Guys, all this talk about stereoscopic games made me very excited about aquiring my future 3D rig.
BUT (there is always a but
I am a bit unsafe about the resolutionsyou are talking about here.
To start I am in Brasil and most people (includemyself) still use CRTs, and since I am about to buy a completely new rig I was seriously thinking about to go for a more imersive equipment until I saw this article. My set up was to be 3x 19´ LCD Display with a Nvidia 8800 and triple head to go.
But LCD resolutions always concerned me a little bit because they are fixed instead of CRT that we can choose from a variety of resolutions and they all look great (or almost).
Then I saw this new aproach to displaying 3d games but the resolution goes even lower. I mean in CRT we can use very easily 1600x1200, then in LCD goes to 1280x1024 and now the best projectors under $1000 can display maximum of 1024x768.
My question is: isn´t it such low resolution to display such ammount of details in the games? Games are always evolving to display more and more details and the graphic cards are evolving also to keep the run.
Can I get the same level of details with 1024x768 in a projector? will I be missing something compared to 3x 19´LCD with 1280x1024?
This is my first point risen to discuss, but there is more.
1-I thought if I am going to loose details then can I use Triple Head to Go to link 3x Projectors at 1024x768 and use them with stereoscopic 3d games?
2-Well does not need to be 3 projector, 2 can be just fine. But did anyone actually tried it?
3-Can I use 2 projectors WITHOUT Dual head to go BUT with simple two display output from the graphic card?
The only problem so far I see using the triple head to go with 3 projector is the fact that even each of them being 85hz the triple head to go downgrade them all to 60hz, is this really a problem since eyes can get 30 fps?
BUT (there is always a but
I am a bit unsafe about the resolutionsyou are talking about here.
To start I am in Brasil and most people (includemyself) still use CRTs, and since I am about to buy a completely new rig I was seriously thinking about to go for a more imersive equipment until I saw this article. My set up was to be 3x 19´ LCD Display with a Nvidia 8800 and triple head to go.
But LCD resolutions always concerned me a little bit because they are fixed instead of CRT that we can choose from a variety of resolutions and they all look great (or almost).
Then I saw this new aproach to displaying 3d games but the resolution goes even lower. I mean in CRT we can use very easily 1600x1200, then in LCD goes to 1280x1024 and now the best projectors under $1000 can display maximum of 1024x768.
My question is: isn´t it such low resolution to display such ammount of details in the games? Games are always evolving to display more and more details and the graphic cards are evolving also to keep the run.
Can I get the same level of details with 1024x768 in a projector? will I be missing something compared to 3x 19´LCD with 1280x1024?
This is my first point risen to discuss, but there is more.
1-I thought if I am going to loose details then can I use Triple Head to Go to link 3x Projectors at 1024x768 and use them with stereoscopic 3d games?
2-Well does not need to be 3 projector, 2 can be just fine. But did anyone actually tried it?
3-Can I use 2 projectors WITHOUT Dual head to go BUT with simple two display output from the graphic card?
The only problem so far I see using the triple head to go with 3 projector is the fact that even each of them being 85hz the triple head to go downgrade them all to 60hz, is this really a problem since eyes can get 30 fps?
Pyricblade
Distinguished
- Apr 10, 2007
- 10
- 0
- 18,510
One problem that may immediately pop up...
Last I knew, most shutter glasses use the DDC pin of the DB15 connector to sync. Since you would now potentially have 2-3 sources for sync, the only way of which I can think to overcome the problem would have to be done through the driver. Even at that, you would see an fps drop as everything would have to sync to whichever display was taking the biggest performance hit at the moment (thinking to the future of gaming if not immediately since an 8k series card is fairly powerful). If the driver is not written for this then you can expect some weird happenings such as:
Flicker on the displays your glasses are not plugged into
Stereoscopic inversion on the displays which your glasses are not plugged into
Rolling bands (like when you use older or lower quality camcorders to record a monitor or TV) along with the prvious 2 problems
If you like resolution for the sake of sharpness you won't have much problem with the lower res. If you like it because you play games where being able to tell the difference between something that's 1 pixel vs 4 pixels in size can make or break your game ( which I imagine not if you were already contemplating 1280x1024) then you will have problems.
