As I said many times glasses free 3D is what we need for 3d gaming to take of, same goes for Movies and we know that James Cameron and many others are hard at work bringing us the real thing we need.
So maybe sooner then later we can just throw those stupid glasses in the trashcan and enjoy perfect 3d without any crap like ghosting and less of colours/contrast and light.
So it seems 2014 is the year of 3d to finaly take of and of course VR with the fantastic Oculus Rift and others to follow, nvidia light field tech for an example :)
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1376292289
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1335426443
As I said many times glasses free 3D is what we need for 3d gaming to take of, same goes for Movies and we know that James Cameron and many others are hard at work bringing us the real thing we need.
So maybe sooner then later we can just throw those stupid glasses in the trashcan and enjoy perfect 3d without any crap like ghosting and less of colours/contrast and light.
Only thing I worry about is exactly how much processing does this require? Because lots of image processing isn't an issue for TV/movies, but input lag for games can turn TVs into being unusable.
Still, hopefully it's as promising as they make it sound.
Only thing I worry about is exactly how much processing does this require? Because lots of image processing isn't an issue for TV/movies, but input lag for games can turn TVs into being unusable.
Still, hopefully it's as promising as they make it sound.
It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH5jUvFEKeE[/url]
Not sure what advantage this has over Dolby3D but dolby according to what is said has no resolution loss while the above does and requires ultra high res[4k]. Supposedly Amazon's smart phone is supposed to include Dolby 3D.
TBH, Dolby 3D will eat any other glasses free 3d technology regardless of it being better because...it's dolby + james cameron backing.
Not sure what advantage this has over Dolby3D but dolby according to what is said has no resolution loss while the above does and requires ultra high res[4k]. Supposedly Amazon's smart phone is supposed to include Dolby 3D.
TBH, Dolby 3D will eat any other glasses free 3d technology regardless of it being better because...it's dolby + james cameron backing.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
Everyone likes the idea of glasses free 3D of course, but it's not necessarily a clear winner in practice. 3D with active shutter glasses is more comfortable to me than the 3DS, with it's very narrow viewing cone. There always has to be a catch of some kind.
If the catch here is simply half 4k resolution, then that's great. If it's 1/8th of 4k, then not so much (I know a previous glasses free 4k display only allowed 720p per viewer). I worry about viewing cones. The reviewer said the transition between cones was only noticeable when moving around, but I wonder if it really works out that great when everyone sits down in the living room.
Subjective impressions from a relatively short viewing experience is a start, but what we really need to know is how this works on a technical level. Too often the reviewers don't know, or aren't told, how it actually works. Often they don't seem to understand the science of stereoscopic 3D very well in the first place.
The same kind of goes for holograms. Many people say they'll wait for holograms, without thinking how limited they'll be in the home. How do you represent a distant landscape with holograms? The only option would be to shrink it down and put it in the room. Not so great. But people don't know what they're talking about.
Everyone likes the idea of glasses free 3D of course, but it's not necessarily a clear winner in practice. 3D with active shutter glasses is more comfortable to me than the 3DS, with it's very narrow viewing cone. There always has to be a catch of some kind.
If the catch here is simply half 4k resolution, then that's great. If it's 1/8th of 4k, then not so much (I know a previous glasses free 4k display only allowed 720p per viewer). I worry about viewing cones. The reviewer said the transition between cones was only noticeable when moving around, but I wonder if it really works out that great when everyone sits down in the living room.
Subjective impressions from a relatively short viewing experience is a start, but what we really need to know is how this works on a technical level. Too often the reviewers don't know, or aren't told, how it actually works. Often they don't seem to understand the science of stereoscopic 3D very well in the first place.
The same kind of goes for holograms. Many people say they'll wait for holograms, without thinking how limited they'll be in the home. How do you represent a distant landscape with holograms? The only option would be to shrink it down and put it in the room. Not so great. But people don't know what they're talking about.
