×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NVIDIA Offers 3D Glasses For the Masses

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the holding-out-for-the-fourth-dimension dept.

261

Vigile writes "A new stereoscopic 3D gaming technology has hit the street today from NVIDIA, though demoed earlier in the year, that promises to bring high quality 3D gaming to the PC. The GeForce 3D Vision technology utilizes active shutter glasses and a 120 Hz display (either 120 Hz LCD or 3D-Ready DLP TVs) to bring an immersive 3D effect to PC games. Using the depth buffer information stored in DirectX, the NVIDIA software is able to construct a stereo 3D image out of existing game content while the 120 Hz requirement gives each eye 60 frames of motion per second negating the physical detriments that were known to occur with previous 3D offerings. The review at PC Perspective details how the technology works, the performance hit your games take while using it and the advantages and disadvantages to the user's gaming experience with 3D Vision."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

261 comments

Uh oh (1)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372537)

Oh boy. Not only does this add a whole new dimension to porn, it also means people will be walking and porning. Yeesh.

RTFA - these are shutter glasses for displays (4, Informative)

billstewart (78916) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374369)

These aren't the kind of video glasses that display the image right in front of each eye - these are shutter glasses that alternately black out the left and right sides, synchronized with your monitor that's alternately showing right and left images.

So if you're walking around instead of looking at your monitor, unless the real world is blinking on and off in sync with your glasses, it'll just look a little dimmer. And if the real world *is* blinking on and off in sync with your glasses, you've found Owsley's Secret Lost Acid Stash... let me help you with that :-)

(My first question when reading the headline about new 3D glasses was to wonder what resolution they are, since I'm not happy reading text at less than 800x600, and most gamer glasses have been 640x200 or less, , but of course they don't work for that either, so no gargoyle mode for me yet.)

Retinal Projection (2, Interesting)

minginqunt (225413) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372541)

It's wouldn't be susceptible to parallax error. They had it in the Star Trek future, why can't we have it in our proper future?

Man is annoyed by this.

Re:Retinal Projection (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372621)

There are companies putting research funds into the subject, but it's far to expensive for home use so far. The only applications that I have heard being anywhere near release are for heads up displays for commercial airliners.

Re:Retinal Projection (4, Insightful)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372833)

The military will have it before the commercial airlines, by probably a couple decades at least. The airlines are perpetually on the brink of bankruptcy whereas the military has (nearly) unlimited funds.

Accessories? (5, Funny)

Mikkeles (698461) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372563)

Does it come with Aspirin?

Re:Accessories? (3, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372981)

If RTFA :), you'll notice that previous systems used refresh rates in the 30Hz range for each eye, which indeed would lead to severe headaches. This system uses 120Hz total (for 60Hz to each eye) which is much more tolerable and shouldn't cause as much eye strain. 80Hz to each eye would be eve better, but we'll see.

Overall though, the general effect shouldn't cause any headaches aside from the refresh rate problems. Afterall most of us walk around all day seeing in 3d - it's just that the objects aren't coming off a screen :).

Re:Accessories? (5, Insightful)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373195)

The problem is that when we are walking around all day seeing in 3d, we can focus on things at different distances by flexing the lenses of our eyes.

In a 3d movie, everything is at the same focal length (the distance from your eyes to the screen) regardless of how far away it appears to be.

That's going to cause some degree of eye strain no matter what.

Re:Accessories? (2, Insightful)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373553)

I even get headaches when playing Far Cry 2 longer than 10 minutes. Reason is that the view is all the time swinging littlebit. My brains register that movement but because I am not moving but staying still, I get headache. Only game what I am suffering from this. Not even the legendary Aliens Versus Predator (1 & 2) did not give this when playing as Alien and running all over places with fullspeed and going 360Â all the time. Far Cry 2 is bad game for me because of that. I wanna find the option to turn off that "realism" effect because it really add realistic feeling about that game ;-)

Re:Accessories? (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372997)

Yeah, I can only take so much of that kind of crap before my head hurts. I have a feeling this is a fad like the entire Wii experience only worse. Nvidia needs to focus on getting more SLI support out in the market and stick with one idea and do it well.