As far as refresh rate, for most people the breakover point is somewhere between 72 and 85 Hz (in my experience). Those with faster eye-brain communication may have issues even at this high a level. Something to keep in mind is that even though TV's may only change the image 30 times per second it's actually refreshing much more than that. That is to say 30 frames per second is the accepted standard for fooling the brain into believing there is smooth motion, but 60 refreshes and up is a must for preventing eye fatigue. Recall that shuttering halves the effective refresh.
Last I knew, most shutter glasses use the DDC pin of the DB15 connector to sync. Since you would now potentially have 2-3 sources for sync, the only way of which I can think to overcome the problem would have to be done through the driver. Even at that, you would see an fps drop as everything would have to sync to whichever display was taking the biggest performance hit at the moment (thinking to the future of gaming if not immediately since an 8k series card is fairly powerful). If the driver is not written for this then you can expect some weird happenings such as:
Flicker on the displays your glasses are not plugged into
Stereoscopic inversion on the displays which your glasses are not plugged into
Rolling bands (like when you use older or lower quality camcorders to record a monitor or TV) along with the prvious 2 problems
If you like resolution for the sake of sharpness you won't have much problem with the lower res. If you like it because you play games where being able to tell the difference between something that's 1 pixel vs 4 pixels in size can make or break your game ( which I imagine not if you were already contemplating 1280x1024) then you will have problems.
As far as refresh rate, for most people the breakover point is somewhere between 72 and 85 Hz (in my experience). Those with faster eye-brain communication may have issues even at this high a level. Something to keep in mind is that even though TV's may only change the image 30 times per second it's actually refreshing much more than that. That is to say 30 frames per second is the accepted standard for fooling the brain into believing there is smooth motion, but 60 refreshes and up is a must for preventing eye fatigue. Recall that shuttering halves the effective refresh.
Google earth doesn't work in full screen mode, so it doesn't support 3D with the current nvidia drivers.
"Dynamic Digital Depth" has released a driver which allows Google Earth to be run in full stereoscopic 3D. More info here:
http://www.tridef.com/promotions/google-earth.html
However, for frame-sequential 3D you will need a NVIDIA Quadro graphics card. From memory the Tridef software is only capable of supporting anaglyph 3D on the NVIDIA GeForce cards.
Some screenshots of Google Earth in 3D are also on the page listed above.
Or you can install NVstrap from Rivatuner (guru3d.com) and then the Quadro functionality of any existing Geforce is unlocked.
The chips for Quadro and geforce have always been the same, it is in the software and sometimes the bios that the quadro distinction is made.
As for the fellow above me from Brasil, do some research, the 19" monitors are 1440x900 or some such, you can turn that into a Projector yourself with a kit, use two and you can do the polarized 3d.
Do some research, use the Anti-Aliasing modes. 1280x1024 is just fine for gaming. I don't know what you are expecting, just get a single wide-screen 24" LCD would do you fine. 2 if you want to do polarized 3D.
Get a 7900 series card for 3D right now, overclocked with 512MB they are just fine. NOT the dual card 7950, but the regular 7950GT 512 should be fine. I paid $120 for a 256MB 7900GS, I clocked it at 650Mhz core with a Zalman and ramsinks, it does fine for my dual 1280x1024. (If you think about dual polarized projection, each eye sees 1280x1024, so it is really double the resolution).
Use 19" or 20" screens and you will get 1680x1050 or 1440x900 or 1440x1050.
The 20" model is only $270 new, get two and the mirror and the polarized glasses and you can make your own one of these: http://www.planar.com/products/flatpanel_monitors/stereoscopic/SD2020.cfm
I keep pointing out the benefits of the dual LCD polarized setup, IE high resolution, totally passive glasses, the inexpensive nature of high quality large high res LCDs.
No cords, no sync issues, no batteries, no flickering, no ghosting, anyone can watch with a pair of glasses, up to as many as can see the screen.
