Nvidia suggesting low depth use for PC games?
  2 / 3    
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.

Image

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.

#16
Posted 01/11/2012 07:44 PM   
I've got to say i'm a 50%'er over here. i can go higher but it tires my eyes after a while. I have a friend who cant go beyond 20% without experiencing headaches though! Think he sold his display in the end :(
I've got to say i'm a 50%'er over here. i can go higher but it tires my eyes after a while. I have a friend who cant go beyond 20% without experiencing headaches though! Think he sold his display in the end :(

#17
Posted 01/11/2012 08:22 PM   
I've got to say i'm a 50%'er over here. i can go higher but it tires my eyes after a while. I have a friend who cant go beyond 20% without experiencing headaches though! Think he sold his display in the end :(
I've got to say i'm a 50%'er over here. i can go higher but it tires my eyes after a while. I have a friend who cant go beyond 20% without experiencing headaches though! Think he sold his display in the end :(

#18
Posted 01/11/2012 08:22 PM   
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...

I tend to wonder if discomfort caused by 3D is due more to variances in depth while configuring your settings, with new user's brains having a hard time figuring out how to "solve" for those adjustments. On the other hand i hear a lot of people talk about film causing discomfort, although there are more of them in the forums im on. Movies are said to shift the primary scene elements to screen depth from scene to scene to minimize crosstalk, thats a hell of lot of depth changes. I've gamed for over 500 hours with ZERO discomfort, for probably 12 hours at a time (damn you bad company 2) and while watching Hugo Cabret the other day, i felt some weird sensations going on that was borderline discomfort.

I think showing people (devs and producers especially) the FULL 3D effect first is the best idea along with a reminder that any eye strain they might experience should go away eventually. [b]Showing them 50% depth and saying, "Here ya go, thats 3D, so what do ya think?!", would be a huge mistake IMO, not that they do that. [/b]

In my opinion the moving 3D demo should be static with subject matter everyone knows the size of. Like a car or a city street scene out of "Legend" or a column of soldiers you stand next to. I hope Nvidia experiments with having new users configure their settings more quickly and jumping into higher depth amounts right away.
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...



I tend to wonder if discomfort caused by 3D is due more to variances in depth while configuring your settings, with new user's brains having a hard time figuring out how to "solve" for those adjustments. On the other hand i hear a lot of people talk about film causing discomfort, although there are more of them in the forums im on. Movies are said to shift the primary scene elements to screen depth from scene to scene to minimize crosstalk, thats a hell of lot of depth changes. I've gamed for over 500 hours with ZERO discomfort, for probably 12 hours at a time (damn you bad company 2) and while watching Hugo Cabret the other day, i felt some weird sensations going on that was borderline discomfort.



I think showing people (devs and producers especially) the FULL 3D effect first is the best idea along with a reminder that any eye strain they might experience should go away eventually. Showing them 50% depth and saying, "Here ya go, thats 3D, so what do ya think?!", would be a huge mistake IMO, not that they do that.



In my opinion the moving 3D demo should be static with subject matter everyone knows the size of. Like a car or a city street scene out of "Legend" or a column of soldiers you stand next to. I hope Nvidia experiments with having new users configure their settings more quickly and jumping into higher depth amounts right away.

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

#19
Posted 01/11/2012 09:30 PM   
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...

I tend to wonder if discomfort caused by 3D is due more to variances in depth while configuring your settings, with new user's brains having a hard time figuring out how to "solve" for those adjustments. On the other hand i hear a lot of people talk about film causing discomfort, although there are more of them in the forums im on. Movies are said to shift the primary scene elements to screen depth from scene to scene to minimize crosstalk, thats a hell of lot of depth changes. I've gamed for over 500 hours with ZERO discomfort, for probably 12 hours at a time (damn you bad company 2) and while watching Hugo Cabret the other day, i felt some weird sensations going on that was borderline discomfort.

I think showing people (devs and producers especially) the FULL 3D effect first is the best idea along with a reminder that any eye strain they might experience should go away eventually. [b]Showing them 50% depth and saying, "Here ya go, thats 3D, so what do ya think?!", would be a huge mistake IMO, not that they do that. [/b]

In my opinion the moving 3D demo should be static with subject matter everyone knows the size of. Like a car or a city street scene out of "Legend" or a column of soldiers you stand next to. I hope Nvidia experiments with having new users configure their settings more quickly and jumping into higher depth amounts right away.
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...