New? (2, Interesting)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372569)


A company named Elsa had 3D shutter glasses for NVidia cards in 2000-2001 or so. I still have a wired and wireless pair. I think NVidia bought them out ages ago and put the 3D stuff in the Detonator drivers. I remember playing Thief 2 with those glasses (it was AWESOME). No idea if they still work, my current game rig has an ATI card.

Re:New? (2, Interesting)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372671)

Yes, I don't feel particularly old but I remember seeing these shutter glasses on GeForce 2. The contrast ratio was not awesome but it worked okay and was provided for free with the card. I wonder why it didn't succeed then. Maybe the lack of support in games. Here the novelty would come from the automatic mode that the driver provides, not from the old tech shutter glasses.

Re:New? (2, Funny)

arugulatarsus (1167251) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372955)

Games did not provide support for the glasses. I remember using my Asus TNT2 Ultra http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=964 [anandtech.com] on final reality and tomb raider 2. I thought this would not work on an LCD monitor though since most of them work only at 60hz. Kudos to greenzilla for playing on the fact that these monitors have a ridiculously high resolution and halving it to maintain the performance while losing sharpness. I don't think this will work for twitch gamers. but for casual gamers, if they can throw in head tracking, this can be a really fun way to play tetris.

Re:New? (1)

Skinkie (815924) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373907)

Games did not provide support? That is non-sense, it was part of the DirectX/OpenGL driver interface within Windows.
I still remember I was playing Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 with my glasses on. I was way cool back then!

Re:New? (1)

arugulatarsus (1167251) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374027)

I'm sorry, I poorly expressed myself.
The driver would provide support for 3d as long as the game used the Z buffer. The user could adjust IIRC for such exotic features as FOV, inverted Z and "eye distance".
Basically games did not need to support it since D3d/OGL worked out of the box, you could load whatever game you wanted from how many generations ago you wanted (mechwarrior 2 anyone?) and get 3d results that would jump out of your 17" CRT monitor. (19-22 for later generations)
Hope that clears things up.

Re:New? (3, Interesting)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374521)

Correction (or emphasis perhaps, since you did mention it), as I had a pair of glasses as well, they worked IF the game used the Z buffer 'correctly'. However many games did wacky stuff with their UI's and the Z buffer, making it do all sorts of wacky stuff.

I think I remember one game had set the "base" of the UI to be at the bottom, while all the interactive parts were at the top, so while it looked correctly without the glasses you had an UI that looked as if it were sunk well below the 'game window' and the dials and gauges are such were floating in the air. What's more, they weren't just floating above the spots they would have had on the base, but offset.

Another game, for some reason, had every other element at a different level, meaning while (again) the UI looked normal without the glasses, it looked like something Escher and Dali would have co-created while on LSD.

Re:New? (1)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373013)

The games didn't have to support the 3D, it was all done by the drivers. I even remember playing some emulators and the 3D actually worked for those emulators that used the DX 3D

Re:New? (1)

randyest (589159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373697)

As other have mentioned, games did not need to support the glasses -- they just worked, because the 3d data is in directX.

They didn't succeed because they gave people headaches due to the refresh rate being something like 30Hz for each eye. The new tech/glasses in this article are 60Hz/eye, which is why it requires special 120Hz displays (which is why these new ones probably won't succeed.)

Re:New? (1)

Skinkie (815924) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373957)

I still have the same 19" Sony CRT monitor, which does 120Hz for the lower resolutions without a problem. That is not really an argument. Since even older glasses of Crystal Eyes even worked with adapted games as Wolfenstein 3D at 320x240 it was also at least 60Hz per eye because for that game they used interlacing.

Re:New? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26374017)

The ELSA Revelator supported higher refresh rates. If you had a good monitor, you could very well use the Revelator at 2*60Hz. FFS, Slashdot needs to go easy on the exponential backoff for anonymous posting.

