Review Acer SpatialLabs View 15.6-inch Glasses-Free 3D Portable Monitor

[Admin]

Acer’s SpatialLabs View Portable Monitor delivers glasses-free 3D from a 15.6-inch IPS panel. With native 4K resolution, it makes a great partner to high-end laptops and PCs for 3D modeling and other workday tasks.

Acer SpatialLabs View 15.6-inch Glasses-Free 3D Portable Monitor : Read more

 

[bit_user]

Interesting, but I prefer the technology behind Looking Glass' light-field displays.

3D spatial memories, beyond the headset

Combining the magic of 3D holographic displays with the power of generative AI.

lookingglassfactory.com

They don't depend on eye-tracking and work with any number of viewers.

 

[dalauder]

As far as I can tell, 3D interest depends on how much people expect real life in 3D. My brother and my wife have a dominant eye and typically see in 2D, so they aren't impressed by 3D content ever. The fact that a good half of people could care less, really hurts adoption.

However, availability of 3D displays that don't require much setup, or any classes, will help A LOT. That way the non-tech savvy folks can get into it. My parents have a 3D TV that I like a lot, but they can't manage to keep their glasses charged or sync'd with their TV consistently enough to be bothered with it.

 

[bit_user]

The fact that a good half of people could care less, really hurts adoption.

I consider myself something of a 3D enthusiast, in that I bought CrystalEyes LCD glasses for my PC, back in 1995, and bought a 3D plasma TV that I still sometimes use to watch 3D movies (I have a few dozen 3D blurays and trade them with another guy at work who collects them even more than I do). When there's a movie I want to see in a theater, I pretty much only watch in laser 3D (either I-Max or Dolby Vision). I even have a half dozen or more PS3 games that support 3D TVs.

With all that being said, if I get engrossed in the movie, I find that I tend to forget I'm watching 3D and sometimes have to remind myself to pay attention to the eye candy. You just get used to it, I guess. From what I hear, a similar effect isn't uncommon among regular VR users.

I think holographic displays have limited applications. Mostly either like 3D modeling, CAD, or GIS displays, where there's a practical benefit to seeing depth. For the general public, they're good for grabbing people's attention as they walk by some kind of kiosk or window display.

I guess they'd make some pretty neat arcade games, though I'm not sure how much the arcade market even is, any more. Speaking of which, does anyone remember that 1991 Sega arcade game Time Traveler, with the dish reflector that made a planar image appear to be suspended in free space?

Anyway, the major downsides of lightfield displays are that there's a bigger tradeoff vs. resolution, and they take a good deal of rendering horsepower, since you're essentially rendering the same scene from like 45 or 90 different angles. The pixel count is still whatever the display's native resolution, so we're talking about lots of geometry processing moreso than raster performance.

That's where this Acer display comes out ahead. It has a much smaller resolution tradeoff, and lesser geometry burden.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Interesting, but I prefer the technology behind Looking Glass' light-field displays.

​

3D spatial memories, beyond the headset

Combining the magic of 3D holographic displays with the power of generative AI.

lookingglassfactory.com

​

They don't depend on eye-tracking and work with any number of viewers.

Light Field doesn't seem to be competing with 3D display's.

They're more on their own track of novelty Displays that's trying to create volumetric Holograms IRL.

Similar to what Star Wars & Star Trek has been wanting to do for many years.

 

[bit_user]

Light Field doesn't seem to be competing with 3D display's.

They're more on their own track of novelty Displays that's trying to create volumetric Holograms IRL.

Similar to what Star Wars & Star Trek has been wanting to do for many years.

The way a lightfield display works is that you have to look at the display. Objects can appear to be in front or behind the plane of the display, but the frustum is clipped by the display itself.

In other words, if you step too far to the left or right, you'll see the image cut off by the edge of the display. It's not as if they're projected into free space.

Even that Sega arcade game only created the illusion of a display pane in free space. You still had to look into the parabolic reflector, even if you didn't realize you were.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

The way a lightfield display works is that you have to look at the display. Objects can appear to be in front or behind the plane of the display, but the frustum is clipped by the display itself.

In other words, if you step too far to the left or right, you'll see the image cut off by the edge of the display. It's not as if they're projected into free space.

Even that Sega arcade game only created the illusion of a display pane in free space. You still had to look into the parabolic reflector, even if you didn't realize you were.

I saw the "Tested" video articles on LightField and how it slowly came to be.

But I don't see them trying to compete directly against 3D Monitors.

It feels like they're kind of going off in their own direction.

The fact that they're not projecting into "Free Space" at the moment is a limitation of the tech.

Everybody is trying to create the floating 3D hologram that Star Wars & Star Trek show us in their shows.

 

[bit_user]

The fact that they're not projecting into "Free Space" at the moment is a limitation of the tech.

Everybody is trying to create the floating 3D hologram that Star Wars & Star Trek show us in their shows

As far as I'm aware, the only displays that appear to form fully 3D images in free space (i.e. with nothing behind them) are actually spinning a 1D or 2D display fast enough that you don't really notice it.

 

[dalauder]

I saw the "Tested" video articles on LightField and how it slowly came to be.

But I don't see them trying to compete directly against 3D Monitors.

It feels like they're kind of going off in their own direction.

The fact that they're not projecting into "Free Space" at the moment is a limitation of the tech.

Everybody is trying to create the floating 3D hologram that Star Wars & Star Trek show us in their shows.

They love to show those in science fiction (commonplace in the Marvel Universe too), but I don't think anyone has a decent idea to actually make one. For some Star Wars holograms, 2D projections on a medium work fine--like the R2-D2 type holograms that are low quality. Fantasmic at Disneyland basically looks the same and that might be achievable.

The Light Field and 3D monitors both cost $1000 or so and provide glasses-free 3D. So they could compete. But I guess they don't because this Acer comes with all the software to make it usable as a computer monitor.

 

[bit_user]

The Light Field and 3D monitors both cost $1000 or so and provide glasses-free 3D.

The Looking Glass Portrait is $400, but it's rather small and their larger displays are way more expensive.

What other Lightfield monitors are there?

So they could compete. But I guess they don't because this Acer comes with all the software to make it usable as a computer monitor.

Looking Glass embeds a Raspberry Pi in theirs, which can play back prerecorded 3D movies in standalone mode. Or, you can connect and use it like a regular monitor.

 

[dalauder]

The Looking Glass Portrait is $400, but it's rather small and their larger displays are way more expensive.

What other Lightfield monitors are there?

Oh, I explicitly meant those Lightfield ones that you mentioned (Looking Glass). There's no direct price comparison, but their small display price suggests that the price is similar for both technologies, within 50% of each other at least.

I should look up some Looking Glass reviews. I like that the Acer one from this review was gaming-ready (well, 60 fps). I suppose I'd own both, if I just won the lottery.

 

[bit_user]

I should look up some Looking Glass reviews. I like that the Acer one from this review was gaming-ready (well, 60 fps). I suppose I'd own both, if I just won the lottery.

It's not the kind of thing you get for regular gaming or movie-watching. The Looking Glass displays require software to incorporate custom support.

As I said, the image has to be rendered from like 45 or 90 different angles, for each frame. The resolution is only 1/45 or 1/90 for each of those images, but the native resolution of their panels is pretty high. 8k, I'm pretty sure, for the larger ones.

So, I think that basically limits it to commercial and professional applications.

 

[dalauder]

It's not the kind of thing you get for regular gaming or movie-watching. The Looking Glass displays require software to incorporate custom support.

As I said, the image has to be rendered from like 45 or 90 different angles, for each frame. The resolution is only 1/45 or 1/90 for each of those images, but the native resolution of their panels is pretty high. 8k, I'm pretty sure, for the larger ones.

So, I think that basically limits it to commercial and professional applications.

Ahh...it only works for pre-rendering.

 

[bit_user]

Ahh...it only works for pre-rendering.

No, you can absolutely render realtime content on it. They have an Unreal plugin, as well as a SDK.

For the Portrait display, its native resolution is 1.5k x 2k and they recommend a GTX 1650 or better dGPU.

The two bigger models are 8k panels, and they recommend a RTX 3090 Turbo or better dGPU.

Honestly, if you're interested or at least curious, you should just spend a few minutes clicking around their website instead of going back-and-forth with me.

https://lookingglassfactory.com/software
​

 

[dalauder]

No, you can absolutely render realtime content on it. They have an Unreal plugin, as well as a SDK.

For the Portrait display, its native resolution is 1.5k x 2k and they recommend a GTX 1650 or better dGPU.

The two bigger models are 8k panels, and they recommend a RTX 3090 Turbo or better dGPU.

Honestly, if you're interested or at least curious, you should just spend a few minutes clicking around their website instead of going back-and-forth with me.

​

https://lookingglassfactory.com/software​

​

Earlier I misunderstood a post where I thought you said something was showing pre-rendered videos. Maybe you did, but meant it for store displays or something. Anyhoo...

Thanks for the info. But I'll check it out more when prices drop 80% in five years. I'm currently happy with my 3x 1080p displays. In maybe two years, I'll upgrade to some other setup. Then after that I might think about 3D.

 

[bit_user]

Earlier I misunderstood a post where I thought you said something was showing pre-rendered videos. Maybe you did, but meant it for store displays or something. Anyhoo...

It has a built-in Raspberry Pi that can play pre-recorded videos. However, you can also connect it to a PC and use it as a 3D monitor.

Thanks for the info. But I'll check it out more when prices drop 80% in five years.

Are you a serious 3D artist, architect, or CAD user? If not, you probably won't have much use for it. It's not the sort of thing you use for playing video games (in part, because the games need to have built-in support for it, and I don't think any do).

Its main use cases seem to be professional and commercial. The Portrait is a cool thing to have around your home. Imagine having a 3D picture frame on an end table. But $400 is a bit dear, for a conversation piece.

 

[dalauder]

It has a built-in Raspberry Pi that can play pre-recorded videos. However, you can also connect it to a PC and use it as a 3D monitor.


Are you a serious 3D artist, architect, or CAD user? If not, you probably won't have much use for it. It's not the sort of thing you use for playing video games (in part, because the games need to have built-in support for it, and I don't think any do).

Its main use cases seem to be professional and commercial. The Portrait is a cool thing to have around your home. Imagine having a 3D picture frame on an end table. But $400 is a bit dear, for a conversation piece.

The Acer can play video games. That's what I'd buy if it came down to reasonable prices in five years. At least in sports games, depth perception is pretty handy. Using a 3D monitor in NBA 2K really helped with rebounds (I used the 2009 IZ3D screen, which was just two LCDs glued on top of each other).

 

[Alex Atkin UK]

I have amblyopia which causes me to also have a dominant eye. This means at the cinema I barely see 3D, but in a home environment where I can tweak the pupiliary distance I still get a decent experience.

I do get a headache from movies that really push the pop-out effect (eg Despicable Me) but anything that relies more on depth looks great. So I don't think its as limited as you might think, you just need to find the sweet spot for yourself and partly let your eyes and brain adjust to it as it can make you feel ill at first.

VR also works perfectly for me, but again you have to get your sea legs. PSVR2s eye tracking just manages to work for me though the calibration clearly doesn't account for it (my eyes are never perfectly aligned with the test). I suppose people with more extreme eye issues will still be out of luck, but I doubt its anything close to 50%. Its more that the discomfort or viewing without calibrating it first for your own eyes can put people off, as they don't realise how important this is to get a good experience.

 

[bit_user]

The Acer can play video games. That's what I'd buy if it came down to reasonable prices in five years. At least in sports games, depth perception is pretty handy. Using a 3D monitor in NBA 2K really helped with rebounds (I used the 2009 IZ3D screen, which was just two LCDs glued on top of each other).

You remind me of the time I first tried gaming with a pair of LCD glasses. It was back in 1996 or so, and a company offered them for use with a PC. You had to run your VGA connection through a little box they sold, which is how they sync'd the glasses to it. Similar to these, but they were wired:

​

​

I only recall using one game with them, but it was Descent. As you say, the extra depth definitely helped.

One reason I got a PS3 was to try it with my 3D TV. I got a half dozen games with 3D support. After the novelty wore off, I tended not to use their 3D mode due to the impact on latency. At the time, I was mostly playing fighting games + a couple racing games (mostly Wipeout 2040).

 

[3Determined]

I've owned this Acer Spatiallabs 3D monitor for over 3 months now and I couldn't be more pleased; the 3D Ultra is where it is at; I've played hours of Remnant From the Ashes and other titles. I have an LG C2 42" and as much as I love that display for gaming; any game I have played in 3D ultra I can't go back to the C2...I tried, but the depth for these Ultra games is now necessary and the small display with a rtx 4090 with max settings literally looks like 4k with an slight edging effect that literally gets lost in the depth of what it offers...truly an entertaining way to experience these game!!

 

[FatherCreamy]

I've owned a SpatialLabs laptop for a few months, and the amount of 3D Ultra games has increased to 43 as of September 2023. https://spatiallabs.acer.com/truegame/list

I've been impressed with the 3D Ultra games each time I play, but it's not perfect. There's often some ghosting in the darker parts of a scene, and the 3D effect can "shimmy" a bit every now & then due to foreground elements getting in the way (ie. a leaf falling behind your character in A Plague Tale: Innocence)... but despite those flaws it's often way better than playing the games in 2D.
I'll also add that the "pop-out" effect doesn't do too much in games because when you see something get cut-off at the edge of the monitor it diminishes the effect, but it works best when viewing 3D models which can pop-out like 8"-9" from the screen if you push it. And despite the small 15.6" monitor size, playing in 3D is like looking through a window rather than looking at a monitor.

The 3D+ games on the other hand are often filled with visual artifacts that can make you feel like you got suckered into a gimmick. 3D+ uses the in-game depth mapping to create the 3D effect, which persists even when text appears on the screen, causing it to appear distorted and unreadable. Don't get your hopes up for the games on the 3D+ list.

I've had lots of good experiences with 3D Ultra, but one game that sticks out for me is with Octopath Traveler - it's like viewing a 3D diorama that can sink a foot or so into the screen (you can adjust the depth & pop-out to fit your comfort), and you're moving flat 2D sprites around inside of that 3D diorama. It's charming, even though the game itself is cringe.