the Batman games where the character is already much closer to the screen I still adjust convergence but not as much.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64
I doubt that percentage of depth and the distance between far away objects are related in the nvidiasettings. The actual distance for far away objects are more related to the specific game and not least the choice of scenery. With this in mind there shouldn't be any problems playing with 100% depth even if 50% is recommended. There's a huge possibility that convergence influence this also. Turning up convergence will make far away objects less shifted (10cm before to 5cm after for example).
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
I doubt that percentage of depth and the distance between far away objects are related in the nvidiasettings. The actual distance for far away objects are more related to the specific game and not least the choice of scenery. With this in mind there shouldn't be any problems playing with 100% depth even if 50% is recommended. There's a huge possibility that convergence influence this also. Turning up convergence will make far away objects less shifted (10cm before to 5cm after for example).
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
I doubt that percentage of depth and the distance between far away objects are related in the nvidiasettings. The actual distance for far away objects are more related to the specific game and not least the choice of scenery. With this in mind there shouldn't be any problems playing with 100% depth even if 50% is recommended. There's a huge possibility that convergence influence this also. Turning up convergence will make far away objects less shifted (10cm before to 5cm after for example).
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
I doubt that percentage of depth and the distance between far away objects are related in the nvidiasettings. The actual distance for far away objects are more related to the specific game and not least the choice of scenery. With this in mind there shouldn't be any problems playing with 100% depth even if 50% is recommended. There's a huge possibility that convergence influence this also. Turning up convergence will make far away objects less shifted (10cm before to 5cm after for example).
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
They probably based their conclusion on actual user feedback, similar to that Focus study they are conducting in Santa Clara stickied at the top. Either that or exit surveys at the various demonstrations they've shown 3D Vision for the last few years.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
They probably based their conclusion on actual user feedback, similar to that Focus study they are conducting in Santa Clara stickied at the top. Either that or exit surveys at the various demonstrations they've shown 3D Vision for the last few years.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
They probably based their conclusion on actual user feedback, similar to that Focus study they are conducting in Santa Clara stickied at the top. Either that or exit surveys at the various demonstrations they've shown 3D Vision for the last few years.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
They probably based their conclusion on actual user feedback, similar to that Focus study they are conducting in Santa Clara stickied at the top. Either that or exit surveys at the various demonstrations they've shown 3D Vision for the last few years.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
Also: Once you practiced stereogaming for a while and the eyes got used to high stereosettings you can really crank up the settings. Show this to a s-3d newcomer and he'll probably complain about eyestrain.
Also: Once you practiced stereogaming for a while and the eyes got used to high stereosettings you can really crank up the settings. Show this to a s-3d newcomer and he'll probably complain about eyestrain.
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." [url="http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/GDC2011/Stereoscopy.pdf"]http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf[/url] [quote]....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly][/quote]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QIj4iKntwpE#t=451s"]Presidium in Mass Effect[/url].
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the Presidium in Mass Effect.
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
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
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." [url="http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/GDC2011/Stereoscopy.pdf"]http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf[/url] [quote]....most users cannot handle more than 50% of the Real Eye Separation [normalized interocular distance across different sized screens if i understand correctly][/quote]
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QIj4iKntwpE#t=451s"]Presidium in Mass Effect[/url].
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
According to this .pdf, Nvidia kind of backs that up and seems to be what they recommend for close viewing scenarios like PC use. Page 40. "Separation must be comfortable." http://www.nvidia.co...Stereoscopy.pdf
My thoughts on this: Bottomline, i probably wouldn't even use 3D anymore if i were suddenly limited to a separation at infinity of 50% of my interocular distance!! Except for the first day having a small amount of eye strain, i have not had any headaches or eye-strain after over 500 hours of gaming, which i know thanks to Steam keeping track In fact, i have my separation at infinity 10% to 30% WIDER THAN my interocular distance, which i've measured precisely. This makes LARGE objects/scenery appear LARGE! For example the Presidium in Mass Effect.
There i have my max separation set to greater than my interocular distance causing my eyes to diverge. (forgot to enable AA for half the game...) Thats adjusted sitting just under 1 meter away from a 46" screen. To me, this also makes the bottom of a cliff look appropriately and scarily far away. Monstrous statues to look magnanimous. Vast scenery to appear epic.
I doubt Nvidia is the originator of this idea, I would think its the film industry seeing that they have to account for Imax vs. home sized screens and small children vs. large adults. Also because so many PC sources of 3D that use their own 3D implementation have users that complain of low depth. Crysis 2 and Deus Ex:HR. Console games apparently are configured for low depth as default as I see console users telling other users to "cheat" and gain more depth by lowering their screen size values with amazed reactions at the increased depth. From my knowledge, people new to 3D are more prone to discomfort than experienced users. Nvidia just recently invited users to test out 3d products, [my assumption] did they get this idea from a horde of users new to 3D?
I could imagine that developers who've publicly stated their disinterest in 3D only seeing lack-luster 3D during 3d demo, of which their programers who set it up stating that what he or she is seeing is as good as it gets unless they want to impart eye strain to their customers, because, as we read in the Nvidia guide "most users cannot handle." any higher. That would sure be a turn off.
Anyone know where this idea that "most users cannot handle" 50% infinity separation originates from?
Who else uses separation equal to or greater than their interocular distance with no problems?
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
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
I was really struggling to make the mountains in Skyrim look 'big' the other day though, on a 23" screen. I know nvidia limit depth based on screensize.
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
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
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
As far as Nvidia or any other vendor setting 3D up for display, keep in mind that they don't want any cutscenes or objects that have so much convergence they can't be focused on correctly, as that could be a big turn off for some people who don't know otherwise. Most of the time my settings leave extreme close-ups in cut scenes and what not to a level that cannot be resolved without going cross-eyed. That's a compromise for an otherwise great experience. Not everyone shares that view though.
|CPU: i7-2700k @ 4.5Ghz
|Cooler: Zalman 9900 Max
|MB: MSI Military Class II Z68 GD-80
|RAM: Corsair Vengence 16GB DDR3
|SSDs: Seagate 600 240GB; Crucial M4 128GB
|HDDs: Seagate Barracuda 1TB; Seagate Barracuda 500GB
|PS: OCZ ZX Series 1250watt
|Case: Antec 1200 V3
|Monitors: Asus 3D VG278HE; Asus 3D VG236H; Samsung 3D 51" Plasma;
|GPU:MSI 1080GTX "Duke"
|OS: Windows 10 Pro X64
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
Are you sure that you really turn up the depth until far away objects shifts sideways more than 6,5cms? To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
-=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
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
As Fish99 said, they do adjust separation maximums based on screen size and assumed sitting distance from screen, but I think that's science more than anything else. I also think they pass this info along as guidelines to devs that ask for them, like Ubisoft for example with Avatar the Game. I believe they are a little bit conservative even on the maximum separation at only 85% of the interocular distance for your screen size at your assumed sitting distance.
It does make sense though to set it a bit conservative for the masses, but I guess the concern would be if settings are tweaked for these more conservative settings and then they limit separation or lock convergence in games so that we can't tweak them to our tastes.
-=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
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.