Re:New? (5, Informative)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372727)

My Asus GeForce 2 shipped with a pair of shutter glasses. The darn things did frak' all on the pack-in game. (Soldier of Fortune) I pretty much tried them out once, then stuck 'em into storage. Shutter glasses are highly overrated.

If manufacturers really want 3D gaming with true depth perception, monitor and GPU manufacturers should work together to create polarized computer monitors. Simply turn on the 3D effect, put on a pair of stylish shades with mismatched lenses, and BAMMO! Instant 3D.

Re:New? (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373031)

monitor and GPU manufacturers should work together to create polarized computer monitors.

LCD monitors are already polarized. [wikipedia.org]

Re:New? (2, Insightful)

wjh31 (1372867) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373145)

they are polarised one way, i think you parent means that it displays two polarisations each with a different image, then glasses with a different polarised lens in each eye will let through different images to allow a 3D effect

Re:New? (5, Interesting)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373113)

I've got a Zalman monitor that does precisely that.

It's great. Unlike anaglyph, it doesn't suffer from ghosting and color problems. Unlike shutter glasses it doesn't require any special support: If you have the monitor, and the glasses, all that's needed is to produce a correctly formatted image. So it can work with any video card without specific support, and you can view 3D photos by just opening the image in the web browser.

The only disadvantage is that horizontal resolution is halved. But it's still much better than the other options.

Re:New? (1)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373239)

To each his own I guess.

Writing them off after trying them once seems a bit rushed. I used mine on several nvidia cards for years and loved them. It helps to use them in a dark room, brightness not too high, etc.

Re:New? Captain Eo!!! (1)

polyomninym (648843) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374009)

I totally agree with what you have to say about manufacturers getting together to make this kind of thing really work right. When I was 12, I was completely blown away by Disney's Captain Eo. If you saw it, then you know exactly what I mean. Crisp, dare I say, close to perfect 3D. I was literally reaching out at the end of the movie to touch that furry guy. I'd love to have that experience again. Cheers.

Re:New? (2, Informative)

mrjimorg (557309) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374031)

Actually, this is a pretty new initiative. It involved working with monitor companies to create 120 Hz monitors that could do 1920x1200 and they spent a lot of time/money making glasses that would eliminate a lot of the ghosting effects, etc that were in prior versions. As for the polarized lenses, many reviewer report getting headaches, etc.

It's not a new technology (3, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373213)

But a new and more likely useful implementation. First off it's wireless which makes them much more practical for general use. The big deal these days is the faster monitors. Back when they first came out, you had to use them CRTs, LCDs were too slow. However even good CRTs had real hell doing refresh rates high enough not to produce severe flicker. 85Hz was fine for a normal image, too slow for this sort of thing to work well. It took a top of the line CRT to do 120Hz at even 1024x768.

Well that's not a problem now. DLP screens update way, waaaaaay, faster. They cycle colours thousands of times per second. So doing 120Hz, or rather 60Hz per eye, is no problem at all.

Nothing revolutionary, but it is practical now. I remember playing with it when it first came out. It was kinda cool, but not all that usable and only really worked when I tried it on a professional CRT at work. This sounds like I could make it work in my living room on a normal DLP screen.

Re:It's not a new technology (1)

grub (11606) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373489)


First off it's wireless which makes them much more practical for general use.

I have a pair of wireless ones (as mentioned above), though they aren't rechargable. True about the refreshes. I had a nice Sony CRT that was running on that setup, 120 Hz was easy for it.

Re:New? (1)

dilvish_the_damned (167205) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373435)

Ran a computer store in `97 or `98 when we had the same sort of thing. Hooked it up to a 21 inch Mag Innovision that no one could afford. It was LCD shutter lens, came with Descent, and was infected. As it turns out, the Epilepsy was hard to wash off.