Get a couple refurbished or used LCD screens and the price drops significantly.
NVIDIA CARDS HAVE DUAL OUTPUT FOR A REASON, THAT REASON IS TWO DISPLAYS. ENGAGE YOUR BRAINS AND QUIT ASKING!!
God forbid that anyone actually reads the User manual on the video card you spend $xxx on. Or reads the driver manual from Nvidia.
RTFM, google that please.
I should drop this thread, I am getting tetchy with people who can't read.
[Edit, techy :arrow: tetchy]
You're also getting rude...
Thanks for the tip about NVstrap.I thought tetchy covered rude 😛 (Edit, I meant tetchy, sorry)
I guess it was nvidia forums where 3 people in a row asked if you needed 2 cards for dual display, and then one guy asked about if he needed a third card to mirror one of the 2 displays for the 3D :roll:
I suppose I could edit out the rudeness, but how dumb do you have to be to not think :arrow: "hmm, two outputs = two displays?", and then "maybe I will read the manual", and then "oh, all that paper in the package that I paid for has a purpose, to tell me things that I need to know".
I messed a little around with stereo and treied this planar Systhem with 2 CRT Monitors. This works ok, except with C&C where -if there is any 3d - the mouse isn't mirrored on the 2nd monitor. Now I read Google Earth could be 3d and want to try this.
I installed a quadro driver (96.02?) and one for stereo for my 7900gs, but can't get/choose the classical Controll pannel, to activate stereo...
If stereo with this modification how is eg. Google Earth appearing in 3d? Is the menue still useable?
Greetings LukePC
PS: I read most of the stuff posted here and learnt a lot more about stereo. Go on like this^^
I installed a quadro driver (96.02?) and one for stereo for my 7900gs, but can't get/choose the classical Controll pannel, to activate stereo...
If stereo with this modification how is eg. Google Earth appearing in 3d? Is the menue still useable?
Greetings LukePC
PS: I read most of the stuff posted here and learnt a lot more about stereo. Go on like this^^
Aerobernardo
Distinguished
- Apr 2, 2006
- 135
- 0
- 18,680
AMAZING ARTICLE! I HAVE TO COMMENT IT ON CAPS!
THANKS TOMSHARDWARE, REALLY AMAZED ME HOW EASY IT CAN BE... THINK OF IT, WITH 2K YOU CAN HAVE IT ON HIGH DEF (WITH PROPER VIDEO CARD FOR THE FRAMERATE OF COURSE), SAME PRICE OF A HDTV
ONCE AGAIN: AMAZING ARTICLE! TECHNICAL AND PRACTICAL. NOW I BELIEVE IT CAN BE DONE WITHOUT BEING A NASA ENGINEER
THANKS TOMSHARDWARE, REALLY AMAZED ME HOW EASY IT CAN BE... THINK OF IT, WITH 2K YOU CAN HAVE IT ON HIGH DEF (WITH PROPER VIDEO CARD FOR THE FRAMERATE OF COURSE), SAME PRICE OF A HDTV
ONCE AGAIN: AMAZING ARTICLE! TECHNICAL AND PRACTICAL. NOW I BELIEVE IT CAN BE DONE WITHOUT BEING A NASA ENGINEER
Hi alik4041,
FEAR needs a little tweaking to run properly, because it uses post processing. Especially in Slow Mo this kills the 3d Effect unless you switch to DX8 mode somewhere in the menue.
Here is a thread about it^^
http://forums.stereovision.net/viewtopic.php?topic=2822&forum=5&6
My problem was just, that it had a some "ghosting" on my CRT. When I'm standing next to a white wall and are watching into the black corridor at enemys, I can see the white wall twice, because the phospor needs some time to get black again.
But in my opionion it is very well playable if you use the Nvidia Laser Sight (normal crosshair is crapp in s-3D) and ignore the gosting or increase gamma (a lot) for additional brightness.
On a DLP beamer you shouldn't get any gosting, right?
