Hardware Nvidia Talks 3D Vision

As a part of our 3D week, Nvidia's Andrew Fear and Phil Eisler discuss 3D Vision.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/05/24/nvidia-talks-03d-vision/1

 

Wow love the Elsa glasses!

 

*sigh* When you're paying £300+ for a decent graphics card, then christ knows how much for the monitor/tv, I don't wanna' be seeing the 3D glasses "ON SALE NOW!" for £84.99 (think this was on OCUK yesterday). As I said about AMD's 3D thread and article yesterday, nausea, headaches and motion sickness aren't something I suffer with until you give me 3D glasses to wear.

"Is it just a fad?" Yes. Will we all want to play normal games again soon, yes.

 

Well that's the great thing about 3D. You want to play games normally? Just turn it off, or don't buy a 3D setup.

I appreciate that you have issues with the 3D system (aforementioned nausea e.t.c.), but I think within the next 2-3 years it will become very economical to do 3D in the home. Who knows, maybe they will invent a head tracking system via something like Kinekt and incorporate 3D into that.

 

Not supporting DisplayPort because not much uses it yet is like saying back in the late 90's that they wouldn't support DVI because most people still use analogue CRTs.

 

As far as I know none of these technologies were ever considered "niche". Rather, they've never really come into play (until now?) because of crappy console ports.

 

There's an iPad app called i3D that uses face recognition to track your head and calculate its position, it then renders a 3d scene using what it assumes is your perspective. It actually works very well and in my opinion is the best way to make games 'feel' more 3 dimensional. This has the bonus of allowing you to move your head to see around objects but also it allows you to experience 3d with say; one eye, as it's actually still 2d.

I have a real issue with needing to wear glasses to see in 3d, it just doesn't work; it's not comfortable and due to the way they function not ideally suited for everyone.

Gaming is a medium that can work very well in 3d. Due to real-time rendering the perspective can change as you move. Movies on the other hand are very bad in 3d, as certain parts of what is essentially a flat image (or more technically, 2 images) have to be given depth; the result looks like a pop-up book with flat planes at different levels.

My personal opinion is that 2d is just great; we live our lives seeing the world in 3d; it's really nothing special. 2d is basically a unique experience and we get the liberty to choose which element of the image we want to look at, instead of a focal point jumping out at us because the designers wanted it that way...

Basically, 3d with glasses is bad, 3d displays without eye-wear could be good. Movies in 3d are bad, but games in 3d could be good.

 

Good read with a brew, cheers BT.

The best bit:

Now all I need is Dell to push out a 30" 120hz (minimum) 3D monitor so I can play Portal 2 again in full 3D ... mmmm.

I installed that yesterday. It works, kind of, but the 3D depth is not there. It just felt like recreated 3D in 2D with a gyroscope-like control method.

 

If the push for 3D results in a 120Hz IPS monitor being available on the market, I'm all for it.

 

3D is coming whether we like it or not - and as it's still early days, it will get better and cheaper over time.

Think I posted that exact line on a dial-up bullettin board 20 years ago about DVD, wireless, (insert tech here)...

 

i played wipeout hd in 3d on my playstation, and it's awesome, although it does take a little getting used to

 

I think this should be if

I think theres an extra to in this sentance

 

Did i just read this right? People..actually..get..excited..about S.L.I.?

 

If they got rid of the nausea and headache issues for 99% of consumers then I could see it as a truly viable option. But until then, well I'll happily go without... i'll probably go without anyway as seeing 3D on a 2D screen while IRL is 3D just makes it seem... well odd!

Sir... we don't mention that round these parts *raises pitchfork*

 

I believe he believes they do!

 

To be honest, I don't think 3D is going to replace 2D until proper 3D displays arrive - and by that, I mean displays where your eye can focus in the perceived depth plane (unlike current 3D, which no matter how shallow or deep you are looking, requires focus on the screen itself). Prototype holographic displays exist (currently only in one colour, though) so I say we'll get there eventually...

 

This a textbook example of worthless tech that nobody asked for but somehow the manufacturers are trying to convince us that we cant live without it. Sorry but if i want a headache i rather drink heavily the day before because that gives me a IRL experience and costs alot less!!!

 

I have used active shutter 3d since 2004 at least on PC and have never had nausea or headaches. It sounds to me like you have underlying medical issues.

 

I agree. This hardware is only now getting going in a big way and I think the next 10 years will see it refined and perfected enormously. Having used the old Elsa Revelator shutter glasses over many years though I have no problems using it even as it is now. I don't mind wearing glasses but of course look forward to to the day auto-stereoscopic displays are as natural on the eye as 2d (nothing natural about 2d since we are born with 3d vision).

 

i thought DVI would be phased out... I remember reading an bit-tech article about that...