Re:New? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26373853)

The product was called ELSA Revelator. The company went bankrupt in 2002. A company called "Neue ELSA GmbH" was founded by the former CEO of ELSA AG, and went under as well. Another company founded in the wake of the ELSA AG is Devolo AG, which is alive and well and best known for its powerline communication products.

The ELSA Revelator was indeed all that the summary mentions. More info is here. [stereo3d.com] The Achilles heel was driver support, until support for stereo viewing became available in stock Nvidia drivers, but that support didn't last long. Some other problems with the "automatic" stereo separation (without explicit game support) will most likely also plague the reinvention of the concept: Lens flares, halos, crosshairs and HUD elements appear to stick to the screen because they're drawn with a z-value of 0. The range of z-values varies from game to game and it can be problematic to find a stereo separation width that provides a nice 3D effect without causing headaches due to double vision effects. The ELSA programmers tried to solve the latter problem with a library of manually tuned settings for popular games, heuristics for other games and a tweak overlay for manual adjustments.

Re:New? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26374533)

Even those Elsa glasses were not new. I still have my X-Specs 3D glasses for my Amiga 1000.

Gaming? (3, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372603)

Who thought of selling a 3d display system for gaming?

Let's see. How many gamers watch porn regularly?
Now, how many non-gamers watch porn regularly?
And finally, how many games get so greater for being in 3d as porn?

How hard can it be to sell a product with "Full 3D titties. $X. Pay here."

How hard? I ask you.

Re:Gaming? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372673)

I can't see the big deal with 3D porn?

Re:Gaming? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26372865)

It's cool. Try it.

Google it, cross your eyes, and enjoy.

Never seen movies though, only still shots. Anyone have a link?

Re:Gaming? (4, Funny)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372721)

It is often the case that "gaming" is code for "porn." That's just how they have to market it to the mainstream.

Same as how "home video" was code for "home porn."

Same as how "internet access" was code for "porn access."

Same as how "broadband" is code for "more porn."

Same as how "high-def" is code for "clearer porn."

You get the picture.
(Which is code for "you get porn.")

Re:Gaming? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26372761)

How hard can it be to sell a product with "Full 3D titties. $X. Pay here."

I think you could sell that even when flaccid.

But 60 Hz wont be enough to capture the stroking motions.

If your specs aren't good enough (1)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372615)

I can imagine this being an epic fail, if your specs aren't good enough. You'll need top of the line to make sure that the refresh rates don't jitter and your framerate doesn't die.

So, I definitely want one, but I'm not going to pretend that this would be remotely useful until I upgrade to a brand new machine.

Re:If your specs aren't good enough (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372659)

So, I definitely want one, but I'm not going to pretend that this would be remotely useful until I upgrade to a brand new machine.

Well, you could buy it now and, while you wait for a more powerful rig, use it on older games.

Like tetris.

Re:If your specs aren't good enough (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372677)

I can imagine this being an epic fail, if your specs aren't good enough.

If they're not "good enough" you should just be able to contact NVIDIA for a pair that works...

Re:If your specs aren't good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26373169)

Ba dum Che!

Nothing new (-1, Redundant)

the_arrow (171557) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372649)

I got 3D-goggles when I bought my old GeForce (the first generation of GeForce) card. Although I have to admit it was probably some extra stuff added by Asus.

Re:Nothing new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26374125)

Yet another retarded "nothing new" post. Guaranteed to be found in any thread about an announced product.

From TFA

Active glasses for stereo 3D viewing are not a technology created by NVIDIA and in fact they have been around for some time as well. However, the quality of the glasses and the user experience has been low due to low frame rates (30 Hz to each eye usually) and bulky hardware. The GeForce 3D Vision product plans on breaking that mold by using 120 Hz displays (60 Hz to each eye) and much improved hardware.

And for those of us without 20/20 vision? (4, Insightful)

astrodoom (1396409) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372705)

Seems like those glasses would not fit over mine. So I guess this product is going purely for the good vision and contact lens market?