I worry about being able to sit closely to one as i like to get a good FOV that way. I don't see why glasses would necessarily be more powerful because what seems to matter is that you get the full picture of one eye into one eye and the other full picture into the other eye. What that picture is would seem like all that would matter. Who knows what content they are showing on these demos. Everything theatrical i've seen has very little depth. A lot of people used to ask which TVs had more 3D depth on AVS forum. :D
I saw Gravity today, 3D conversion which i thought they could make look good. It was a small Imax theater. Sat way too close, very little depth. Only really two shots had 3D Vision like realism, but again i was sitting too close. They have tons of close up shots, like Mass Effect kinda and Sandra Bullock's face took up the FOV she would if you were kissing her, yet she was at screen depth. Definitely recommend sitting back on that one. That said, this movie had Avatar'ish 3D. Great for a movie as long as your back further.
I worry about being able to sit closely to one as i like to get a good FOV that way. I don't see why glasses would necessarily be more powerful because what seems to matter is that you get the full picture of one eye into one eye and the other full picture into the other eye. What that picture is would seem like all that would matter. Who knows what content they are showing on these demos. Everything theatrical i've seen has very little depth. A lot of people used to ask which TVs had more 3D depth on AVS forum. :D
I saw Gravity today, 3D conversion which i thought they could make look good. It was a small Imax theater. Sat way too close, very little depth. Only really two shots had 3D Vision like realism, but again i was sitting too close. They have tons of close up shots, like Mass Effect kinda and Sandra Bullock's face took up the FOV she would if you were kissing her, yet she was at screen depth. Definitely recommend sitting back on that one. That said, this movie had Avatar'ish 3D. Great for a movie as long as your back further.
[quote="Volnaiskra"]It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses. [/quote]
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
I love 3d as everyone here but even how good nvidias glasses are it would be way better without them with no crosstalk and dimming colours/contrast bla bla you get it right!!!!!!
And as I have glasses you can see how much easier it would be!
VR as said it's another storie where you just have to had it as where can you get into this otherworld without em!
Volnaiskra said:It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
I love 3d as everyone here but even how good nvidias glasses are it would be way better without them with no crosstalk and dimming colours/contrast bla bla you get it right!!!!!!
And as I have glasses you can see how much easier it would be!
VR as said it's another storie where you just have to had it as where can you get into this otherworld without em!
[quote="JnLoader"][quote="Volnaiskra"]It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses. [/quote]
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/[/quote]Huh??? Who said anything about glasses-free VR?! *
The point is that if you're willing to accept half a kilo of equipment on your head for a VR experience, it's strange to complain about some lightweight glasses for a 3D experience.
Or to put it another way: the mainstream public has shown a great deal of interest in the Oculus Rift, despite it being very cumbersome.......so maybe they're not as averse to wearing 3D equipment on their head (including 3D glasses) as you think.
Though of course we can all agree that glasses-free 3D would be great. But I wouldn't jump to conclusions about its absence being some sort of final hurdle in the way of mainstream acceptance of 3D. Especially since the quality of glasses-free 3D is likely to be inferior for quite some time.
* But since you ask, the answer is: "Google Glass - Contact Lens edition". It will be all the rage in 2036 ;)
Volnaiskra said:It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
Huh??? Who said anything about glasses-free VR?! *
The point is that if you're willing to accept half a kilo of equipment on your head for a VR experience, it's strange to complain about some lightweight glasses for a 3D experience.
Or to put it another way: the mainstream public has shown a great deal of interest in the Oculus Rift, despite it being very cumbersome.......so maybe they're not as averse to wearing 3D equipment on their head (including 3D glasses) as you think.
Though of course we can all agree that glasses-free 3D would be great. But I wouldn't jump to conclusions about its absence being some sort of final hurdle in the way of mainstream acceptance of 3D. Especially since the quality of glasses-free 3D is likely to be inferior for quite some time.