I tend to wonder if discomfort caused by 3D is due more to variances in depth while configuring your settings, with new user's brains having a hard time figuring out how to "solve" for those adjustments. On the other hand i hear a lot of people talk about film causing discomfort, although there are more of them in the forums im on. Movies are said to shift the primary scene elements to screen depth from scene to scene to minimize crosstalk, thats a hell of lot of depth changes. I've gamed for over 500 hours with ZERO discomfort, for probably 12 hours at a time (damn you bad company 2) and while watching Hugo Cabret the other day, i felt some weird sensations going on that was borderline discomfort.



I think showing people (devs and producers especially) the FULL 3D effect first is the best idea along with a reminder that any eye strain they might experience should go away eventually. Showing them 50% depth and saying, "Here ya go, thats 3D, so what do ya think?!", would be a huge mistake IMO, not that they do that.



In my opinion the moving 3D demo should be static with subject matter everyone knows the size of. Like a car or a city street scene out of "Legend" or a column of soldiers you stand next to. I hope Nvidia experiments with having new users configure their settings more quickly and jumping into higher depth amounts right away.

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

#20
Posted 01/11/2012 09:30 PM   
[quote name='Likay' date='11 January 2012 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1326309582' post='1354707']
To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
[/quote]
!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!

Libertine, are you sure you measured precisely? That's not a terribly easy thing to do.

I agree with the main point, though. Having high depth makes objects appear far away and allows big objects to feel big. There are exceptions where the true size of the objects in play is so big that pretty much everything will be beyond what triangulation can measure accurately (perhaps a space game with fleets of mile-long ships) but, when there's a human as the main character, I aim for "true depth."

I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.
[quote name='Likay' date='11 January 2012 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1326309582' post='1354707']

To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.



!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!



Libertine, are you sure you measured precisely? That's not a terribly easy thing to do.



I agree with the main point, though. Having high depth makes objects appear far away and allows big objects to feel big. There are exceptions where the true size of the objects in play is so big that pretty much everything will be beyond what triangulation can measure accurately (perhaps a space game with fleets of mile-long ships) but, when there's a human as the main character, I aim for "true depth."



I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.

#21
Posted 01/12/2012 03:58 AM   
[quote name='Likay' date='11 January 2012 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1326309582' post='1354707']
To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.
[/quote]
!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!

Libertine, are you sure you measured precisely? That's not a terribly easy thing to do.

I agree with the main point, though. Having high depth makes objects appear far away and allows big objects to feel big. There are exceptions where the true size of the objects in play is so big that pretty much everything will be beyond what triangulation can measure accurately (perhaps a space game with fleets of mile-long ships) but, when there's a human as the main character, I aim for "true depth."

I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.
[quote name='Likay' date='11 January 2012 - 01:19 PM' timestamp='1326309582' post='1354707']

To view the scene your eyes have to converge outwards which most people cannot do.



!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!



Libertine, are you sure you measured precisely? That's not a terribly easy thing to do.



I agree with the main point, though. Having high depth makes objects appear far away and allows big objects to feel big. There are exceptions where the true size of the objects in play is so big that pretty much everything will be beyond what triangulation can measure accurately (perhaps a space game with fleets of mile-long ships) but, when there's a human as the main character, I aim for "true depth."



I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.

#22
Posted 01/12/2012 03:58 AM   
[quote name='Zloth' date='11 January 2012 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1326340681' post='1354888']
!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!

I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.
[/quote]

Yeah same here. Was playing Arkham Asylum on 75% depth and no convergence tweaks and thought it was incredible. Pretty soon though most games felt shallow at those settings.

I've mentioned before that the first time I fired up 3D vision I instantly had a sharp pain between my eyes that lasted 30 seconds, and from that point on I've never had a problem of any kind.
[quote name='Zloth' date='11 January 2012 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1326340681' post='1354888']

!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!



I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.





Yeah same here. Was playing Arkham Asylum on 75% depth and no convergence tweaks and thought it was incredible. Pretty soon though most games felt shallow at those settings.