Re:And for those of us without 20/20 vision? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26372961)

Seems like those glasses would not fit over mine.

Who are you? Buddy Holly?

Re:And for those of us without 20/20 vision? (1)

arugulatarsus (1167251) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373203)

Seems like those glasses would not fit over mine. So I guess this product is going purely for the good vision and contact lens market?

Can you wear contact lenses? Dunno, I have 20/20 and am probably an insensitive clod.

Re:And for those of us without 20/20 vision? (1)

astrodoom (1396409) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373289)

I suppose one could, although I've grown quite accustomed to my good ol spectacles and I can't really see changing one of the major parts of my lifestyle and appearance merely to use a product...

Re:And for those of us without 20/20 vision? (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373851)

At least older generations of these glasses (as others have said, lower refresh rate versions were available with even the original GeForce, many were bundled by Asus) fit just fine over glasses.

I have the older glasses (5, Interesting)

Flentil (765056) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372747)

The glasses work great. Any direct3D will show in full 3D. The only reasons I don't wear them all the time (or ever really) are bad 3d driver support from nvidia in the past, and more importantly, every game I've ever played in 3D has used some weird visual shortcuts for displaying explosions or gunshots or something that breaks the whole immersion. For example, in Grand Theft Auto San Andreas, it's all full 3D except the streetlights and headlights. Those appear to be painted on a 2D window in front of you because they don't really appear in the 3D space. Anyway, it's weird enough to make me not want to play it that way. So if this is going to ever work in the mainstream, game developers have to meet halfway and stop using graphical shortcuts like that.

Re:I have the older glasses (4, Insightful)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373573)

Any direct3D will show in full 3D

Any Direct3D application will look good and 3D. However, there is a flaw . While it will show the pixels adjusted for each eye, the occlusion testing is only done once. That is, your right eye cannot see slightly around a barrel, or both eyes will perceive you rounding a corner at the same time.

if this is going to ever work in the mainstream, game developers have to meet halfway and stop using graphical shortcuts like that.

It's not worth it to use until these devices become mainstream, or have reached a pricepoint where they can become so easily. Then they will rush to do so.

Re:I have the older glasses (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26374241)

I have to admit, I'm not sure why you were modded Flamebait. Both your points are good and valid from what I can tell...

Maybe the mods are just in a bad mood today.

Re:I have the older glasses (2, Informative)

Chabo (880571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373783)

I think this is fixed nowadays, with most developers no longer using sprites for steam, explosions, etc.

Example: Valve, as recently as Half-Life 2: Episode 1 (June 2006), was still using sprites for fire and explosions. However, by the time The Orange Box (October 2007) was released, they were using full 3D models for those entities.

I imagine any game made in the past year or so will be full-3D, with no sprites.

*sigh* (1)

PeDRoRist (639207) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372797)

Screw this shutter glass nonsense!

The masses don't need no stinkin glasses (active, passive or whatever), what they need is autostereoscopy.

Manufacturers have been teasing with autostereoscopic technology (I'm looking at you Philips) throughout 2008, now they need to actualy push these to market.

Got these with my Asus V7700 GeForce 2 in 2001 (2, Informative)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372861)

Nothing new. I got these with my Asus V7700 GFX card (a very good card, btw!) - but they had a cable rather than wireless sync. The GFX card had an extra connector for these. The glasses worked but needed calibrating and were a guarantee for headache after playing for 10 minutes or so. But Dark Reign 2 and simular games looked really cool with them. For 3D RTS I think something like this can even give you an advantage - if you can raise your monitor refresh rate enough, that is.

Re:Got these with my Asus V7700 GeForce 2 in 2001 (1)

randyest (589159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373771)

No, you did not get these in 2001. You got headache-inducing 30Hz/eye glasses. These are 60Hz/eye, which is why they require a 120Hz display.

Who are those "masses" ? (0, Redundant)

dword (735428) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372867)

OK, OK, 3D Glasses for the Masses, but who will be able to afford them? I wasn't able to find anything related to pricing. Please enlighten me if you know anything related to the price.

