| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 113519 | 2010-10-23 22:50:00 | Nvidia 3D Glasses | ManUFan (7602) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1147130 | 2010-10-23 22:50:00 | HI all Was thinking of maybe getting a pair of Nvidia 3D glasses (pricespy.co.nz). Has anyone got any experience with these? My system is as follows: Intel quad core i5 750 CPU @ 2.67GhHz 4 GB RAM GT240 Video (1 GB) 500GB HDD Viewsonic VX2233wm-3 Full HD monitor Cheers |
ManUFan (7602) | ||
| 1147131 | 2010-10-23 22:53:00 | And it is compatible with your graphics card? (Probably a yes) |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 1147132 | 2010-10-23 22:59:00 | At that price I would like to try before I buy. I used some a few years ago and didn't like them. I was lucky that they were on loan to me to try. I sent them on to another person who bought them. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 1147133 | 2010-10-23 23:40:00 | Don't you also have to have a special monitor? (like this (www.playtech.co.nz) or this (www.playtech.co.nz)) If you've got a pair of those cheap red and blue glasses you can try 3D by going Start > All Programs > NVIDIA Corporation > Enable 3D. It works on all monitors and gives a similar effect. |
davidmmac (4619) | ||
| 1147134 | 2010-10-24 01:11:00 | The 3D exploit using red and green filters over each eye is quite simply cheap and nasty, and is a 'poor mans' 3D. Obviously if the image being displayed is not in a suitable colour to suit the filters the 3D effect will be diminished or lost. To fully render the scenes without any 'conflict' between the image for each eye would require all scenes to be coloured like a cartoon using red, green, black and white only. Polarising filters (with polarising screen) will give a much better result over the entire spectrum of colours. However, it's like watching the screen through sunglasses, and will be a dimmer image than without the filters. There's newer tech using monitors with built in prisms - a trick a bit like those nasty pictures that appear to show a moving scene when you move in front of them, or those kids books where the animals have eyes that seem to move. This tech has great potential for glasses-free / filter-free 3D, but may be a bit restrictive in where you can sit in relation to the screen. The prisms may induce the appearance of a vertical grating across the screen. All of this is useless unless you have two good eyes that work together. If one eye is particularly weak, or turns (cross eyed/lazy eye) then it's a dead loss. The persuit of 3D can lead to fatigue and headaches. It will not be something you'll happily use all day. Best 3D is likely to be achieved with specs/goggles that have an independant hi def display for each eye. These would have to have an adjustment to suit wide heads or narrow heads, otherwise double vision or headaches/fatigue will again be a problem. An alternative, if they can figure out how to make it - would be a screen with an interlaced 'comb' of opposing polarisers - kinda like our interlaced tv images, with each 'field' of the image being polarized opposite to the other other field... clear as mud no doubt. Whatever the case, if you wish to exploit 3D, you will effectively be halving the true resolution of the image that the eyes receive, coz the display has to split the pixels available for each eye. ie, play a 3D game at 1024x768 and each eye actually gets an image of 512x768. It's a tech that is not yet ready for mainstream. |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1147135 | 2010-10-24 01:35:00 | I'm yet to have 3D work for me. as in, those cheap 3d glasses you get when seeing movies etc.. they don't work | goodiesguy (15316) | ||
| 1147136 | 2010-10-24 01:36:00 | Whatever the case, if you wish to exploit 3D, you will effectively be halving the true resolution of the image that the eyes receive, coz the display has to split the pixels available for each eye. ie, play a 3D game at 1024x768 and each eye actually gets an image of 512x768.Sorry Paul - this is shutter technology - i.e. you double the refresh rate on the monitor, and alternate right / left images. The glasses are synchronised to the monitor, and alternately block the left / right eye as appropriate. The result is that a monitor running at 120Hz will give you an independent 60Hz feed for each eye, at the monitor's full resolution. If the monitor is running at 1280*1024, then that is what each eye will see. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 1147137 | 2010-10-24 06:45:00 | Thanks for your responses. At the prices on pricespy I can't really justify buying any anyway :-) I think that my monitor and video card are 'good' enough, but will wait (for now!).......... Cheers all! |
ManUFan (7602) | ||
| 1147138 | 2010-10-24 07:42:00 | Sorry Paul - this is shutter technology - i.e. you double the refresh rate on the monitor, and alternate right / left images. The glasses are synchronised to the monitor, and alternately block the left / right eye as appropriate. The result is that a monitor running at 120Hz will give you an independent 60Hz feed for each eye, at the monitor's full resolution. If the monitor is running at 1280*1024, then that is what each eye will see. Oh, I stand educated! Thanks. If you do have a monitor that can deliver 100+Hz refresh rate, then this does sound a reasonable option... still effectively wearing sunglasses in order to play. I'd not be keen on doing it on a monitor with 60Hz - giving 30Hz to each eye. Some people might find this refresh rate uncomfortable, and for a susceptible few it could bring on epilepsy. About 10Hz is the worst rate for epileptics, but I have seen a few people who can't handle TVs with their 50Hz (25fps) rate. How much GPU and CPU oomph is needed for a FPS game in 3D? |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1147139 | 2010-10-24 08:03:00 | Thanks for your responses. At the prices on pricespy I can't really justify buying any anyway :-) I think that my monitor and video card are 'good' enough, but will wait (for now!).......... Cheers all! i dont think your monitor is 3d... |
GameJunkie (72) | ||
| 1 | |||||