* But since you ask, the answer is: "Google Glass - Contact Lens edition". It will be all the rage in 2036 ;)
Current glasses-free technology uses a lenticular screen over the display, very much like 3D postcards or some ads. Higher resolution of course, but the same principle of directing alternating columns of pixels to one eye, and the next column of pixels to the other.
I have an EVO 3D phone that has a glasses free 3D screen, very much like the 3DS. It's only OK. The 3D effect is terrific and a great gimmick. People are generally surprised that glasses-free even exists.
But, the viewing range is pretty narrow, and you can't move your head or the screen or it drops in and out of 3D. This doesn't not lend itself well to playing games. Like a racing game where you tilt the phone to drive, and was fully supporting 3D. Just makes no sense.
Even watching the 3D movie on there is tough, because you don't naturally sit perfectly still. You also had to keep it farther away than you'd want, because otherwise you can't see the effect because of overlapping cones.
They are working on making the cones better, but you still have an IPD problem of making sure that your cones are not wider or much narrower than IPD, which restricts your seating position. It's interesting technology, but don't hold your breath.
Current glasses-free technology uses a lenticular screen over the display, very much like 3D postcards or some ads. Higher resolution of course, but the same principle of directing alternating columns of pixels to one eye, and the next column of pixels to the other.
I have an EVO 3D phone that has a glasses free 3D screen, very much like the 3DS. It's only OK. The 3D effect is terrific and a great gimmick. People are generally surprised that glasses-free even exists.
But, the viewing range is pretty narrow, and you can't move your head or the screen or it drops in and out of 3D. This doesn't not lend itself well to playing games. Like a racing game where you tilt the phone to drive, and was fully supporting 3D. Just makes no sense.
Even watching the 3D movie on there is tough, because you don't naturally sit perfectly still. You also had to keep it farther away than you'd want, because otherwise you can't see the effect because of overlapping cones.
They are working on making the cones better, but you still have an IPD problem of making sure that your cones are not wider or much narrower than IPD, which restricts your seating position. It's interesting technology, but don't hold your breath.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607 Latest 3Dmigoto Release Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
Looks promising, but really, when they release 3d glasses free, they have to be perfect. Great fov, perfect 3d, with godd brightness and black levels. I don't think 3d market will get a third chance to succeed, so they better nail it.
That 31'' monitor with this technology sure sounds interesting though.
Looks promising, but really, when they release 3d glasses free, they have to be perfect. Great fov, perfect 3d, with godd brightness and black levels. I don't think 3d market will get a third chance to succeed, so they better nail it.
That 31'' monitor with this technology sure sounds interesting though.
All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com
It does have potential, especially with heavies like Cameron and Philips. But it is still going to have a sweet spot that you need to sit at. If the cones/views are wide enough, you could put a cone-seam on your nose, and get one view per eye, with the ability to move your head no further than IPD/2 before breaking the 3D effect.
Glasses on the other hand let me move anywhere I want, and maintain the image. FOV on a projector is at least as good as these TVs.
Pretty good for the ocular impaired like many of us though. I use contacts so that I don't get the glasses over glasses, which is definitely not awesome. Also pretty sure it's not going to meet your bar of being perfect 3D, there are drawbacks that the marketing people always conveniently ignore.
It does have potential, especially with heavies like Cameron and Philips. But it is still going to have a sweet spot that you need to sit at. If the cones/views are wide enough, you could put a cone-seam on your nose, and get one view per eye, with the ability to move your head no further than IPD/2 before breaking the 3D effect.
Glasses on the other hand let me move anywhere I want, and maintain the image. FOV on a projector is at least as good as these TVs.
Pretty good for the ocular impaired like many of us though. I use contacts so that I don't get the glasses over glasses, which is definitely not awesome. Also pretty sure it's not going to meet your bar of being perfect 3D, there are drawbacks that the marketing people always conveniently ignore.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607 Latest 3Dmigoto Release Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
[quote="JnLoader"][quote="Volnaiskra"]It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses. [/quote]
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
I love 3d as everyone here but even how good nvidias glasses are it would be way better without them with no crosstalk and dimming colours/contrast bla bla you get it right!!!!!!