Re:Who are those "masses" ? (2, Informative)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373127)

$199 according to Nvidia's website. Can't find them for sale anywhere else. I'd be willing to try them for half that, but I'll have to hold off for now.

Re:Who are those "masses" ? (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373931)

$199! How can they possibly claim "for the masses" at that price point.

I'm fairly certain it does not cost THAT much extra to make 60Hz shutter glasses (as compared to the 30Hz ones that were not even remotely close to $199, at most they typically resulted in a $20-30 price premium for the cards they were bundled with 8-10 years ago like some of the original Asus GeForce 256 cards.)

Not only that but you need a high-end 120Hz monitor. I know even the old 30Hz glasses stopped working with most LCDs back in the day when LCDs started becoming popular (which was a contributing factor to the old shutter glasses dying off.)

Peripheral vision is important. 3D is not. (1)

Normal_Deviate (807129) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372871)

I have played with 3D glasses and found the experience disappointing. Parallax is only important within a few feet, and most of my depth cues seem to come from other sources. In game settings a 3-D "feel" was obtained only by exaggerating the parallax cues, which quickly became unpleasant. IMO, the sense of immersion depends much more on peripheral vision. Hopefully we will have that before long, through some technique more elegant than having 16 monitors.

Re: Peripheral vision is important. 3D is not. (2, Interesting)

JMZero (449047) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373063)

For most of the games we tried (FPS games, etc), 3d wasn't spectacular. But for racing games, I found the 3d effect (with an eMagin head mounted display) to really make the game better - you got a real sense of speed.

I think the thing that will push this over the top is good head tracking. If your perspective changed with head movement, I think the 3d illusion would be really compelling.

Re: Peripheral vision is important. 3D is not. (1)

Failed Physicist (1411173) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373551)

First thing I thought when seeing the article is, 'As soon as I buy myself those glasses, I'll also buy a wii remote; might as well go all the way.'

I'd combine this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw) with the glasses.

After reading the title... (5, Funny)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372885)

... I expected the Slashdot story to be something like:

3 young lasses from Manassas made glasses for the masses rendering 3d in two passes. Currently the glasses are omitting noxious gasses and they're receiving an action lawsuit in classes so they really need to cover their asses.

more as time passes.

3D Polarized Monitor? (2, Interesting)

ZirbMonkey (999495) | more than 5 years ago | (#26372951)

If anyone has ever worn sunglasses while looking at an LCD monitor, you quickly discover that tilting your head causes the screen to go black in specific orientations.

Hasn't anyone tried to manufacture an LCD with alternating LCD polarity between adjacent lines of pixels? Mounting cheap polarized films on any frame is all you'd need to split the monitor image between left and right eye. No shutter frames needed, the video card merely splits an image into stripes for the left and right eye at normal refesh rates. Same idea as "progressive scanning" images on some HDTVs

Digital Cameras (1)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373053)

It would be great if cheap glasses leads to the development of cheap stereoscopic digital cameras. Why should 3-d photography be limited to running only on your grandpas antiques?

Re:Digital Cameras (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373303)

I've got two words for you: duct tape!

Actually, digital cameras have gotten so small, I bet some models could be simply attached to a dual-mount tripod or something.

OpenGL support? (2, Interesting)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373197)

After reading the article, I notice they make mention that this works by utilizing data provided from Direc3D....does anyone know if this works with OpenGL-based games as well?

Re:OpenGL support? (4, Informative)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373279)

Welp, to answer my own question, it looks like it does not. That's a shame, as the only game I really play is ETQW.

Re:OpenGL support? (1)

maz2331 (1104901) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374047)

It seems that nVidia is still stupidly keeping the OpenGL support as a Quadro-only feature. There is no good reason to not support it across the line - 3D in a window is actually a really cool feature, much better than having to run "full screen".

Come on, guys. If you want to sell the stuff, quit being asshats and do it already.