FEAR needs a little tweaking to run properly, because it uses post processing. Especially in Slow Mo this kills the 3d Effect unless you switch to DX8 mode somewhere in the menue.
Here is a thread about it^^
http://forums.stereovision.net/viewtopic.php?topic=2822&forum=5&6
My problem was just, that it had a some "ghosting" on my CRT. When I'm standing next to a white wall and are watching into the black corridor at enemys, I can see the white wall twice, because the phospor needs some time to get black again.
But in my opionion it is very well playable if you use the Nvidia Laser Sight (normal crosshair is crapp in s-3D) and ignore the gosting or increase gamma (a lot) for additional brightness.
On a DLP beamer you shouldn't get any gosting, right?
In my experience so far, you still DO experience a bit of ghosting with a DLP projector, even at 85Hz refresh, yes.
Not really sure why this occurs either--it certainly isn't because of glowing screen phosphers. Might instead be something to do with afterglow effect in the rods and cones of the eyeballs? That same "afterglow" effect you get when you step into a brightly lit room and suddenly shut off the lights....
I will have to say that it's pretty minimal in my view. No showstopper, certainly.
Bigger issues to me might be that some colors tend to shimmer more than others--yellow seems the worst, but there is some of this effect too with red and green.
What causes this sensation, I think, is the fact that the two eyes see some objects displayed with different levels of color (and I would guess it has to do with the rotating colorwheel timings rather than the actual throughput of the signal in Hz). So I'll see one billboard as bright yellow, for example, with the left eye, but only a dirty brown with the right eye.
While the two eyes will agree on the stereo placement of the object in space, they won't agree on the color of the object they are each seeing. Thus they instead agree only on an object that will seem to shimmer and dance to some degree.
I have the idea this problem might be solved by re-engineering the projector so that the colorwheel speeds were all doubled, tripled, or quadrupled, but if we try that we're now heading off into the DIY/experimenter realm. Not really just "off-the-shelf" stuff any more.
---------
On the plus side, I have to say it's the LIFESIZE stereo projection which really makes it all worthwhile for me. I've used shutterglasses in the past for driving, but even with a big (21") CRT monitor located right behind my wheel, I just couldn't quite buy into the idea that I was sitting inside a real car--the stereo effect, colors, and resolution were all quite good on my monitor...but everything seemed considerably "undersized" at the same time. Felt like I was driving a large (1/4 scale) RC car instead of a real, full-sized, automobile.
With lifesized stereo projection, however, that fundamental disconnect has finally been bridged over, and my brain buys into what I'm seeing pretty thoroughly at this point.
C_S
Not really sure why this occurs either--it certainly isn't because of glowing screen phosphers. Might instead be something to do with afterglow effect in the rods and cones of the eyeballs? That same "afterglow" effect you get when you step into a brightly lit room and suddenly shut off the lights....
I will have to say that it's pretty minimal in my view. No showstopper, certainly.
Bigger issues to me might be that some colors tend to shimmer more than others--yellow seems the worst, but there is some of this effect too with red and green.
What causes this sensation, I think, is the fact that the two eyes see some objects displayed with different levels of color (and I would guess it has to do with the rotating colorwheel timings rather than the actual throughput of the signal in Hz). So I'll see one billboard as bright yellow, for example, with the left eye, but only a dirty brown with the right eye.
While the two eyes will agree on the stereo placement of the object in space, they won't agree on the color of the object they are each seeing. Thus they instead agree only on an object that will seem to shimmer and dance to some degree.
I have the idea this problem might be solved by re-engineering the projector so that the colorwheel speeds were all doubled, tripled, or quadrupled, but if we try that we're now heading off into the DIY/experimenter realm. Not really just "off-the-shelf" stuff any more.
---------
On the plus side, I have to say it's the LIFESIZE stereo projection which really makes it all worthwhile for me. I've used shutterglasses in the past for driving, but even with a big (21") CRT monitor located right behind my wheel, I just couldn't quite buy into the idea that I was sitting inside a real car--the stereo effect, colors, and resolution were all quite good on my monitor...but everything seemed considerably "undersized" at the same time. Felt like I was driving a large (1/4 scale) RC car instead of a real, full-sized, automobile.
