Please help me fix the 60FPS @ 120Hz issue once and for all!
  6 / 6    
LMAO Some random theory with no proof and we are all supposed to simply believe it? Interpolation on TVs at high frame rates produce perceivable visual artifacts. For those of you offering Blind Faith, go see Jim Jones, he has some Kool-Aid for you.
LMAO

Some random theory with no proof and we are all supposed to simply believe it?

Interpolation on TVs at high frame rates produce perceivable visual artifacts.

For those of you offering Blind Faith, go see Jim Jones, he has some Kool-Aid for you.

#76
Posted 08/12/2013 11:13 PM   
[quote="3DPhanatic"][quote="Volnaiskra"]I got very strong ghosting, and the movement of my hand was much harder to follow than it is without glasses.[/quote] Wait... Ghosting is made by the second image from the screen being shown to the eye it wasn't meant for. Reality doesn't have a second image, and so there is no ghosting... Dude, what have you been smoking? ;-) Ofcourse movement with the glasses on is going to be harder to follow than without the glasses, i mean, duh? You clearly haven't understood the point of rage's "experiment", lol. Sorry to be making fun of you, but the tone of your comments is filled with vitriol. The guy has an idea which might work (should work imo). Without proof yourself, you deliberately misconstrue his experiment to conjure up evidence against it. Wtf man, uncool. I don't see you coming up with ideas. Why do you feel that he owes you an explanation? Are you some high king who will bestow him with riches if it works? No, you are a common man who will enjoy what he and others have created for free. You have nothing to lose but a significant something to gain, but you mock those who would provide it. Its pathetic. You aren't the first in this thread either. Less said about that the better I think. dont wanna derail the thread into a flame war. too much negativity in this thread already. Me thinks the people who are worst are the ones who are angry that they don't understand/cant think through what rage is saying. They cant face the fact that they might not be as smart as they think, and so try to make the idea guy feel stupid because of their own insecurities. Some people are just so unperceptive of new ideas that they fight against them purely from primitive tribal emotion rather than reason... Its funny, its the same people who wonder why everyone is so unperceptive to 3D sterescopic without even trying it. You only need look within yourselves. rage, i hope your idea works man. even if it doesnt, we'll all have learned something. someone wise one said that its the journey that counts, not the destination. Journeys are good to have with the right people, but can turn into a right nightmare with the wrong crowd.[/quote] I've been merely criticising some of the OP's arguments, which is well within my rights, and within the scope of this thread, since the OP explicitly requested feedback. You, on the other hand, have made snooty personal attacks against members of the forum, and have insulted their intelligence, emotional security, and have called them "primitive" and "tribal". And you have the nerve to accuse me of vitriol? I don't believe anyone on this thread has been as rude as you. [quote="3DPhanatic"]Wait... Ghosting is made by the second image from the screen being shown to the eye it wasn't meant for. Reality doesn't have a second image, and so there is no ghosting... Dude, what have you been smoking? ;-)[/quote] Ghosting simply means a double image. It can come in many forms, and be caused by many things. It need not have anything to do with stereoscopic 3D monitors. For example, old analogue TVs frequently had ghosting when their reception wasn't very good. In this case, it was caused by shutter glasses periodically blocking light from hitting the retina. When I did the hand-waving experiment, I saw a double-image of my hand (a.k.a ghosting). Obviously this was caused by brain not being able to completely keep track of where my hand was moving, since each eye was receiving different spatial information. This suggests that out-of-sync frames may hinder a fluid 3D experience. [quote="3DPhanatic"]Ofcourse movement with the glasses on is going to be harder to follow than without the glasses, i mean, duh? [/quote] Which is why I explicitly wrote that the hand-waving experiment "was much less smooth and fluid than a 3D game in 60fps". Since this comparison (between the synced frames and unsynced frames) is the key one.
3DPhanatic said:
Volnaiskra said:I got very strong ghosting, and the movement of my hand was much harder to follow than it is without glasses.


Wait... Ghosting is made by the second image from the screen being shown to the eye it wasn't meant for. Reality doesn't have a second image, and so there is no ghosting... Dude, what have you been smoking? ;-)

Ofcourse movement with the glasses on is going to be harder to follow than without the glasses, i mean, duh?

You clearly haven't understood the point of rage's "experiment", lol.

Sorry to be making fun of you, but the tone of your comments is filled with vitriol. The guy has an idea which might work (should work imo). Without proof yourself, you deliberately misconstrue his experiment to conjure up evidence against it. Wtf man, uncool. I don't see you coming up with ideas.

Why do you feel that he owes you an explanation? Are you some high king who will bestow him with riches if it works? No, you are a common man who will enjoy what he and others have created for free. You have nothing to lose but a significant something to gain, but you mock those who would provide it. Its pathetic.

You aren't the first in this thread either. Less said about that the better I think. dont wanna derail the thread into a flame war. too much negativity in this thread already.

Me thinks the people who are worst are the ones who are angry that they don't understand/cant think through what rage is saying. They cant face the fact that they might not be as smart as they think, and so try to make the idea guy feel stupid because of their own insecurities.

Some people are just so unperceptive of new ideas that they fight against them purely from primitive tribal emotion rather than reason... Its funny, its the same people who wonder why everyone is so unperceptive to 3D sterescopic without even trying it.

You only need look within yourselves.

rage, i hope your idea works man. even if it doesnt, we'll all have learned something. someone wise one said that its the journey that counts, not the destination. Journeys are good to have with the right people, but can turn into a right nightmare with the wrong crowd.


I've been merely criticising some of the OP's arguments, which is well within my rights, and within the scope of this thread, since the OP explicitly requested feedback. You, on the other hand, have made snooty personal attacks against members of the forum, and have insulted their intelligence, emotional security, and have called them "primitive" and "tribal". And you have the nerve to accuse me of vitriol? I don't believe anyone on this thread has been as rude as you.


3DPhanatic said:Wait... Ghosting is made by the second image from the screen being shown to the eye it wasn't meant for. Reality doesn't have a second image, and so there is no ghosting... Dude, what have you been smoking? ;-)


Ghosting simply means a double image. It can come in many forms, and be caused by many things. It need not have anything to do with stereoscopic 3D monitors. For example, old analogue TVs frequently had ghosting when their reception wasn't very good. In this case, it was caused by shutter glasses periodically blocking light from hitting the retina.

When I did the hand-waving experiment, I saw a double-image of my hand (a.k.a ghosting). Obviously this was caused by brain not being able to completely keep track of where my hand was moving, since each eye was receiving different spatial information. This suggests that out-of-sync frames may hinder a fluid 3D experience.



3DPhanatic said:Ofcourse movement with the glasses on is going to be harder to follow than without the glasses, i mean, duh?

Which is why I explicitly wrote that the hand-waving experiment "was much less smooth and fluid than a 3D game in 60fps". Since this comparison (between the synced frames and unsynced frames) is the key one.

ImageVolnaPC.com - Tips, tweaks, performance comparisons (PhysX card, SLI scaling, etc)

#77
Posted 08/13/2013 12:57 AM   
My main complaint with active shutter glasses is motion tearing. Active works on the principle that your brain will put a left and right image together despite a small time lag. However, your brain has no way to tell when a frame is changing, and will inevitably end up combining two for an instant when the display is changing to a new frame. For example, with 60 frames per second content, the eyes are receiving: 1R - blank blank - 1L 2R - blank blank - 2L 3R - blank blank - 3L But we don't perceive it that way because because our eyes/brains fill in all the blanks with the image it was just shown, so we perceive: 1R- blank 1R-1L [b]2R-1L[/b] 2R-2L [b]3R-2L[/b] 3R-3L Notice the mismatches. It's unavoidable. I find it most noticeable on 24fps movies. 24fps means less mismatches, but I think the differences between frames are greater because of the low frame rate. I find it less noticeable on 60fps, probably because while that means more mismatches, the differences between each frame is smaller and it's harder to notice. If 60fps 3D is going to mean your brain will have mismatches half the time, perhaps there's not much more harm in just letting them all be mismatched. I don't know. Let me back up and write it out considering how the PC is rendering the frames. This is how things normally work: 1st frame R - blank blank - 1st frame L 2nd frame R - blank blank - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - blank blank - 3rd frame L Our eyes/brains fill in the blanks so we see: 1st frame R - blank 1st frame R - 1st frame L [b]2nd frame R - 1st frame L[/b] 2nd frame R - 2nd frame L [b]3rd frame R - 2nd frame L[/b] 3rd frame R - 3rd frame L I believe what RAGEdemon wants to do is have the PC deliver this: 1st frame R - blank blank - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - blank blank - 4th frame L 5th frame R - blank blank - 6th frame L In other words, odd frames are rendered from the right perspective, even frames are rendered from the left. The problem is then we'd perceive this: 1st frame R - blank [b]1st frame R - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - 4th frame L 5th frame R - 4th frame L 5th frame R - 6th frame L[/b] So they're all mismatched, but whether you notice it depends on if there's motion between each frame, and how much. I would guess this is the "tearing" that RAGEdemon describes seeing. In fact I believe the DX9 wrapper I use for Minecraft renders in this way. It works, though I'm not sure if it's better. I'm not sure if it ISN'T either. The traditional method might be visually more coherent, but the sequential method might be more natural. The example of moving your hand in front of your face while your shutter glasses are active is a valid one. The flow of time doesn't pause, and the brief glimpses of your hand you get in each eye will not possibly match.
My main complaint with active shutter glasses is motion tearing. Active works on the principle that your brain will put a left and right image together despite a small time lag. However, your brain has no way to tell when a frame is changing, and will inevitably end up combining two for an instant when the display is changing to a new frame. For example, with 60 frames per second content, the eyes are receiving:

1R - blank
blank - 1L
2R - blank
blank - 2L
3R - blank
blank - 3L

But we don't perceive it that way because because our eyes/brains fill in all the blanks with the image it was just shown, so we perceive:

1R- blank
1R-1L
2R-1L
2R-2L
3R-2L
3R-3L

Notice the mismatches. It's unavoidable. I find it most noticeable on 24fps movies. 24fps means less mismatches, but I think the differences between frames are greater because of the low frame rate. I find it less noticeable on 60fps, probably because while that means more mismatches, the differences between each frame is smaller and it's harder to notice. If 60fps 3D is going to mean your brain will have mismatches half the time, perhaps there's not much more harm in just letting them all be mismatched. I don't know.

Let me back up and write it out considering how the PC is rendering the frames. This is how things normally work:

1st frame R - blank
blank - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - blank
blank - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - blank
blank - 3rd frame L

Our eyes/brains fill in the blanks so we see:

1st frame R - blank
1st frame R - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 3rd frame L

I believe what RAGEdemon wants to do is have the PC deliver this:

1st frame R - blank
blank - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - blank
blank - 4th frame L
5th frame R - blank
blank - 6th frame L

In other words, odd frames are rendered from the right perspective, even frames are rendered from the left. The problem is then we'd perceive this:

1st frame R - blank
1st frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 4th frame L
5th frame R - 4th frame L
5th frame R - 6th frame L


So they're all mismatched, but whether you notice it depends on if there's motion between each frame, and how much. I would guess this is the "tearing" that RAGEdemon describes seeing. In fact I believe the DX9 wrapper I use for Minecraft renders in this way. It works, though I'm not sure if it's better. I'm not sure if it ISN'T either.

The traditional method might be visually more coherent, but the sequential method might be more natural. The example of moving your hand in front of your face while your shutter glasses are active is a valid one. The flow of time doesn't pause, and the brief glimpses of your hand you get in each eye will not possibly match.

#78
Posted 08/13/2013 01:44 AM   
[quote="Airion"]My main complaint with active shutter glasses is motion tearing. Active works on the principle that your brain will put a left and right image together despite a small time lag. However, your brain has no way to tell when a frame is changing, and will inevitably end up combining two for an instant when the display is changing to a new frame. For example, with 60 frames per second content, the eyes are receiving: 1R - blank blank - 1L 2R - blank blank - 2L 3R - blank blank - 3L But we don't perceive it that way because because our eyes/brains fill in all the blanks with the image it was just shown, so we perceive: 1R- blank 1R-1L [b]2R-1L[/b] 2R-2L [b]3R-2L[/b] 3R-3L Notice the mismatches. It's unavoidable. I find it most noticeable on 24fps movies. 24fps means less mismatches, but I think the differences between frames are greater because of the low frame rate. I find it less noticeable on 60fps, probably because while that means more mismatches, the differences between each frame is smaller and it's harder to notice. If 60fps 3D is going to mean your brain will have mismatches half the time, perhaps there's not much more harm in just letting them all be mismatched. I don't know. Let me back up and write it out considering how the PC is rendering the frames. This is how things normally work: 1st frame R - blank blank - 1st frame L 2nd frame R - blank blank - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - blank blank - 3rd frame L Our eyes/brains fill in the blanks so we see: 1st frame R - blank 1st frame R - 1st frame L [b]2nd frame R - 1st frame L[/b] 2nd frame R - 2nd frame L [b]3rd frame R - 2nd frame L[/b] 3rd frame R - 3rd frame L I believe what RAGEdemon wants to do is have the PC deliver this: 1st frame R - blank blank - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - blank blank - 4th frame L 5th frame R - blank blank - 6th frame L In other words, odd frames are rendered from the right perspective, even frames are rendered from the left. The problem is then we'd perceive this: 1st frame R - blank [b]1st frame R - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - 2nd frame L 3rd frame R - 4th frame L 5th frame R - 4th frame L 5th frame R - 6th frame L[/b] So they're all mismatched, but whether you notice it depends on if there's motion between each frame, and how much. I would guess this is the "tearing" that RAGEdemon describes seeing. In fact I believe the DX9 wrapper I use for Minecraft renders in this way. It works, though I'm not sure if it's better. I'm not sure if it ISN'T either. The traditional method might be visually more coherent, but the sequential method might be more natural. The example of moving your hand in front of your face while your shutter glasses are active is a valid one. The flow of time doesn't pause, and the brief glimpses of your hand you get in each eye will not possibly match.[/quote] Indeed! That is the way is happening. The optimum solution would be to have one display for each eye (some VR kits do this) and thus all these problems would go away:) However we all know how expensive that can get. Personally, I find the current 3D vision implementation very good (or my brain is working good on filling the blanks :)) )
Airion said:My main complaint with active shutter glasses is motion tearing. Active works on the principle that your brain will put a left and right image together despite a small time lag. However, your brain has no way to tell when a frame is changing, and will inevitably end up combining two for an instant when the display is changing to a new frame. For example, with 60 frames per second content, the eyes are receiving:

1R - blank
blank - 1L
2R - blank
blank - 2L
3R - blank
blank - 3L

But we don't perceive it that way because because our eyes/brains fill in all the blanks with the image it was just shown, so we perceive:

1R- blank
1R-1L
2R-1L
2R-2L
3R-2L
3R-3L

Notice the mismatches. It's unavoidable. I find it most noticeable on 24fps movies. 24fps means less mismatches, but I think the differences between frames are greater because of the low frame rate. I find it less noticeable on 60fps, probably because while that means more mismatches, the differences between each frame is smaller and it's harder to notice. If 60fps 3D is going to mean your brain will have mismatches half the time, perhaps there's not much more harm in just letting them all be mismatched. I don't know.

Let me back up and write it out considering how the PC is rendering the frames. This is how things normally work:

1st frame R - blank
blank - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - blank
blank - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - blank
blank - 3rd frame L

Our eyes/brains fill in the blanks so we see:

1st frame R - blank
1st frame R - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - 1st frame L
2nd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 3rd frame L

I believe what RAGEdemon wants to do is have the PC deliver this:

1st frame R - blank
blank - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - blank
blank - 4th frame L
5th frame R - blank
blank - 6th frame L

In other words, odd frames are rendered from the right perspective, even frames are rendered from the left. The problem is then we'd perceive this:

1st frame R - blank
1st frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 2nd frame L
3rd frame R - 4th frame L
5th frame R - 4th frame L
5th frame R - 6th frame L


So they're all mismatched, but whether you notice it depends on if there's motion between each frame, and how much. I would guess this is the "tearing" that RAGEdemon describes seeing. In fact I believe the DX9 wrapper I use for Minecraft renders in this way. It works, though I'm not sure if it's better. I'm not sure if it ISN'T either.

The traditional method might be visually more coherent, but the sequential method might be more natural. The example of moving your hand in front of your face while your shutter glasses are active is a valid one. The flow of time doesn't pause, and the brief glimpses of your hand you get in each eye will not possibly match.


Indeed! That is the way is happening. The optimum solution would be to have one display for each eye (some VR kits do this) and thus all these problems would go away:)
However we all know how expensive that can get. Personally, I find the current 3D vision implementation very good (or my brain is working good on filling the blanks :)) )

1x Palit RTX 2080Ti Pro Gaming OC(watercooled and overclocked to hell)
3x 3D Vision Ready Asus VG278HE monitors (5760x1080).
Intel i9 9900K (overclocked to 5.3 and watercooled ofc).
Asus Maximus XI Hero Mobo.
16 GB Team Group T-Force Dark Pro DDR4 @ 3600.
Lots of Disks:
- Raid 0 - 256GB Sandisk Extreme SSD.
- Raid 0 - WD Black - 2TB.
- SanDisk SSD PLUS 480 GB.
- Intel 760p 256GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD.
Creative Sound Blaster Z.
Windows 10 x64 Pro.
etc


My website with my fixes and OpenGL to 3D Vision wrapper:
http://3dsurroundgaming.com

(If you like some of the stuff that I've done and want to donate something, you can do it with PayPal at tavyhome@gmail.com)

#79
Posted 08/13/2013 03:11 AM   
[quote="helifax"]The optimum solution would be to have one display for each eye (some VR kits do this) and thus all these problems would go away:)[/quote] Or of course passive. I think that's one of the great benefits of passive monitors/TVs, motion handling. Left and right are in perfect sync. But then you have other problems with resolution and horizontal black lines in each eye. In any case, you certainly wouldn't want to use this left/right 120fps alternating rendering with anything other than active shutter glasses.
helifax said:The optimum solution would be to have one display for each eye (some VR kits do this) and thus all these problems would go away:)


Or of course passive. I think that's one of the great benefits of passive monitors/TVs, motion handling. Left and right are in perfect sync. But then you have other problems with resolution and horizontal black lines in each eye.

In any case, you certainly wouldn't want to use this left/right 120fps alternating rendering with anything other than active shutter glasses.

#80
Posted 08/13/2013 03:22 AM   
I tried playing Vireio at 120Hz with red/blue, but the primitive nature of red/blue makes it impossible for me to tell. Could be Vireio as well, it doesn't work like you'd expect, so it's hard to dial in a comfortable setting. Separation did what I expect, but I could see no difference with convergence. To use Vireio, you just unzip that package and launch the app. Choose SBS, and no tracking. Turn off 3D Vision so it doesn't compete. Run Left 4 Dead, or maybe Mirrors Edge. Use F2 and F3 for separation (no ctrl), F4, F5 are convergence. F6 to reset to default. If someone wants to try SBS, use this driver: [url]http://vire.io/download/Perception_D3D_proxy.zip[/url]
I tried playing Vireio at 120Hz with red/blue, but the primitive nature of red/blue makes it impossible for me to tell. Could be Vireio as well, it doesn't work like you'd expect, so it's hard to dial in a comfortable setting. Separation did what I expect, but I could see no difference with convergence.

To use Vireio, you just unzip that package and launch the app. Choose SBS, and no tracking. Turn off 3D Vision so it doesn't compete. Run Left 4 Dead, or maybe Mirrors Edge. Use F2 and F3 for separation (no ctrl), F4, F5 are convergence. F6 to reset to default.


If someone wants to try SBS, use this driver:

http://vire.io/download/Perception_D3D_proxy.zip

Acer H5360 (1280x720@120Hz) - ASUS VG248QE with GSync mod - 3D Vision 1&2 - Driver 372.54
GTX 970 - i5-4670K@4.2GHz - 12GB RAM - Win7x64+evilKB2670838 - 4 Disk X25 RAID
SAGER NP9870-S - GTX 980 - i7-6700K - Win10 Pro 1607
Latest 3Dmigoto Release
Bo3b's School for ShaderHackers

#81
Posted 08/13/2013 08:30 AM   
[b]Guys, helifax has released his app in this thread: [url]https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/572432/3d-vision/-test-request-stereo-3d-opengl-application/1[/url] If you enable triple buffering using NVinspector, you will attain 120fps, without which I am capped at 80fps... not 60... strange. Could have something to do with my SLI. You can compare it by capping the FPS to 60 and then 120 using NV inspector. FRAPS and MSI Afterburner both correctly report 60 and 120fps respectively. The difference between 60fps [which looks and feels just like all s3D games] and 120fps is night and day for me personally... it's just so butter smooth, even vertical motion. Perhaps there will be people who won't notice much difference at all. I believe this is proof positive that most have been looking for. Mouse input is a little buggy/stuttery in both 60 and 120 though, but I don't believe it is a problem caused by the 120fps. [edit: helifax has confirmed mouse input problem as a buggy QT library] Hopefuly helifax can code in some object movements to show it off some more. Thank you helifax! I urge everyone to try it and give him feedback as he has requested. Please also post your thoughts relating to this discussion. Perhaps different people will get different results. -- Shahzad [/b]
Guys, helifax has released his app in this thread:

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/572432/3d-vision/-test-request-stereo-3d-opengl-application/1

If you enable triple buffering using NVinspector, you will attain 120fps, without which I am capped at 80fps... not 60... strange. Could have something to do with my SLI.

You can compare it by capping the FPS to 60 and then 120 using NV inspector. FRAPS and MSI Afterburner both correctly report 60 and 120fps respectively.

The difference between 60fps [which looks and feels just like all s3D games] and 120fps is night and day for me personally... it's just so butter smooth, even vertical motion. Perhaps there will be people who won't notice much difference at all.

I believe this is proof positive that most have been looking for.

Mouse input is a little buggy/stuttery in both 60 and 120 though, but I don't believe it is a problem caused by the 120fps.

[edit: helifax has confirmed mouse input problem as a buggy QT library]

Hopefuly helifax can code in some object movements to show it off some more.

Thank you helifax!


I urge everyone to try it and give him feedback as he has requested. Please also post your thoughts relating to this discussion. Perhaps different people will get different results.

-- Shahzad

Windows 10 64-bit, Intel 7700K @ 5.1GHz, 16GB 3600MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM, 2x GTX 1080 SLI, Asus Maximus IX Hero, Sound Blaster ZxR, PCIe Quad SSD, Oculus Rift CV1, DLP Link PGD-150 glasses, ViewSonic PJD6531w 3D DLP Projector @ 1280x800 120Hz native / 2560x1600 120Hz DSR 3D Gaming.

#82
Posted 08/13/2013 07:14 PM   
  6 / 6    
Scroll To Top