Re:OpenGL support? (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374387)

It seems that nVidia is still stupidly keeping the OpenGL support as a Quadro-only feature.

Huh? So it's just my imagination that my GeForce 9800gtx (as well as all other GeForce cards) can run OpenGL applications natively?

120 Hz HD? (1)

arugulatarsus (1167251) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373333)

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any dvi mode that can reach 120Hz. In the article NV was talking about working with some proprietary TI dlp stuff. Is this technology condemned to HDMI/HDCP + Projectors with a lamp life of 1/2 of your typical sandbox game?

60 still hertz (2, Insightful)

Eil (82413) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373355)

the NVIDIA software is able to construct a stereo 3D image out of existing game content while the 120 Hz requirement gives each eye 60 frames of motion per second negating the physical detriments that were known to occur with previous 3D offerings.

Well, except that some of us can still see the 60Hz flicker. I want to gouge my eyes out looking at anything less than 75Hz, which would work out to 150Hz combined for this technology.

Re:60 still hertz (1)

dilvish_the_damned (167205) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373529)

the NVIDIA software is able to construct a stereo 3D image out of existing game content while the 120 Hz requirement gives each eye 60 frames of motion per second negating the physical detriments that were known to occur with previous 3D offerings.

Well, except that some of us can still see the 60Hz flicker. I want to gouge my eyes out looking at anything less than 75Hz, which would work out to 150Hz combined for this technology.

I am guessing they are banking on LCD being fairly slow.

There are downsides to this approach (4, Informative)

Forkenhoppen (16574) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373375)

To understand why this may be a poor choice for 3D glasses technology for consumers, as well as some thoughts on why NVIDIA might have gone with it anyways, here's an article [theinquirer.net] that gets into the nitty gritty. Brief summary; headaches and batteries.

(Insert usual disclaimer about the Inquirer not exactly being an enthusiastic supporter of NVIDIA here..)

Linux support? (1, Redundant)

CoolHnd30 (89871) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373439)

I saw no mention in the article if Linux, OSX, or other OS'es would be supported. That is a large issue for me if I'm going to come off $200...

Re:Linux support? (1)

joe_cot (1011355) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373657)

given that they only support Direct X, I don't see how they would build in Linux support. Sure, you can run it in wine, but I can't see writing a driver dependent on that. We really need to just kill Direct X with something good and also cross platform. OpenGL works, but lacks the shortcuts that Direct X has.

I've played it all (5, Informative)

ShooterNeo (555040) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373487)

I've owned and used heavily 2 stereoscopic 3d systems.

One used a large CRT monitor that could run at 150Hz. I had two different 3d shutter glasses I used. I remember having to do quite a bit of tweaking with each game I wanted to play, but eventually I was able to get 'perfect' effects that were completely and totally awesome.

You can't really know til you try it, but 3d can make games feel dramatically more real. It can make even older games look a LOT better. Deus Ex was pretty darn awesome looking when your weapons actually have depth to them, and so do the enemies.

I then built a passive stereoscopic rig using polarized glasses and 2 LCD monitors, as well as a half-silvered mirror. Total cost : about $650. That one also ruled, and worked better than the shutter glasses. I found that the killer app game for it was World of Warcraft.

This was 18 months ago : I was playing WoW in full 3d. I had to disable just 1 effect to get it to work perfectly, all of the time, smooth as glass. Again, a lot of the graphics of that game look amazing when they have depth, because your brain automatically fills in details that aren't really in the low detail graphics.

Why did I quit? Time, and the fact that Nvidia basically abandoned stereo 3d for a while. My 8800GT did not work at all for a long time. Stereo 3d IS worth it, but it requires heavy driver support or it doesn't work.

Also, I never could eliminate "ghosting". That is where the images from one eye leak into the other. One game in particular, a horror game, was AWESOME and VASTLY more scary with depth. The problem was, the dark shadows and flashlights would create various halos on the screen from ghosting which was very unrealistic and distracting.

Ghosting is inherent to shutter glasses. The only 3d tech that completely eliminates it is a headset with a separate display for each eye. However, no affordable, high resolution headsets are available on the market today. (and when I say affordable, I mean for any reasonable price. You cannot get a high resolution head mounted display for even $2000)

They always do. (2, Insightful)

radarsat1 (786772) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374065)

Why did I quit? Time, and the fact that Nvidia basically abandoned stereo 3d for a while.

That's the problem. They always do. 3D glasses have been in and out of favour with manufacturers for years and years. They keep trying it, and then giving up. Maybe it's just too invasive to require people to use special glasses, but for whatever reason it never seems to catch on.

I remember that the Sega system had 3D glasses. I think there were about 2 games for them. I even bought (and still have) a pair for my Amiga computer. I literally only ever used them with the demo game that came with them. Nothing else was available, as far as I could tell.

Even earlier, stereoscopic movies were made in the 50's. It also turned out to be nothing but a passing fad.

I think stereoscopic vision adds a really cool level of detail to the 3D experience. Combine it with head tracking for *truly* impressive results. But unless the industry gets its act together and actually produces games and applications that use them, this technology will forever be doomed to last about a week and then disappear.

Maybe this time around it will be different: At least at this point we have many more games and applications that are actually rendered in 3D, which is a significant difference from the state of computing circa 1995. And the level of detail and realism in 3D rendering has increased dramatically. We also have operating systems that fully utilize 3D technology for day-to-day interaction, which might have interesting uses for depth perception.

Also, from a consumer point of view the glasses themselves seem to be quite a bit more stylish and less bulky, which should help quite a bit.

For those who say these will induce headaches: when I had the old glasses for the Amiga they refreshed at 30 Hz, alternating with the interlaced scanlines of the monitor display. Heck even just staring at a 30 Hz monitor without glasses will give you a headache. If these really update at 120 Hz, I don't think headaches will be a problem.

Re:I've played it all (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374671)

When they abandoned the 3D support is when I stopped caring about 3D from nVidia. If it's not there when I want it, what good is it?

As for this new offering, 'for the masses' is an asinine thing to say. The $200 glasses are as expensive as ever (if not moreso) and the special monitor needed to go with them is hardly going to be a cheap one.

Other uses besides gaming? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373749)

I'm not a gamer, so I immediately began to think of other 3D exploration uses:

  • Flying around Mount Everest
  • Flying through Manhattan
  • Flying over the Hawaiian Islands

But I *didn't* think of porn. I should go see a doctor, there must be something wrong with me.

I had these about 10 years ago (1)

bsmoor01 (150458) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373777)

And they gave me terrible headaches. Playing Descent in real 3d was pretty durned cool, though. Too bad 15 minutes of play left me hurting pretty badly.

I'm guessing the old ones probably shuttered at 60Hz. I'm doubtful that the 120Hz rate solves the issues. I bet it still looks a bit flickery, because I know I can't look at a 60Hz display without eye strain and headaches. They'll need to hit 150 Hz before it really looks smooth.

other uses than gaming (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373833)

I, for one, can't wait to use it with Blender. That will surely help in 3D modeling. Finally we'll have a 3D cursor that is really 3D! :)

About time... More than 20 years after the Atari. (1)

GuerreroDelInterfaz (922857) | more than 5 years ago | (#26373857)

      I still have around the StereoTek LCD shutter glasses that I used with a lowly Atari ST during the second half of the 80's. Maybe I can adapt them for the PC ;-)

      It's about time.

--
El Guerrero del Interfaz

Alphablending? (1)

Spykk (823586) | more than 5 years ago | (#26374515)

A common way to render alpha blended (translucent) objects is to first render everything that is not alpha blended, then turn off the depth buffer and render the alpha blended objects in order of furthest from the camera to closest. This is necessary to keep an object you can see through from occluding objects that are behind it. How does their software account for these objects that were rendered without any depth information?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...