I've mentioned before that the first time I fired up 3D vision I instantly had a sharp pain between my eyes that lasted 30 seconds, and from that point on I've never had a problem of any kind.

|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

#23
Posted 01/12/2012 01:46 PM   
[quote name='Zloth' date='11 January 2012 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1326340681' post='1354888']
!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!

I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.
[/quote]

Yeah same here. Was playing Arkham Asylum on 75% depth and no convergence tweaks and thought it was incredible. Pretty soon though most games felt shallow at those settings.

I've mentioned before that the first time I fired up 3D vision I instantly had a sharp pain between my eyes that lasted 30 seconds, and from that point on I've never had a problem of any kind.
[quote name='Zloth' date='11 January 2012 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1326340681' post='1354888']

!!! Even if they do, the triangulation is going to tell you that the object is BEHIND your head!



I'm not so sure about new users. When I first got 3D Vision I left it at the defaults and thought it was awesome. It took a week or so before I started noticing that other characters in games tended to look like animated cardboard cutouts.





Yeah same here. Was playing Arkham Asylum on 75% depth and no convergence tweaks and thought it was incredible. Pretty soon though most games felt shallow at those settings.



I've mentioned before that the first time I fired up 3D vision I instantly had a sharp pain between my eyes that lasted 30 seconds, and from that point on I've never had a problem of any kind.

|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

#24
Posted 01/12/2012 01:46 PM   
[quote name='Libertine' date='11 January 2012 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1326317457' post='1354764']
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...
[/quote]
Well a big caveat to that is that you've already configured the settings for them, and I think the bigger risk for high depth defaults for new users is that you have out-of-focus objects AND a lot of separation if you don't know how to fix convergence which can be a negative experience for sure. I remember having a lot of problems with this when I first got 3D Vision for games that didn't have an accurate 3D Vision profile for starting convergence settings and only after I figured out how to tweak convergence was I fully satisfied with my 3D Vision purchase decision.

Also, I still have issues with some games at very high depth because it makes it harder to re-focus on 2D HUD elements at screen depth. If you ignore the HUD elements or don't reference them a lot then its less bothersome, but this is without a doubt my #1 issue with very high depth settings in the vast majority of games that prevent me from going higher on Depth all the time. Typically I do stay ~40-60% Depth and then max out Convergence so that the main focus in the scene is at or near screen depth, objects closer seem like they pop-out. Not only does this give a good mix of depth and pop-out, it also makes 2D screen elements much less bothersome to shift focus to and from.

But if I did have a single complaint about the recommendations Nvidia makes to developers, 2D UI/HUD elements would be it. According to their 3D best-practices whitepaper, they do recommend devs render their UI/HUD elements in 2D or at screen depth still, but obviously recommend crosshairs and mouse cursors rendered at target depth in 3D. Personally, I think having these HUD elements sunk into the screen is the best approach; a variety of games has done this in the past and Trine 2 has probably done it the best overall. This allows the user to shift focus more comfortably between objects far into the scene to their UI much more comfortably in 3D. Adjustable amounts would be ideal, but perhaps ~20-25% of overall max depth would be a good place to start.

I think this is also something Nvidia can implement in their 3D profile for some games, but not sure about it. I do remember SC2 for example they were able to selectively render HUD elements in 2D/3D. When the game first came out with no 3D Vision profile, the HUD and HUD unit portrait were both in 3D. The first 3D Vision profile patch changed both the HUD and portrait to 2D to fix some of the issues with the HUD in 3D.
[quote name='Libertine' date='11 January 2012 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1326317457' post='1354764']

Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...



Well a big caveat to that is that you've already configured the settings for them, and I think the bigger risk for high depth defaults for new users is that you have out-of-focus objects AND a lot of separation if you don't know how to fix convergence which can be a negative experience for sure. I remember having a lot of problems with this when I first got 3D Vision for games that didn't have an accurate 3D Vision profile for starting convergence settings and only after I figured out how to tweak convergence was I fully satisfied with my 3D Vision purchase decision.