And as I have glasses you can see how much easier it would be!
VR as said it's another storie where you just have to had it as where can you get into this otherworld without em![/quote]
Like others have said, though, you really can't trust impressions at this stage. It's really easy to cherry pick material and optimum seating positions, and then wow someone who's never seen great 3D material before. Most people think 3D is terrible after all.
Like I said before, hopefully it lives up to its potential, but this is a similar technique to the 3DS and I'll take "bulky" or "IQ destroying" glasses over that terrible solution every time. The 3DS has more issues than the other techniques IMO. So while the idea certainly is intriguing, until they prove they can actually deliver without huge compromises, a little skepticism is probably healthy.
Volnaiskra said:It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
I love 3d as everyone here but even how good nvidias glasses are it would be way better without them with no crosstalk and dimming colours/contrast bla bla you get it right!!!!!!
And as I have glasses you can see how much easier it would be!
VR as said it's another storie where you just have to had it as where can you get into this otherworld without em!
Like others have said, though, you really can't trust impressions at this stage. It's really easy to cherry pick material and optimum seating positions, and then wow someone who's never seen great 3D material before. Most people think 3D is terrible after all.
Like I said before, hopefully it lives up to its potential, but this is a similar technique to the 3DS and I'll take "bulky" or "IQ destroying" glasses over that terrible solution every time. The 3DS has more issues than the other techniques IMO. So while the idea certainly is intriguing, until they prove they can actually deliver without huge compromises, a little skepticism is probably healthy.
[quote="bo3b"]I use contacts so that I don't get the glasses over glasses, which is definitely not awesome.[/quote]
I use both contacts and glasses, depending on what I plan to do each day. I've had both on hand for two decades. If there's a chance I'll be playing sports, I'll wear contacts. When comfort is my only concern, I choose glasses. So when I'm playing 3D games, it's always glasses with 3D glasses on top. It's a total non-issue for me. Perhaps it's thanks to the size and shape of my glasses, but I find no practical difference between having them on or off when wearing 3D shutter glasses.
That's not to say that you shouldn't care of course, everyone is different. But the above is the experience of me and many others.
bo3b said:I use contacts so that I don't get the glasses over glasses, which is definitely not awesome.
I use both contacts and glasses, depending on what I plan to do each day. I've had both on hand for two decades. If there's a chance I'll be playing sports, I'll wear contacts. When comfort is my only concern, I choose glasses. So when I'm playing 3D games, it's always glasses with 3D glasses on top. It's a total non-issue for me. Perhaps it's thanks to the size and shape of my glasses, but I find no practical difference between having them on or off when wearing 3D shutter glasses.
That's not to say that you shouldn't care of course, everyone is different. But the above is the experience of me and many others.
[quote="Volnaiskra"][quote="JnLoader"][quote="Volnaiskra"]It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses. [/quote]
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/[/quote]Huh??? Who said anything about glasses-free VR?! *
The point is that if you're willing to accept half a kilo of equipment on your head for a VR experience, it's strange to complain about some lightweight glasses for a 3D experience.
Or to put it another way: the mainstream public has shown a great deal of interest in the Oculus Rift, despite it being very cumbersome.......so maybe they're not as averse to wearing 3D equipment on their head (including 3D glasses) as you think.
Though of course we can all agree that glasses-free 3D would be great. But I wouldn't jump to conclusions about its absence being some sort of final hurdle in the way of mainstream acceptance of 3D. Especially since the quality of glasses-free 3D is likely to be inferior for quite some time
* But since you ask, the answer is: "Google Glass - Contact Lens edition". It will be all the rage in 2036 ;)[/quote]
I say in again then, thats why I said it's a different storie with VR as you just have to use a device like that to get into the game so it's easy :)
But of course I put up with nvidia glasses as I havent an option yet so lets hope they will nail 3d glasses free this time around.
And nope I cant wear contacts, have tried out different pair this sommer but no one works with my astigmatism whitch is a damn shame, would love to get rid of my glasses.
Volnaiskra said:It's interesting that you describe Nvidia's lightweight and comfortable glasses as "stupid", while you describe the Occulus Rift as "fantastic".
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
Huh??? Who said anything about glasses-free VR?! *
The point is that if you're willing to accept half a kilo of equipment on your head for a VR experience, it's strange to complain about some lightweight glasses for a 3D experience.
Or to put it another way: the mainstream public has shown a great deal of interest in the Oculus Rift, despite it being very cumbersome.......so maybe they're not as averse to wearing 3D equipment on their head (including 3D glasses) as you think.
Though of course we can all agree that glasses-free 3D would be great. But I wouldn't jump to conclusions about its absence being some sort of final hurdle in the way of mainstream acceptance of 3D. Especially since the quality of glasses-free 3D is likely to be inferior for quite some time
* But since you ask, the answer is: "Google Glass - Contact Lens edition". It will be all the rage in 2036 ;)
I say in again then, thats why I said it's a different storie with VR as you just have to use a device like that to get into the game so it's easy :)
But of course I put up with nvidia glasses as I havent an option yet so lets hope they will nail 3d glasses free this time around.
And nope I cant wear contacts, have tried out different pair this sommer but no one works with my astigmatism whitch is a damn shame, would love to get rid of my glasses.
So maybe sooner then later we can just throw those stupid glasses in the trashcan and enjoy perfect 3d without any crap like ghosting and less of colours/contrast and light.
So it seems 2014 is the year of 3d to finaly take of and of course VR with the fantastic Oculus Rift and others to follow, nvidia light field tech for an example :)
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1376292289
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1335426443
Still, hopefully it's as promising as they make it sound.
The Occulus Rift is the antithesis of glasses-free 3d. It's bulky, heavy, disorienting, permanently wired to a receiver, and the developer warns against wearing it in conjunction with normal glasses as its thick lenses might scratch your glasses.
Not sure what advantage this has over Dolby3D but dolby according to what is said has no resolution loss while the above does and requires ultra high res[4k]. Supposedly Amazon's smart phone is supposed to include Dolby 3D.
TBH, Dolby 3D will eat any other glasses free 3d technology regardless of it being better because...it's dolby + james cameron backing.
Co-founder of helixmod.blog.com
If you like one of my helixmod patches and want to donate. Can send to me through paypal - eqzitara@yahoo.com
If the catch here is simply half 4k resolution, then that's great. If it's 1/8th of 4k, then not so much (I know a previous glasses free 4k display only allowed 720p per viewer). I worry about viewing cones. The reviewer said the transition between cones was only noticeable when moving around, but I wonder if it really works out that great when everyone sits down in the living room.
Subjective impressions from a relatively short viewing experience is a start, but what we really need to know is how this works on a technical level. Too often the reviewers don't know, or aren't told, how it actually works. Often they don't seem to understand the science of stereoscopic 3D very well in the first place.
The same kind of goes for holograms. Many people say they'll wait for holograms, without thinking how limited they'll be in the home. How do you represent a distant landscape with holograms? The only option would be to shrink it down and put it in the room. Not so great. But people don't know what they're talking about.
Model: Clevo P570WM Laptop
GPU: GeForce GTX 980M ~8GB GDDR5
CPU: Intel Core i7-4960X CPU +4.2GHz (12 CPUs)
Memory: 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3L 1600MHz, 4x8gb
OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate
I saw Gravity today, 3D conversion which i thought they could make look good. It was a small Imax theater. Sat way too close, very little depth. Only really two shots had 3D Vision like realism, but again i was sitting too close. They have tons of close up shots, like Mass Effect kinda and Sandra Bullock's face took up the FOV she would if you were kissing her, yet she was at screen depth. Definitely recommend sitting back on that one. That said, this movie had Avatar'ish 3D. Great for a movie as long as your back further.
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
Dude thats a whole different storie..how in the hell would a glasses free VR device work, you tell me sherlock :/
I love 3d as everyone here but even how good nvidias glasses are it would be way better without them with no crosstalk and dimming colours/contrast bla bla you get it right!!!!!!
And as I have glasses you can see how much easier it would be!
VR as said it's another storie where you just have to had it as where can you get into this otherworld without em!
The point is that if you're willing to accept half a kilo of equipment on your head for a VR experience, it's strange to complain about some lightweight glasses for a 3D experience.
Or to put it another way: the mainstream public has shown a great deal of interest in the Oculus Rift, despite it being very cumbersome.......so maybe they're not as averse to wearing 3D equipment on their head (including 3D glasses) as you think.
Though of course we can all agree that glasses-free 3D would be great. But I wouldn't jump to conclusions about its absence being some sort of final hurdle in the way of mainstream acceptance of 3D. Especially since the quality of glasses-free 3D is likely to be inferior for quite some time.
* But since you ask, the answer is: "Google Glass - Contact Lens edition". It will be all the rage in 2036 ;)
I have an EVO 3D phone that has a glasses free 3D screen, very much like the 3DS. It's only OK. The 3D effect is terrific and a great gimmick. People are generally surprised that glasses-free even exists.
But, the viewing range is pretty narrow, and you can't move your head or the screen or it drops in and out of 3D. This doesn't not lend itself well to playing games. Like a racing game where you tilt the phone to drive, and was fully supporting 3D. Just makes no sense.
Even watching the 3D movie on there is tough, because you don't naturally sit perfectly still. You also had to keep it farther away than you'd want, because otherwise you can't see the effect because of overlapping cones.
They are working on making the cones better, but you still have an IPD problem of making sure that your cones are not wider or much narrower than IPD, which restricts your seating position. It's interesting technology, but don't hold your breath.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
That 31'' monitor with this technology sure sounds interesting though.
All hail 3d modders DHR, MasterOtaku, Losti, Necropants, Helifax, bo3b, mike_ar69, Flugan, DarkStarSword, 4everAwake, 3d4dd and so many more helping to keep the 3d dream alive, find their 3d fixes at http://helixmod.blogspot.com/ Also check my site for spanish VR and mobile gaming news: www.gamermovil.com
Glasses on the other hand let me move anywhere I want, and maintain the image. FOV on a projector is at least as good as these TVs.
Pretty good for the ocular impaired like many of us though. I use contacts so that I don't get the glasses over glasses, which is definitely not awesome. Also pretty sure it's not going to meet your bar of being perfect 3D, there are drawbacks that the marketing people always conveniently ignore.
Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers
Like others have said, though, you really can't trust impressions at this stage. It's really easy to cherry pick material and optimum seating positions, and then wow someone who's never seen great 3D material before. Most people think 3D is terrible after all.
Like I said before, hopefully it lives up to its potential, but this is a similar technique to the 3DS and I'll take "bulky" or "IQ destroying" glasses over that terrible solution every time. The 3DS has more issues than the other techniques IMO. So while the idea certainly is intriguing, until they prove they can actually deliver without huge compromises, a little skepticism is probably healthy.
I use both contacts and glasses, depending on what I plan to do each day. I've had both on hand for two decades. If there's a chance I'll be playing sports, I'll wear contacts. When comfort is my only concern, I choose glasses. So when I'm playing 3D games, it's always glasses with 3D glasses on top. It's a total non-issue for me. Perhaps it's thanks to the size and shape of my glasses, but I find no practical difference between having them on or off when wearing 3D shutter glasses.
That's not to say that you shouldn't care of course, everyone is different. But the above is the experience of me and many others.
I say in again then, thats why I said it's a different storie with VR as you just have to use a device like that to get into the game so it's easy :)
But of course I put up with nvidia glasses as I havent an option yet so lets hope they will nail 3d glasses free this time around.
And nope I cant wear contacts, have tried out different pair this sommer but no one works with my astigmatism whitch is a damn shame, would love to get rid of my glasses.