Different between 3D vision 3D quality/effect vs 3DTV Play?
  2 / 2    
[quote="foreverseeking"]As for closeness to TV mentioned by both Airion and mbloof, this is completely a matter of preference. The further away you are from the screen the better the 3D effect looks imo. That seems to be why people playing crisis 2 on consoles thought the 3D was great, but people on PC's playing on a monitor up close thought it was terrible. [/quote] Certainly pop out will appear more amazing further back. If you have a still photo with something popping out apparently half way between you and the screen, it will appear that way whether you're 1 meter away (it pops out 50 cm) or 6 meters away (it pops out 3 meters!). Although I'd wager with a big screen and high FOV, the distinction between depth/pop out becomes less distinct...things just are where they are. Certainly if you hope to enjoy Crysis 2's 3D, your best bet is sitting as far away as possible! Even console gamers are split on reprojection 3D though.
foreverseeking said:As for closeness to TV mentioned by both Airion and mbloof, this is completely a matter of preference. The further away you are from the screen the better the 3D effect looks imo. That seems to be why people playing crisis 2 on consoles thought the 3D was great, but people on PC's playing on a monitor up close thought it was terrible.


Certainly pop out will appear more amazing further back. If you have a still photo with something popping out apparently half way between you and the screen, it will appear that way whether you're 1 meter away (it pops out 50 cm) or 6 meters away (it pops out 3 meters!). Although I'd wager with a big screen and high FOV, the distinction between depth/pop out becomes less distinct...things just are where they are.

Certainly if you hope to enjoy Crysis 2's 3D, your best bet is sitting as far away as possible! Even console gamers are split on reprojection 3D though.

#16
Posted 03/22/2013 10:54 AM   
Honestly, i have an 55" LG passive TV with 7.1 DTS ready surround sound. And beside that i have ASUS VG278H with good headset. Currently mine 55" is used for games like Tomb Raider, Batman, GTA etc... the games where input lag is not so important and of course 720p with passive is not so crisp quality picture when you can directly compare to the 1080p S3D /60p. But in FPS games you really can feel the difference between in the input lag in games like WOT, CS:S and Warface. So in my advice get them both. Or wait for an 55" TV with less input lag and good response time's and with new HDMI standard including 1080p/120Hz. Until that in my opinion on TV's the 3D is currently delivered to consumers in "half-way" mode. That's my experience....
Honestly,

i have an 55" LG passive TV with 7.1 DTS ready surround sound. And beside that i have ASUS VG278H with good headset. Currently mine 55" is used for games like Tomb Raider, Batman, GTA etc... the games where input lag is not so important and of course 720p with passive is not so crisp quality picture when you can directly compare to the 1080p S3D /60p. But in FPS games you really can feel the difference between in the input lag in games like WOT, CS:S and Warface. So in my advice get them both. Or wait for an 55" TV with less input lag and good response time's and with new HDMI standard including 1080p/120Hz.

Until that in my opinion on TV's the 3D is currently delivered to consumers in "half-way" mode.

That's my experience....

HW:
i7 3770K @ 4.6Hz on ASUS MAXIMUS V FORMULA together with G.Skill F3-2400C10D-8GTX
ASUS GTX 980ti DirectCU III in SLI paired with ASUS ROG Swift on DP 1.2
Rig is powered by Corsair AX850W
OS: Win8.1 Pro 64bit
Always on latest Gforce Drivers :)

#17
Posted 03/22/2013 01:15 PM   
[quote="RobertZomi"]Hi Frens, want to buy 3D Monitor or 3D TV this week, but b4 buy want to knw tht, 3D monitor with 3D vision kit it wil beter or 3D TV with 3D TV play driver give beter in 3D efect/quality? Which 1 give much beter 3D performance/Quality/effect? Thanks in advance.. [/quote] in a perfect world, you'd be able to try out each and every 3D gaming solution available, and see what you feel is the best, but too bad we're in the real world in which people will just throw their preferences at you. so, honestly and sincerely, just weight out your own preferences: big display size? (not resolution, not FOV, as per Field of View: on 100" TV screen, Lara's ponytail is "bigger," but not "more") or not wanting the ordeal of being "hunched over a desk with your face arms length to the monitor," laid back and game "comfortably"? or image quality or...what? best wishes and good luck:)
RobertZomi said:Hi Frens, want to buy 3D Monitor or 3D TV this week, but b4 buy want to knw tht, 3D monitor with 3D vision kit it wil beter or 3D TV with 3D TV play driver give beter in 3D efect/quality? Which 1 give much beter 3D performance/Quality/effect?

Thanks in advance..


in a perfect world, you'd be able to try out each and every 3D gaming solution available, and see what you feel is the best, but too bad we're in the real world in which people will just throw their preferences at you.

so, honestly and sincerely,
just weight out your own preferences:

big display size? (not resolution, not FOV, as per Field of View: on 100" TV screen, Lara's ponytail is "bigger," but not "more")

or not wanting the ordeal of being "hunched over a desk with your face arms length to the monitor," laid back and game "comfortably"?

or image quality

or...what?

best wishes and good luck:)

epenny size =/= nerdiness

#18
Posted 03/22/2013 03:08 PM   
@ALL Thanks Guys, realy u guys r helpfull. So my budgt is Rs40000(indian currency), and 2moro goin to buy 3D TV/3D monitor any1. Sugest me best 3D TV or 3D monitor. ? Thanks guys :)
@ALL

Thanks Guys, realy u guys r helpfull. So my budgt is Rs40000(indian currency), and 2moro goin to buy 3D TV/3D monitor any1. Sugest me best 3D TV or 3D monitor. ?

Thanks guys :)

#19
Posted 03/22/2013 04:14 PM   
Just make sure it's compatible with 3D Vision, we don't want to see you back here the day after '2moro' saying it doesn't work. :D
Just make sure it's compatible with 3D Vision, we don't want to see you back here the day after '2moro' saying it doesn't work. :D
#20
Posted 03/22/2013 04:41 PM   
I'm suggesting the ASUS VG278H. You get the whole package with 3D Vision 2 glasses and integrated emitter. HDMI 1.4a support. As a 27" it is probably as big as TN should go. I have a Benq XL2410T and I liked the flexible scaling and FPS mode. If the XL2420T monitors are good enough they are another option. I have not researched them.
I'm suggesting the ASUS VG278H.

You get the whole package with 3D Vision 2 glasses and integrated emitter.

HDMI 1.4a support.

As a 27" it is probably as big as TN should go.

I have a Benq XL2410T and I liked the flexible scaling and FPS mode.
If the XL2420T monitors are good enough they are another option. I have not researched them.

Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?

donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com

#21
Posted 03/22/2013 04:57 PM   
[quote="teardropmina"]too bad we're in the real world in which people will just throw their preferences at you.[/quote] Who was throwing what? where? I thought everyone was being subjective.
teardropmina said:too bad we're in the real world in which people will just throw their preferences at you.


Who was throwing what? where?

I thought everyone was being subjective.

#22
Posted 03/22/2013 05:02 PM   
Both plasma and LED HDTVs are unsuitable for 3D gaming. This is because you are limited to super ugly scaled 1280x720 resolution. With DLPs, you can use checkerboard mode and game at 1920x1080 native resolution, so disregard any advice that recommends using plasma or LED for 3D gaming, the picture quality is hideous. Use either DLP or a computer monitor.
Both plasma and LED HDTVs are unsuitable for 3D gaming. This is because you are limited to super ugly scaled 1280x720 resolution. With DLPs, you can use checkerboard mode and game at 1920x1080 native resolution, so disregard any advice that recommends using plasma or LED for 3D gaming, the picture quality is hideous. Use either DLP or a computer monitor.

#23
Posted 03/25/2013 04:40 AM   
[quote="seals328"]Both plasma and LED HDTVs are unsuitable for 3D gaming. This is because you are limited to super ugly scaled 1280x720 resolution. With DLPs, you can use[u] checkerboard mode and game at 1920x1080 native resolution[/u], so disregard any advice that recommends using plasma or LED for 3D gaming, the picture quality is hideous. Use either DLP or a computer monitor. [/quote] you mean 1920x1080 3D vision gaming; "native" means only for 1080p DLP? anyway, these couple of days, I had the chance to test out Benq W710ST DLP projector (720p) on 80" screen. games with excellent graphic such as Tomb Raider 2013, the 1280x720p 3D image quality is decent; games with only sub-par graphic, such as Prototype 2, the 720p 3D image is just unbearable~~"
seals328 said:Both plasma and LED HDTVs are unsuitable for 3D gaming. This is because you are limited to super ugly scaled 1280x720 resolution. With DLPs, you can use checkerboard mode and game at 1920x1080 native resolution, so disregard any advice that recommends using plasma or LED for 3D gaming, the picture quality is hideous. Use either DLP or a computer monitor.


you mean 1920x1080 3D vision gaming; "native" means only for 1080p DLP?

anyway, these couple of days, I had the chance to test out Benq W710ST DLP projector (720p) on 80" screen. games with excellent graphic such as Tomb Raider 2013, the 1280x720p 3D image quality is decent; games with only sub-par graphic, such as Prototype 2, the 720p 3D image is just unbearable~~"

epenny size =/= nerdiness

#24
Posted 03/25/2013 09:30 AM   
[quote="teardropmina"][quote="foreverseeking"] As for closeness to TV mentioned by both Airion and mbloof, this is completely a matter of preference. The further away you are from the screen the better the 3D effect looks imo. That seems to be why people playing crisis 2 on consoles thought the 3D was great, but people on PC's playing on a monitor up close thought it was terrible. [/quote] I hear you loudly and clear!!!! Yes, Crysis 3 3D really sucks, and its even worse than Crysis 2 3D, cause in C3 the cvars are locked and we can't try tweaking the config.cfg to get more depth. The maximum default depth in C3 depth is just to damn flat, it's horrible. Are you sure that Crysis 3 3D makes the graphics quality a bit worse than regular plain 2D? I thought that C3 3D graphical quality was the same as in 2D? this might be preference, but by my own experience, the fake 3D of Crysis 2& 3 simply lowers the overall image quality, from a distance they may look ok in 3D, but it's far inferior to the quality 2D image. this for me, itsn't worthy of playing in 3D, since 2D provides much better image quality. true 3D (native or after helix fix) titles on the other hand, actually have better image quality than standard 2D maxed out. Metro 2033 (ready) and Prototype 2 (Helix fix) for primary examples...and we both know how Alice Madness Returns turned out. my personal preference is up close and personal with highest depth and convergence possible in 3D surround: 3D effect and (close) image quality are equally important to me. [/quote] I hear you loudly and clear!!!! Yes, Crysis 3 3D really sucks, and its even worse than Crysis 2 3D, cause in C3 the cvars are locked and we can't try tweaking the config.cfg to get more depth. The maximum default depth in C3 depth is just to damn flat, it's horrible. Are you sure that Crysis 3 3D makes the graphics quality a bit worse than regular plain 2D? I thought that C3 3D graphical quality was the same as in 2D? I totally agree that every other game that we play in 3D, the graphical quality enhances a lot when we enable 3D, it's a huge quality difference. You pick games that have dated graphics like Dead Space 3 and when you enable 3D, the whole game experience changes, the graphics gets much much better, not just the immersion and 3D feeling, it's mainly the graphics that really enhance a lot. It really feels like the resolution of the game has doubled to say at least. So much more eye candy we get out of real 3D, it's big plus. On the other hand we can all see how bad is the 3D in Crysis 2&3, cause it's really fake. There's no change in graphics at all, it's just a 2D scenario pushed inside the screen, there's no volume, no 3D immersion, its so fake that it really bothers me. Crysis 3 may have the best 2D graphics to date, but to me I wasn't impressed at all, cause 100% of all games I've been playing since early 2009 were in real S3D thanks to 3D Vision, helix and others. When I enable 3D in Crysis 3, the game is still in 2D, there's no change at all, it's the same game with a gimmick 3D that only Crytek claims to be good and some other noobies that have never seen how real 3D looks like. A good example of how 3D is such a huge bonus for gaming and how much it adds to graphics and realism is to compare Crysis 3 and Dead Space 3 in 3D. Dead Space 3 has graphics that any 5 year old PC can run maxed out and Crysis 3 requires the best of the best up to date rig to run it maxed out. Once you enable 3D, Dead Space 3 looks amazing and it's whole different experience. Crysis 3 when you enable 3D, nothing changes, it's the same game with a fake sense of depth, just flat scenario in the background, just basic 2D graphics. You show these 2 games in 3D to anyone, and I assure you that everyone will be more amazed with Dead Space 3, and no one will pay attention to Crysis 3. I'm right now playing Crysis 3 in 3D and I'm not enjoying at all, I just want to finish the game, but there's big felling that something is missing out, and it's definatelly real S3D FOOTAGE. I don't get impressed with fantastic next generation 2D graphics anynmore like most PC gamers still do, I think I was spoiled by 3D Vision to much, I just don't care about 2D at all, doesn't impress me that much anymore. I would play Crysis 3 in plain 2D if quality is a little bit better than that fake 3D shit, but I just can't play any games without the sense of depth, plain 2D, so I keep fooling myself trying to play Crysis 3 in 3D. I remember how much fun I had playing Max Payne 3, Farcry 3 and Dead Space 3 in 3D. How many times I was just amazed staring a tree, a rock, a waterfall in 3D, how real it looked and when I'm playing Crysis 3 in 3D, I just keep realizing how bad the fake 3D is, there's no WOW, it's just 2D all the way, there's isn't 3D in the 1st place. It's all Fake ny friends... It's just sad that I can only imagine how amazing Crysis 3 would look like in real S3D??? It would be the best of the best of all 3D Vision games. Why da hell Crytek doesn't let modders try to enable real S3D in this game, what's the issue??? We would make sacrifices, turn off a few features, lower the quality a bit, turn off AA, but I am sure the game would look 3X more appealimg to anyone who are used to 3D gaming. I really don't get this stupid mentality that Crytek has towards to 3D. I am sure they've never played or payed to much attention to real S3D gaming. Their 3D tech is the biggest gimmick I've ever seem. It just gives a bad reputation to 3D.
teardropmina said:
foreverseeking said:

As for closeness to TV mentioned by both Airion and mbloof, this is completely a matter of preference. The further away you are from the screen the better the 3D effect looks imo. That seems to be why people playing crisis 2 on consoles thought the 3D was great, but people on PC's playing on a monitor up close thought it was terrible.






I hear you loudly and clear!!!! Yes, Crysis 3 3D really sucks, and its even worse than Crysis 2 3D, cause in C3 the cvars are locked and we can't try tweaking the config.cfg to get more depth. The maximum default depth in C3 depth is just to damn flat, it's horrible.
Are you sure that Crysis 3 3D makes the graphics quality a bit worse than regular plain 2D? I thought that C3 3D graphical quality was the same as in 2D?


this might be preference, but by my own experience, the fake 3D of Crysis 2& 3 simply lowers the overall image quality, from a distance they may look ok in 3D, but it's far inferior to the quality 2D image. this for me, itsn't worthy of playing in 3D, since 2D provides much better image quality.
true 3D (native or after helix fix) titles on the other hand, actually have better image quality than standard 2D maxed out. Metro 2033 (ready) and Prototype 2 (Helix fix) for primary examples...and we both know how Alice Madness Returns turned out.

my personal preference is up close and personal with highest depth and convergence possible in 3D surround: 3D effect and (close) image quality are equally important to me.



I hear you loudly and clear!!!! Yes, Crysis 3 3D really sucks, and its even worse than Crysis 2 3D, cause in C3 the cvars are locked and we can't try tweaking the config.cfg to get more depth. The maximum default depth in C3 depth is just to damn flat, it's horrible.
Are you sure that Crysis 3 3D makes the graphics quality a bit worse than regular plain 2D? I thought that C3 3D graphical quality was the same as in 2D?

I totally agree that every other game that we play in 3D, the graphical quality enhances a lot when we enable 3D, it's a huge quality difference. You pick games that have dated graphics like Dead Space 3 and when you enable 3D, the whole game experience changes, the graphics gets much much better, not just the immersion and 3D feeling, it's mainly the graphics that really enhance a lot.
It really feels like the resolution of the game has doubled to say at least. So much more eye candy we get out of real 3D, it's big plus.

On the other hand we can all see how bad is the 3D in Crysis 2&3, cause it's really fake. There's no change in graphics at all, it's just a 2D scenario pushed inside the screen, there's no volume, no 3D immersion, its so fake that it really bothers me.
Crysis 3 may have the best 2D graphics to date, but to me I wasn't impressed at all, cause 100% of all games I've been playing since early 2009 were in real S3D thanks to 3D Vision, helix and others. When I enable 3D in Crysis 3, the game is still in 2D, there's no change at all, it's the same game with a gimmick 3D that only Crytek claims to be good and some other noobies that have never seen how real 3D looks like.

A good example of how 3D is such a huge bonus for gaming and how much it adds to graphics and realism is to compare Crysis 3 and Dead Space 3 in 3D.
Dead Space 3 has graphics that any 5 year old PC can run maxed out and Crysis 3 requires the best of the best up to date rig to run it maxed out. Once you enable 3D, Dead Space 3 looks amazing and it's whole different experience. Crysis 3 when you enable 3D, nothing changes, it's the same game with a fake sense of depth, just flat scenario in the background, just basic 2D graphics.

You show these 2 games in 3D to anyone, and I assure you that everyone will be more amazed with Dead Space 3, and no one will pay attention to Crysis 3.

I'm right now playing Crysis 3 in 3D and I'm not enjoying at all, I just want to finish the game, but there's big felling that something is missing out, and it's definatelly real S3D FOOTAGE.
I don't get impressed with fantastic next generation 2D graphics anynmore like most PC gamers still do, I think I was spoiled by 3D Vision to much, I just don't care about 2D at all, doesn't impress me that much anymore.

I would play Crysis 3 in plain 2D if quality is a little bit better than that fake 3D shit, but I just can't play any games without the sense of depth, plain 2D, so I keep fooling myself trying to play Crysis 3 in 3D. I remember how much fun I had playing Max Payne 3, Farcry 3 and Dead Space 3 in 3D. How many times I was just amazed staring a tree, a rock, a waterfall in 3D, how real it looked and when I'm playing Crysis 3 in 3D, I just keep realizing how bad the fake 3D is, there's no WOW, it's just 2D all the way, there's isn't 3D in the 1st place. It's all Fake ny friends...

It's just sad that I can only imagine how amazing Crysis 3 would look like in real S3D??? It would be the best of the best of all 3D Vision games. Why da hell Crytek doesn't let modders try to enable real S3D in this game, what's the issue??? We would make sacrifices, turn off a few features, lower the quality a bit, turn off AA, but I am sure the game would look 3X more appealimg to anyone who are used to 3D gaming. I really don't get this stupid mentality that Crytek has towards to 3D. I am sure they've never played or payed to much attention to real S3D gaming. Their 3D tech is the biggest gimmick I've ever seem. It just gives a bad reputation to 3D.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bits - Core i7 2600K @ 4.5ghz - Asus Maximus IV Extreme Z68 - Geforce EVGA GTX 690 - 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 9-9-9-24 (2T) - Thermaltake Armor+ - SSD Intel 510 Series Sata3 256GB - HD WD Caviar Black Sata3 64mb 2TB - HD WD Caviar Black 1TB Sata3 64mb - Bose Sound System - LG H20L GGW Blu Ray/DVD/CD RW - LG GH20 DVD RAM - PSU Thermaltake Toughpower 1000W - Samsung S27A950D 3D Vision Ready + 3D HDTV SAMSUNG PL63C7000 3DTVPLAY + ROLLERMOD CHECKERBOARD

#25
Posted 03/25/2013 03:21 PM   
I suppose it comes down to what you can or can't see. When I bought my set it was displayed between 2 1080P sets. I could not tell the difference. Most agree that unless your sitting very close you can't tell the difference between 1080P and 720P. When it comes to 3D my set has a 'native resolution' of 1024x768 so no matter what I feed it the picture gets 'scaled'. While 1080i 3D looks much sharper than 720P, I'd rather have 60FPS then the 24FPS 1080i gives me. IMHO 720P 3D on my 43" plasma still blows away the looks of anything on the POS VG236 collecting dust in my spare bedroom. That's not to say that some may have VG236's that look/perform 'fine' or to say that the rare 'checkerboard' format may in some cases look better. I may never buy another passive (or active) 3D LCD screen but that does not mean it does not have its uses and others enjoy it. While one format may perform better it does not invalidate the other formats or other peoples enjoyment of them.
I suppose it comes down to what you can or can't see.

When I bought my set it was displayed between 2 1080P sets. I could not tell the difference. Most agree that unless your sitting very close you can't tell the difference between 1080P and 720P.

When it comes to 3D my set has a 'native resolution' of 1024x768 so no matter what I feed it the picture gets 'scaled'. While 1080i 3D looks much sharper than 720P, I'd rather have 60FPS then the 24FPS 1080i gives me. IMHO 720P 3D on my 43" plasma still blows away the looks of anything on the POS VG236 collecting dust in my spare bedroom.

That's not to say that some may have VG236's that look/perform 'fine' or to say that the rare 'checkerboard' format may in some cases look better. I may never buy another passive (or active) 3D LCD screen but that does not mean it does not have its uses and others enjoy it. While one format may perform better it does not invalidate the other formats or other peoples enjoyment of them.

i7-2600K-4.5Ghz/Corsair H100i/8GB/GTX780SC-SLI/Win7-64/1200W-PSU/Samsung 840-500GB SSD/Coolermaster-Tower/Benq 1080ST @ 100"

#26
Posted 03/25/2013 04:08 PM   
  2 / 2    
Scroll To Top