Also, I still have issues with some games at very high depth because it makes it harder to re-focus on 2D HUD elements at screen depth. If you ignore the HUD elements or don't reference them a lot then its less bothersome, but this is without a doubt my #1 issue with very high depth settings in the vast majority of games that prevent me from going higher on Depth all the time. Typically I do stay ~40-60% Depth and then max out Convergence so that the main focus in the scene is at or near screen depth, objects closer seem like they pop-out. Not only does this give a good mix of depth and pop-out, it also makes 2D screen elements much less bothersome to shift focus to and from.



But if I did have a single complaint about the recommendations Nvidia makes to developers, 2D UI/HUD elements would be it. According to their 3D best-practices whitepaper, they do recommend devs render their UI/HUD elements in 2D or at screen depth still, but obviously recommend crosshairs and mouse cursors rendered at target depth in 3D. Personally, I think having these HUD elements sunk into the screen is the best approach; a variety of games has done this in the past and Trine 2 has probably done it the best overall. This allows the user to shift focus more comfortably between objects far into the scene to their UI much more comfortably in 3D. Adjustable amounts would be ideal, but perhaps ~20-25% of overall max depth would be a good place to start.



I think this is also something Nvidia can implement in their 3D profile for some games, but not sure about it. I do remember SC2 for example they were able to selectively render HUD elements in 2D/3D. When the game first came out with no 3D Vision profile, the HUD and HUD unit portrait were both in 3D. The first 3D Vision profile patch changed both the HUD and portrait to 2D to fix some of the issues with the HUD in 3D.

-=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

#25
Posted 01/12/2012 04:55 PM   
[quote name='Libertine' date='11 January 2012 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1326317457' post='1354764']
Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...
[/quote]
Well a big caveat to that is that you've already configured the settings for them, and I think the bigger risk for high depth defaults for new users is that you have out-of-focus objects AND a lot of separation if you don't know how to fix convergence which can be a negative experience for sure. I remember having a lot of problems with this when I first got 3D Vision for games that didn't have an accurate 3D Vision profile for starting convergence settings and only after I figured out how to tweak convergence was I fully satisfied with my 3D Vision purchase decision.

Also, I still have issues with some games at very high depth because it makes it harder to re-focus on 2D HUD elements at screen depth. If you ignore the HUD elements or don't reference them a lot then its less bothersome, but this is without a doubt my #1 issue with very high depth settings in the vast majority of games that prevent me from going higher on Depth all the time. Typically I do stay ~40-60% Depth and then max out Convergence so that the main focus in the scene is at or near screen depth, objects closer seem like they pop-out. Not only does this give a good mix of depth and pop-out, it also makes 2D screen elements much less bothersome to shift focus to and from.

But if I did have a single complaint about the recommendations Nvidia makes to developers, 2D UI/HUD elements would be it. According to their 3D best-practices whitepaper, they do recommend devs render their UI/HUD elements in 2D or at screen depth still, but obviously recommend crosshairs and mouse cursors rendered at target depth in 3D. Personally, I think having these HUD elements sunk into the screen is the best approach; a variety of games has done this in the past and Trine 2 has probably done it the best overall. This allows the user to shift focus more comfortably between objects far into the scene to their UI much more comfortably in 3D. Adjustable amounts would be ideal, but perhaps ~20-25% of overall max depth would be a good place to start.

I think this is also something Nvidia can implement in their 3D profile for some games, but not sure about it. I do remember SC2 for example they were able to selectively render HUD elements in 2D/3D. When the game first came out with no 3D Vision profile, the HUD and HUD unit portrait were both in 3D. The first 3D Vision profile patch changed both the HUD and portrait to 2D to fix some of the issues with the HUD in 3D.
[quote name='Libertine' date='11 January 2012 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1326317457' post='1354764']

Well, im a little unconvinced that 50% depth is a good beginning target. I've shown three friends and two family members 3D, with my full 3D settings(depth and maximum and convergence setting to make the fps gun look like its right in front of you) and not a one of them had eye-strain. Each of them played between a half-hour and an hour and a half. On top of that, i don't remember any discussions or even mentions of 3D discomfort on the 3d Vision forums. EDIT: except for the new post above i missed while typing this...



Well a big caveat to that is that you've already configured the settings for them, and I think the bigger risk for high depth defaults for new users is that you have out-of-focus objects AND a lot of separation if you don't know how to fix convergence which can be a negative experience for sure. I remember having a lot of problems with this when I first got 3D Vision for games that didn't have an accurate 3D Vision profile for starting convergence settings and only after I figured out how to tweak convergence was I fully satisfied with my 3D Vision purchase decision.