With lifesized stereo projection, however, that fundamental disconnect has finally been bridged over, and my brain buys into what I'm seeing pretty thoroughly at this point.
C_S
I've been thinking of ordering a pair of e-dimensional 3d glasses but the thing holding me back is the way counter-strike: source looks
i installed the stereo drivers and took some jps screenshots and i can clearly see the 3d effect just by having the stereoscopic double image side by side
the crosshair, kill info and chat msgs are double, this is quite annoying
is there a way to fix this? at the very least, i need to see my crosshair
also, in marvel ultimate alliance, the minimap and the hero interface are also doubled
if you guys can suggest a fix to this, I'm ordering the glasses right away
Thanks
i installed the stereo drivers and took some jps screenshots and i can clearly see the 3d effect just by having the stereoscopic double image side by side
the crosshair, kill info and chat msgs are double, this is quite annoying
is there a way to fix this? at the very least, i need to see my crosshair
also, in marvel ultimate alliance, the minimap and the hero interface are also doubled
if you guys can suggest a fix to this, I'm ordering the glasses right away
Thanks
Pyricblade
Distinguished
- Apr 10, 2007
- 10
- 0
- 18,510
A lot of what you are talking about with doubling is usually due to a combination of stereo separation and convergence adjustment. The convergence adjustments are defaultly bound to the F5 and F6 keys (may require holding CTRL... I forget offhand) and are used to determine the Z level at which sight for each eye should intersect. Usually in situations where the menuing is affected in this manner I use the convergence to set the menu at 0 or very nearly 0 screen depth. Then adjust the stereo separation to add/remove depth as necessary for acceptable viewing.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/04/10/wall_sized_3d_displays/index.html
Great article. I've been totally fascinated with stereoscopic 3D since I was a kid!
But do you really need an inverter? Couldn't you just physically invert the wireless transmitter unit instead?
Great article. I've been totally fascinated with stereoscopic 3D since I was a kid!
But do you really need an inverter? Couldn't you just physically invert the wireless transmitter unit instead?
Pyricblade
Distinguished
- Apr 10, 2007
- 10
- 0
- 18,510
Inversion of the transmitter won't buy you anything. What I mean is that the signal received by the glasses is essentially the same regardless of orientation (with the exception of line-of-sight issues). You could turn the glasses upside-down, they tend to be difficult to wear in that fashion.
Hey nubie! I just, after settling a legal dispute that could have cost me $300, bought a mirror from teleprompter mirrors and some polarized 3d glasses.
Got the "Terminator" one and 3 amusemark park style ones for guests.
I paid for a mirror large enough for a 24" LCD, though I plan to start with 20" or 22" LCDs.
I am going to exploit a local walmart. They ripped me off when refusing to allow me to return a cheaply made bicycle that rusted badly within days of purchase. So, I am going to abuse their return policy by buying 2 LCD monitors, playing with them for 5 weeks, and then returning them. I'll do everything with cash, and will buy the same displays AGAIN...
Got the "Terminator" one and 3 amusemark park style ones for guests.
I paid for a mirror large enough for a 24" LCD, though I plan to start with 20" or 22" LCDs.
I am going to exploit a local walmart. They ripped me off when refusing to allow me to return a cheaply made bicycle that rusted badly within days of purchase. So, I am going to abuse their return policy by buying 2 LCD monitors, playing with them for 5 weeks, and then returning them. I'll do everything with cash, and will buy the same displays AGAIN...
Questions for nubie, or anyone else who's gone the dual LCD/planar route:
What refresh rates are you able to get out of the two monitor pairings with your current planar setup?
My assumption (based on the typical 75Hz max refresh for an LCD monitor), is that you are actually seeing ~30-37 FPS at each eye (each eye is refreshed twice for each stereo frame) but I'm wondering if it's just possible one might somehow set things up instead to drive each eye @60Hz (or even 75Hz) and thereby realize an effective "stereo throughput" of 120-150Hz*?
