Is this ghosting normal? Is this amount of ghosting expected or do I have something wrong?
Hello, I only got my 3D glasses on Monday which I'm using through my GTX570 on a Samsung 2233... I seem to be getting some noticeable ghosting but I'm not really sure if it's normal or not.
I've read through lots of threads on here where people have talked about their ghosting issues but mine appears to be the entire screen and both eyes so not sure if it's just how it is.
I've taken a couple of photographs through each eye that illustrate the problem. For these I've got it set to 120Hz, 15% depth and I've turned the brightness and contrast on the monitor both down to 20 but it is still really noticeable...
This example is of the lights in the Devil May Cry 4 second photo that comes with the Photo Viewer... I have similar issues in all of the other photographs and in games but these two seemed to come out best.
I've tried different depths, different refresh rates, etc. but they don't seem to make any difference.
If someone could please let me know if this is just normality or if there is something genuinely wrong, that would be sincerely appreciated.
Hello, I only got my 3D glasses on Monday which I'm using through my GTX570 on a Samsung 2233... I seem to be getting some noticeable ghosting but I'm not really sure if it's normal or not.
I've read through lots of threads on here where people have talked about their ghosting issues but mine appears to be the entire screen and both eyes so not sure if it's just how it is.
I've taken a couple of photographs through each eye that illustrate the problem. For these I've got it set to 120Hz, 15% depth and I've turned the brightness and contrast on the monitor both down to 20 but it is still really noticeable...
This example is of the lights in the Devil May Cry 4 second photo that comes with the Photo Viewer... I have similar issues in all of the other photographs and in games but these two seemed to come out best.
I've tried different depths, different refresh rates, etc. but they don't seem to make any difference.
If someone could please let me know if this is just normality or if there is something genuinely wrong, that would be sincerely appreciated.
[quote name='ERP' date='18 February 2011 - 07:24 PM' timestamp='1298057097' post='1195558']
Looks pretty normal to me for areas of high contrast.
[/quote]
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately./spaz.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':spaz:' />
[b]Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.[/b]
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. [b]Ghosting for me is intolerable![/b] I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
[quote name='ERP' date='18 February 2011 - 07:24 PM' timestamp='1298057097' post='1195558']
Looks pretty normal to me for areas of high contrast.
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately./spaz.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':spaz:' />
Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. Ghosting for me is intolerable! I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.[img]http://forums.nvidia.com/public/style_emoticons/default/spaz.gif[/img]
[b]Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.[/b]
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. [b]Ghosting for me is intolerable![/b] I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
[/quote]
Your post didn't help Tommy for one bit...
Ghosting is normal with the Rz2233 and some games have more ghosting then others....
[quote name='duhn' date='18 February 2011 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1298066919' post='1195630']
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.
Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. Ghosting for me is intolerable! I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
Your post didn't help Tommy for one bit...
Ghosting is normal with the Rz2233 and some games have more ghosting then others....
Intel I7 3820 3.8 Ghz,MSI MS7760 Motherboard, 6GB )2x MSI GTX670 (SLI),OCZ Vertex 230Gb SSD,OCZ Agility 120Gb SSD, Asus 3D VG278HR ,Optoma HD67 3D DLP Beamer with 95inch 2.5 gain screen.
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
[quote name='ERP' date='18 February 2011 - 11:28 PM' timestamp='1298071721' post='1195665']
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
[/quote]
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
[b]In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.[/b]
[quote name='ERP' date='18 February 2011 - 11:28 PM' timestamp='1298071721' post='1195665']
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAQh6bREFqM
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
[b]This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).[/b]
[size="1"](me likey bold stuff)[/size]
[quote name='Nick7' date='21 February 2011 - 08:56 AM' timestamp='1298278603' post='1196630']
Here we go again.
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAQh6bREFqM
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
[b]This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).[/b]
[size="1"](me likey bold stuff)[/size]
[/quote]
This could be fixed by the method I wrote. No?
[quote name='duhn' date='20 February 2011 - 08:43 PM' timestamp='1298263393' post='1196555']
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
[b]In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.[/b]
[/quote]
You lose 50% off the top because the glasses lens are polarized.
If the lens just alternated you woud be at 25%.