Also, I still have issues with some games at very high depth because it makes it harder to re-focus on 2D HUD elements at screen depth. If you ignore the HUD elements or don't reference them a lot then its less bothersome, but this is without a doubt my #1 issue with very high depth settings in the vast majority of games that prevent me from going higher on Depth all the time. Typically I do stay ~40-60% Depth and then max out Convergence so that the main focus in the scene is at or near screen depth, objects closer seem like they pop-out. Not only does this give a good mix of depth and pop-out, it also makes 2D screen elements much less bothersome to shift focus to and from.



But if I did have a single complaint about the recommendations Nvidia makes to developers, 2D UI/HUD elements would be it. According to their 3D best-practices whitepaper, they do recommend devs render their UI/HUD elements in 2D or at screen depth still, but obviously recommend crosshairs and mouse cursors rendered at target depth in 3D. Personally, I think having these HUD elements sunk into the screen is the best approach; a variety of games has done this in the past and Trine 2 has probably done it the best overall. This allows the user to shift focus more comfortably between objects far into the scene to their UI much more comfortably in 3D. Adjustable amounts would be ideal, but perhaps ~20-25% of overall max depth would be a good place to start.



I think this is also something Nvidia can implement in their 3D profile for some games, but not sure about it. I do remember SC2 for example they were able to selectively render HUD elements in 2D/3D. When the game first came out with no 3D Vision profile, the HUD and HUD unit portrait were both in 3D. The first 3D Vision profile patch changed both the HUD and portrait to 2D to fix some of the issues with the HUD in 3D.

-=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

#26
Posted 01/12/2012 04:55 PM   
This might be the wrong place to ask, but how exactly do you guys mess with the settings to get it the way you describe?

I spent a good hour playing with convergence with Arkham City and I just cannot find the "best" image
I also have become a depth-o-phile and I feel that 100% is just not enough, but changing my monitor size just doesn't seem to work, depth remains the same.

Anyway, I really would like to get the best possible 3d experience, and I have no complaints with what I have, I just feel like...I'm not doing it the way the OP has described, which sounds better.
This might be the wrong place to ask, but how exactly do you guys mess with the settings to get it the way you describe?



I spent a good hour playing with convergence with Arkham City and I just cannot find the "best" image

I also have become a depth-o-phile and I feel that 100% is just not enough, but changing my monitor size just doesn't seem to work, depth remains the same.



Anyway, I really would like to get the best possible 3d experience, and I have no complaints with what I have, I just feel like...I'm not doing it the way the OP has described, which sounds better.

#27
Posted 01/12/2012 06:29 PM   
This might be the wrong place to ask, but how exactly do you guys mess with the settings to get it the way you describe?

I spent a good hour playing with convergence with Arkham City and I just cannot find the "best" image
I also have become a depth-o-phile and I feel that 100% is just not enough, but changing my monitor size just doesn't seem to work, depth remains the same.

Anyway, I really would like to get the best possible 3d experience, and I have no complaints with what I have, I just feel like...I'm not doing it the way the OP has described, which sounds better.
This might be the wrong place to ask, but how exactly do you guys mess with the settings to get it the way you describe?



I spent a good hour playing with convergence with Arkham City and I just cannot find the "best" image

I also have become a depth-o-phile and I feel that 100% is just not enough, but changing my monitor size just doesn't seem to work, depth remains the same.



Anyway, I really would like to get the best possible 3d experience, and I have no complaints with what I have, I just feel like...I'm not doing it the way the OP has described, which sounds better.

#28
Posted 01/12/2012 06:29 PM   
I did some test in the Deus Ex HR thread trying to make the in-game distances match the percieved distance to the point that my eyes are converging on when looking through the screen.

I attempted to measure my occular distance and found it to be around 65mm.

DXHR does not use nvidia settings as it is a native game and the 3D strength and convergence is configurable in the registry.

Using a 3D strength of less than 50% of my occular width of 25mm at infinity gives a percived distance at infinity of only 73cm or less than twice my 45cm distance to the monitor.

3d strength:
63mm -> 14,6m
64mm -> 29,2m
64,5mm -> 58,5m
64,8mm -> 146m
64,9mm -> 293m

If we are talking about recommendations for PC monitor usage we must restrict ourselves to 23,6" and the new 27" monitors at approximate half a metre distance.
My 23,6" monitor is about 41cm wide and with almost 6,5cm 3D strength there is 6,5cm of content on the side that is unique to each eye and only sharing 85% of the screen.

Because the occular distance is fixed this effect small monitors more severely.

I just configured my Batman Arkam City with 100% depth and I measured an on screen displacement of 63mm which is very close to the occular width and I need a more precise tool to go further like 64mm.
I did some test in the Deus Ex HR thread trying to make the in-game distances match the percieved distance to the point that my eyes are converging on when looking through the screen.



I attempted to measure my occular distance and found it to be around 65mm.



DXHR does not use nvidia settings as it is a native game and the 3D strength and convergence is configurable in the registry.



Using a 3D strength of less than 50% of my occular width of 25mm at infinity gives a percived distance at infinity of only 73cm or less than twice my 45cm distance to the monitor.



3d strength:

63mm -> 14,6m

64mm -> 29,2m

64,5mm -> 58,5m

64,8mm -> 146m

64,9mm -> 293m



If we are talking about recommendations for PC monitor usage we must restrict ourselves to 23,6" and the new 27" monitors at approximate half a metre distance.

My 23,6" monitor is about 41cm wide and with almost 6,5cm 3D strength there is 6,5cm of content on the side that is unique to each eye and only sharing 85% of the screen.



Because the occular distance is fixed this effect small monitors more severely.



I just configured my Batman Arkam City with 100% depth and I measured an on screen displacement of 63mm which is very close to the occular width and I need a more precise tool to go further like 64mm.

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

#29
Posted 01/12/2012 10:59 PM   
I did some test in the Deus Ex HR thread trying to make the in-game distances match the percieved distance to the point that my eyes are converging on when looking through the screen.

I attempted to measure my occular distance and found it to be around 65mm.

DXHR does not use nvidia settings as it is a native game and the 3D strength and convergence is configurable in the registry.

Using a 3D strength of less than 50% of my occular width of 25mm at infinity gives a percived distance at infinity of only 73cm or less than twice my 45cm distance to the monitor.

3d strength:
63mm -> 14,6m
64mm -> 29,2m
64,5mm -> 58,5m
64,8mm -> 146m
64,9mm -> 293m

If we are talking about recommendations for PC monitor usage we must restrict ourselves to 23,6" and the new 27" monitors at approximate half a metre distance.
My 23,6" monitor is about 41cm wide and with almost 6,5cm 3D strength there is 6,5cm of content on the side that is unique to each eye and only sharing 85% of the screen.

Because the occular distance is fixed this effect small monitors more severely.

I just configured my Batman Arkam City with 100% depth and I measured an on screen displacement of 63mm which is very close to the occular width and I need a more precise tool to go further like 64mm.
I did some test in the Deus Ex HR thread trying to make the in-game distances match the percieved distance to the point that my eyes are converging on when looking through the screen.



I attempted to measure my occular distance and found it to be around 65mm.



DXHR does not use nvidia settings as it is a native game and the 3D strength and convergence is configurable in the registry.



Using a 3D strength of less than 50% of my occular width of 25mm at infinity gives a percived distance at infinity of only 73cm or less than twice my 45cm distance to the monitor.



3d strength:

63mm -> 14,6m

64mm -> 29,2m

64,5mm -> 58,5m

64,8mm -> 146m

64,9mm -> 293m



If we are talking about recommendations for PC monitor usage we must restrict ourselves to 23,6" and the new 27" monitors at approximate half a metre distance.

My 23,6" monitor is about 41cm wide and with almost 6,5cm 3D strength there is 6,5cm of content on the side that is unique to each eye and only sharing 85% of the screen.



Because the occular distance is fixed this effect small monitors more severely.



I just configured my Batman Arkam City with 100% depth and I measured an on screen displacement of 63mm which is very close to the occular width and I need a more precise tool to go further like 64mm.

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

#30
Posted 01/12/2012 10:59 PM   
  2 / 3    
Scroll To Top