[*Which is actually just 60-75Hz overall, of course]
This couldn't be done with your 6800 video card, I realize, nor with mine (7800GS AGP)...but I have to wonder if something very powerful like a 8800 GTX might just be able to drive a mid-res (1280 x 1024 or even 1600 x 1200) pairing of LCD's somewhere near this range....
[EDIT: Turns out, yes, this powerful single card should be able to drive either of these high rate configurations, although only the 1280x1024 solution will be able to refresh at 150Hz (75Hz x2) in 32 bit color--either color resolution or refresh rate drops off a bit when we move up to 1600x1200--it'll send output at this resolution only @120Hz (16 bit color) or 100Hz (32 bit color).]
--------
The idea then (for me anyway) would be to rig the two LCD's into a DIY stereo projector, instead of pursuing the single DLP projector route.
Thoughts?
C_S
What refresh rates are you able to get out of the two monitor pairings with your current planar setup?
My assumption (based on the typical 75Hz max refresh for an LCD monitor), is that you are actually seeing ~30-37 FPS at each eye (each eye is refreshed twice for each stereo frame) but I'm wondering if it's just possible one might somehow set things up instead to drive each eye @60Hz (or even 75Hz) and thereby realize an effective "stereo throughput" of 120-150Hz*?
[*Which is actually just 60-75Hz overall, of course]
This couldn't be done with your 6800 video card, I realize, nor with mine (7800GS AGP)...but I have to wonder if something very powerful like a 8800 GTX might just be able to drive a mid-res (1280 x 1024 or even 1600 x 1200) pairing of LCD's somewhere near this range....
[EDIT: Turns out, yes, this powerful single card should be able to drive either of these high rate configurations, although only the 1280x1024 solution will be able to refresh at 150Hz (75Hz x2) in 32 bit color--either color resolution or refresh rate drops off a bit when we move up to 1600x1200--it'll send output at this resolution only @120Hz (16 bit color) or 100Hz (32 bit color).]
--------
The idea then (for me anyway) would be to rig the two LCD's into a DIY stereo projector, instead of pursuing the single DLP projector route.
Thoughts?
C_S
Well, I am a bit confused (or maybe you are
).Since each eye sees only one screen, accomplished optically, not dynamically, there is no difference because LCD panels do not flicker. You can't tell the difference between 60, 70 or 75hz I am running dual 75hz because my monitors will do it. My left eye views an LCD directly, while the right eye is dark, since I have a mirror up the other monitor is displayed in the right eye and to the right eye it appears dark
With an LCD the refresh rate has nothing to do with anything, you can't see the flickering.
I am not using Shutter glasses, merely polarized lenses to block the light from this setup:
As you can see the glasses do all the polarization, there is no flickering at all and you can't tell what refresh rate is set without checking the driver panel or the monitor menu.
Here are some more screenshots. First with no glasses:
Then through the Left eye of the glasses:
The Right Eye:
No trickery, just polarized glasses ($3):
You will notice that the polarization isn't perfect, probably because I am trying to hold a camera and the glasses and click the button for monitor identify and then snap the shot quickly, in practice the contrast is much higher than shutter glasses, and anaglyph isn't even in the running.
So, yes in theory blah blah blah, but I have a 7900GS and it is doing fine at dual 1280x1024 60 65 70 or 75, and you can't tell at all which one you are looking at.
I wouldn't call it more than it is, 1280x720x32-bit @75hz, per eye (dual, or x2 monitors)
I guess I can't help you any with your question, I hope you understand better what is accomplished with this method, there is no need to use high refresh rates on LCD technology with the Planar method.
DIY projectors made out of 17" LCD monitors will be 1280x1024 in resolution.
For projection you need a silver surface screen. I have found some killer ones for under $200 (up to 100" diagonal) here:
http://www.onlyscreens.com/versatol.htm
The prices aren't working as I checked it a minute ago, but you can email the guy, my screen was shipped from the factory new for $142 total.