In practice both lens are off for a percentage of the frame so you end up with ~16% - I think Bloody actually measured the transmission on the 3D vision blog a while bcak.
[quote name='duhn' date='20 February 2011 - 08:43 PM' timestamp='1298263393' post='1196555']
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.
You lose 50% off the top because the glasses lens are polarized.
If the lens just alternated you woud be at 25%.
In practice both lens are off for a percentage of the frame so you end up with ~16% - I think Bloody actually measured the transmission on the 3D vision blog a while bcak.
I've read through lots of threads on here where people have talked about their ghosting issues but mine appears to be the entire screen and both eyes so not sure if it's just how it is.
I've taken a couple of photographs through each eye that illustrate the problem. For these I've got it set to 120Hz, 15% depth and I've turned the brightness and contrast on the monitor both down to 20 but it is still really noticeable...
[url="http://i55.tinypic.com/2nsqtyg.jpg"]Left Eye[/url]
[url="http://i55.tinypic.com/2u4hiso.jpg"]Right Eye[/url]
This example is of the lights in the Devil May Cry 4 second photo that comes with the Photo Viewer... I have similar issues in all of the other photographs and in games but these two seemed to come out best.
I've tried different depths, different refresh rates, etc. but they don't seem to make any difference.
If someone could please let me know if this is just normality or if there is something genuinely wrong, that would be sincerely appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Tommy
I've read through lots of threads on here where people have talked about their ghosting issues but mine appears to be the entire screen and both eyes so not sure if it's just how it is.
I've taken a couple of photographs through each eye that illustrate the problem. For these I've got it set to 120Hz, 15% depth and I've turned the brightness and contrast on the monitor both down to 20 but it is still really noticeable...
Left Eye
Right Eye
This example is of the lights in the Devil May Cry 4 second photo that comes with the Photo Viewer... I have similar issues in all of the other photographs and in games but these two seemed to come out best.
I've tried different depths, different refresh rates, etc. but they don't seem to make any difference.
If someone could please let me know if this is just normality or if there is something genuinely wrong, that would be sincerely appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Tommy
My Blog
Nothing wrong with your setup ...
There are coming better LCD´s this year.. so save up some money ...
The new ACER 27" with a built in transmitter should "almost" get rid of the ghosting ...
I personally think it wont be gone before the 3rd generation of screns appear SADLY ... :0)
PS. And maybe Nvidia soon will get their fingers out there A.., and make some better 3D classes ;0)
Nothing wrong with your setup ...
There are coming better LCD´s this year.. so save up some money ...
The new ACER 27" with a built in transmitter should "almost" get rid of the ghosting ...
I personally think it wont be gone before the 3rd generation of screns appear SADLY ... :0)
PS. And maybe Nvidia soon will get their fingers out there A.., and make some better 3D classes ;0)
Looks pretty normal to me for areas of high contrast.
[/quote]
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.
[b]Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.[/b]
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. [b]Ghosting for me is intolerable![/b] I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
Looks pretty normal to me for areas of high contrast.
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.
Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. Ghosting for me is intolerable! I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
If you go read the reviews of 3D monitors over at 3DVision blog, he does some pretty extensive ghosting comparisons of the monitors available.
The new Planar 24 inch and the new Acer 27 inch do a lot better than the current panels, bu they are not ghosting free.
You can reduce the issue by reducing contrast and brightness, but given the loss of brightness in 3D it's usually not a viable solution.
DLP projectors are probably about as close as you can get to ghost free for time sequential 3D displays as of right now, but your limited to 720P.
The technology is what it is, if you don't like it, don't buy it.
If you go read the reviews of 3D monitors over at 3DVision blog, he does some pretty extensive ghosting comparisons of the monitors available.
The new Planar 24 inch and the new Acer 27 inch do a lot better than the current panels, bu they are not ghosting free.
You can reduce the issue by reducing contrast and brightness, but given the loss of brightness in 3D it's usually not a viable solution.
DLP projectors are probably about as close as you can get to ghost free for time sequential 3D displays as of right now, but your limited to 720P.
The technology is what it is, if you don't like it, don't buy it.
My Blog
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.[img]http://forums.nvidia.com/public/style_emoticons/default/spaz.gif[/img]
[b]Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.[/b]
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. [b]Ghosting for me is intolerable![/b] I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
[/quote]
Your post didn't help Tommy for one bit...
Ghosting is normal with the Rz2233 and some games have more ghosting then others....
Pretty normal?!
That is the most idiotic assumption I have seen lately.
Doesn't nvidia know that to remove ghosting there must be an option to control how much time both eyes are closed in between frames? You know that the response time in an lcd might be 2 to 5 ms and the shutter glasses also have a response time. If drivers do not take in account this response time (display and glasses), ghosting will appear.
I wonder If quadro cards have this option? They must have, people are buying 10 times expensive cards for the software and they have ghosting? No way.
Besides, Opengl is supported only in quadro.
Geforce 3d software drivers are crap. Ghosting for me is intolerable! I want my money back, or if I buy a quadro it will go away?
Please answer.
Thanks
Edit: There is nothing wrong with your display, tommy, the solution is in the software not the display as I stated before in this post (and that workaround is not the only software solution to the problem).
Your post didn't help Tommy for one bit...
Ghosting is normal with the Rz2233 and some games have more ghosting then others....
Intel I7 3820 3.8 Ghz,MSI MS7760 Motherboard, 6GB )2x MSI GTX670 (SLI),OCZ Vertex 230Gb SSD,OCZ Agility 120Gb SSD, Asus 3D VG278HR ,Optoma HD67 3D DLP Beamer with 95inch 2.5 gain screen.
And some games don't have more ghosting than others -> high contrast games have more, less contrast games have less.
And some games don't have more ghosting than others -> high contrast games have more, less contrast games have less.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
My Blog
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
[/quote]
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
[b]In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.[/b]
It's a trade off though, at 8ms/frame if the pixels take 5ms to settle and the glasses take 2ms to transition.
You end up with insufficient brighness, of the order of 6% transmission on the glasses.
As it is with ~16% transmission it's borderline bright enough.
I do think it would be nice if nvidia let you adjust the glasses timings, mostly for those suffering from USB timing issues that literally have double images over portions of their screen.
But to assume in general they did a crappy job of timing the monitor, and a ghost free super bright experience is just a few tweaks away is pretty naive
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAQh6bREFqM
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
[b]This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).[/b]
[size="1"](me likey bold stuff)[/size]
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check:
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).
(me likey bold stuff)
Here we go again.
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAQh6bREFqM
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
[b]This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).[/b]
[size="1"](me likey bold stuff)[/size]
[/quote]
This could be fixed by the method I wrote. No?
Here we go again.
It's because whole screen is *not* redrawn at once.
Check:
As you see there's only a fraction of time you have 'static' frame.
This is why you cannot have 38% transmission on current hardware (monitors).
(me likey bold stuff)
This could be fixed by the method I wrote. No?
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
[b]In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.[/b]
[/quote]
You lose 50% off the top because the glasses lens are polarized.
If the lens just alternated you woud be at 25%.
In practice both lens are off for a percentage of the frame so you end up with ~16% - I think Bloody actually measured the transmission on the 3D vision blog a while bcak.
I thought that as it is you ended with 50% transmission not ~16 as you say, why 16%? So they do take account with 2ms glass transition?=38% transmission at 120hz.
So at 120hz we have 8.3(3)ms if we take 5ms (from the screen), we stay with 3.3(3)ms witch is 19,8% transmission. If we take the 2ms more from the glasses wee stay with 1.3(3)ms, witch is ~8% transmission, now we can put the brightness to the max, we can only see the screen but no ghosting at all, and if we can adjust this, better.
But as I said, this is the easiest way to implement no ghosting, there is another way:
In the frame that you are seeing with one eye add the inverse of the previous frame from the other eye, with control from the user of this inverse additive frame, with blend percent, brightness, contrast and gamma curves to match the settings the user have on the monitor (should exist a test screen were the user use the glasses and adjust these parameters is order to have no ghosting). With this approach you will have 38% transmission and no ghosting, of course calibrating this is not a simple task that everybody can do.
You lose 50% off the top because the glasses lens are polarized.
If the lens just alternated you woud be at 25%.
In practice both lens are off for a percentage of the frame so you end up with ~16% - I think Bloody actually measured the transmission on the 3D vision blog a while bcak.
My Blog