The eBay seller search (this works, upgrade to Silver Matte at checkout):
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZmrm71
Da-Lite calls the surface "silver-Matte", so you can reflect polarized light.
When you make two DIY projectors you must mirror one of them and then project both images on top of each other, since you are building it yourself you can make one projector internally mirrored.
I was helped a lot by the Projector Log of this guy from Spain, he is using 2 19" LCDs (1440x900!!) to make his stereo Polarized setup.
http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15333
For projection you need a silver surface screen. I have found some killer ones for under $200 (up to 100" diagonal) here:
http://www.onlyscreens.com/versatol.htm
The prices aren't working as I checked it a minute ago, but you can email the guy, my screen was shipped from the factory new for $142 total.
The eBay seller search (this works, upgrade to Silver Matte at checkout):
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZmrm71
Da-Lite calls the surface "silver-Matte", so you can reflect polarized light.
When you make two DIY projectors you must mirror one of them and then project both images on top of each other, since you are building it yourself you can make one projector internally mirrored.
I was helped a lot by the Projector Log of this guy from Spain, he is using 2 19" LCDs (1440x900!!) to make his stereo Polarized setup.
http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15333
bryans3572
Distinguished
- May 5, 2007
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
Read about some conversion software etc.. for dvd's. Anyone have any information about watching or converting standard dvd movies to 3d, and watching on the systems mentioned in the posts?
Would be great fun to watch.. ahhh.. "private content" dvd's in 3d... :roll:
Would be great fun to watch.. ahhh.. "private content" dvd's in 3d... :roll:
Quite right, nubie. I obviously didn't understand it. I glossed quickly over it searching for solutions to my own questions, I'm afraid--rather too tightly focused on the connectivity issues the other night, both here and in some other forums I frequent. Error mine, not yours.
Your screenshots do clear things up for me and they also show some big advantages to this method where color reproduction and overall brightness are an issue (as they are with most DLP projectors and the shutterglasses method).
Thanks too for the links--that last one, in particular, has proved invaluable already, providing solutions to quite a few other problems. A very useful blog, that one....
-----
As you point out, this method (as used in projection) does demand a higher "quality" of screen, since it must reflect not just light, but polarized light back to the eye in order to work. This MAY eventually be the one stumbling block that forces me to continue instead down the path of the strobed/shutterglasses projection solution, but I'm certainly not ready to say that for sure until I do some hands on testing of some of these components myself.
In any case, this solution has real potential and some clear advantages over the other method.
Biggest advantage to the DLP shutterglasses route right now (for me) would be simply that I already have a working system in place pretty much "off-the-shelf," and without much fiddling. Certainly nice to have until I can get a better (but also more involved) system up and running to replace it, so I'm glad I tried it...but it probably won't satisfy me long term. An LCD solution will be the way to go instead, I do think.
Very glad you looked into this thread. Thanks again.
C_S
Your screenshots do clear things up for me and they also show some big advantages to this method where color reproduction and overall brightness are an issue (as they are with most DLP projectors and the shutterglasses method).
Thanks too for the links--that last one, in particular, has proved invaluable already, providing solutions to quite a few other problems. A very useful blog, that one....
-----
As you point out, this method (as used in projection) does demand a higher "quality" of screen, since it must reflect not just light, but polarized light back to the eye in order to work. This MAY eventually be the one stumbling block that forces me to continue instead down the path of the strobed/shutterglasses projection solution, but I'm certainly not ready to say that for sure until I do some hands on testing of some of these components myself.
In any case, this solution has real potential and some clear advantages over the other method.
Biggest advantage to the DLP shutterglasses route right now (for me) would be simply that I already have a working system in place pretty much "off-the-shelf," and without much fiddling. Certainly nice to have until I can get a better (but also more involved) system up and running to replace it, so I'm glad I tried it...but it probably won't satisfy me long term. An LCD solution will be the way to go instead, I do think.
Very glad you looked into this thread. Thanks again.
C_S
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Question Pc no longer detects working external HDD/SSD drives but still detects usb keys.
- Started by Robdam
- Replies: 3
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram