3D GT5 on Pc displays??

So here is my question:

Samsung has a 3D screen which is sold with the nvidia 3dvision as a package.
Will this screen support 3D by Sony?? Cause the screen is not as cheap as the Tv's, and to watch then some movies and play some games in 3d till tv are mainstream, this might be a good alternative 💡💡💡💡

But is it possible? and will i need to spent than an extra 150 bucks for sony glasses ( i already get glasses and they were paid by my insurance!!!! not sure they will do it for shutterglasses; shutterwhat??).
Or are the glasses by nvidia enough and just need the sony senors??

-

This is precisely the reason why I think 3D is a complete waste of time - confusion around compatibility. It is so obviously a marketing-led technology, yet they seem to be completely missing the point, because most people I speak to about really don't want or care for it.

Yeah if it be alone the screen it would be ok, 'cause you can use it on ps3 and pc + bluray.
But adding 150 quids for glasses is 75% of the screen price. and that is insane.

But i think we need this step,(for people who have too much handy) so the industry gets funds for 3d, so they can improve real 3d without glasses, and that will be in 7 years.
Then i buy a TV for 1500 bucks, but my sony 40z4500 is a year old and 5 years warrenty, so i don't see the point either

TokyoDrift

This is precisely the reason why I think 3D is a complete waste of time - confusion around compatibility. It is so obviously a marketing-led technology, yet they seem to be completely missing the point, because most people I speak to about really don't want or care for it.

Click to expand...

You're being a bit unfair and quick to judge here -- I'm not saying that this is the case with EVERY single product out there, but there is always at least some confusion when a new product line comes out. That is of course not mentioning that 3D TVs aren't even out yet, so confusion is perfectly understandable. HDTVs have been out for a few years now, and so is digital cable. There is still a LOT of confusion regarding which cables support HD signals, whether HDMI is better than composite and people that have digital cable receivers thinking their singal is "HD" just because they have a digital signal/receiver. Just do a quick google search and see for yourself. Of course these are just two examples that came to mind regarding very well positioned products that have been in the market for several years now and you can still see confusion.

TokyoDrift

This is precisely the reason why I think 3D is a complete waste of time - confusion around compatibility. It is so obviously a marketing-led technology, yet they seem to be completely missing the point, because most people I speak to about really don't want or care for it.

Click to expand...

I think it wont be in every house hold, they are not aiming for that.. But either way, technology in 5 years will be available for anyone, all you need is 120hz TV, in future all TVs will have 120+hz. So for the ones that wanna enjoy 3D, let them be, for the ones that dont, they dont have to. Just like buying a wheel to play GT5, its available, but not everyone has to use one. So its not waist of time.

Coxis

You're being a bit unfair and quick to judge here -- I'm not saying that this is the case with EVERY single product out there, but there is always at least some confusion when a new product line comes out. That is of course not mentioning that 3D TVs aren't even out yet, so confusion is perfectly understandable. HDTVs have been out for a few years now, and so is digital cable. There is still a LOT of confusion regarding which cables support HD signals, whether HDMI is better than composite and people that have digital cable receivers thinking their singal is "HD" just because they have a digital signal/receiver. Just do a quick google search and see for yourself. Of course these are just two examples that came to mind regarding very well positioned products that have been in the market for several years now and you can still see confusion.

Click to expand...

Relative levels of confusion aside (which I agree with), 3D has blatantly been rushed to market in a bid to try and get consumers to part with even more money when there is really no need. Sure, in 5 years time every TV on sale will have it and you either use it or you don't, but sitting in front of a flat screen with special glasses on...puh'lease! Wake me up when a display is developed that has true depth perception without needing to fool my brain and induce headaches.

I don't say many negative things about technology development, but this...3D...nah, a completely pointless step IMO. Image quality isn't even where it needs to be, yet here they are developing gimmicks that do nothing to improve the underlying image.

Pointless for you, but for me, sure I won't watch all Movies and Play ALL games in 3D, but in 5 Years, I might watch occasional Movie and game in 3D. Why not
It's almost as saying I don't wanna play a Video game with a Controller, I want it to recognize my brain waves. And if people don't wan it, they can watch super fast 120 Hz screen, as well maybe in 5 Years, TV's will be 4X 1080p displays. They are already selling the Projection with 3840x2160. In few years we might see them in flat screen TV's with special movies made for the high resolution and 120hz FPS.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a bit of depth perception - 3D itself is not what I'm dissing here - it's the method in which it is being achieved (offset images with special glasses).

I understand you, I am not trying to point you at, I am just wanna give some info that I think everyone will watch 3D occasionally in the future.

I think we can have 3D televisions without the need for glasses, The TV will have to have multiple screens and couple feet deep.. Or maybe some kind of Box with super high resolutions lasers or holograms displaying a 3D environment.

Another way to view a 3D without glasses, is to use a Camera on top of the TV, so if you move the picture moves, but that can only work with ONE person, and that person would have to move and not sitting down.

Goldrusher

Yes.

Click to expand...

no ?

NoxNoctis Umbra

I think we can have 3D televisions without the need for glasses, The TV will have to have multiple screens and couple feet deep.. Or maybe some kind of Box with super high resolutions lasers or holograms displaying a 3D environment.

Click to expand...

Yep, I personally think this will be the way things go, with clever use of lasers and mirrors to create the illusion of something being in 3D space. Arcade games of old have used such tricks, and it was very convincing.

I suppose people will have to buy new DVD/Blue ray comparable 3D stuff again.

I've got a mate who is massively into star wars. He bought the collection on VHS then on DVD. Then they brought out the extra scenes versions which he bought again. I don't suppose star wars is possible to release in 3D but who knows. When I mentioned the possibilty to my friend he just groaned.

3D was possible on VHS and normal TV. Heck I remember when I was a lil kid back in Poland watching some Animal Show in 3D! Sony PS3 will get a 3D ready patch around e3.

I watched that 3D stuff myself when i was a kid. Even had certain comics that were made with the red and blue glasses. Utter crap. I'm expecting a bit more than that old crap.

Spagetti69

I watched that 3D stuff myself when i was a kid. Even had certain comics that were made with the red and blue glasses. Utter crap. I'm expecting a bit more than that old crap.

Click to expand...

It's waaaay better than that, trust me. If you want to get an idea of what 3D looks like in the 21st century, go see Avatar or the new Alice in Wonderland. The cinema is using a slightly different process (ninja voodoo circular polarisation) but I'm pretty sure the TV version will look pretty similar. It impressed the hell out of me but I'm still not convinced about just how effective it will be for gaming. Point of focus is fixed for one thing - suits a passive experience like watching a film but I'm pretty sure it would annoy me in a game.

Here you guys, future of 3D technology and gaming.. Drugs.

That brings up another consideration. Alot of films put in scenes for 3d effect, jaws had legs floating towards you. Done nothing for the film but looked ok for it's time with the cellophane glasses. You can watch a 3D movie in standard mode and recognise stuff that was put in just for 3D. My worry is that the gaming culture will follow suit and rely on gimicky scenes just to please the 3D crowd. A bit like having to put a waggle in a wii game wether it needs it or not.

Once there is 3DTV without glasses, I'm in! With glasses, I'm a bit optimistic. Have to try it out myself to see if its practical.

TokyoDrift

This is precisely the reason why I think 3D is a complete waste of time - confusion around compatibility. It is so obviously a marketing-led technology, yet they seem to be completely missing the point, because most people I speak to about really don't want or care for it.

Click to expand...

Firstly 3DTV isnt limited to a single display technology be it LED/LCD/PLASMA/DLP/CRT

Stereoscopic 3D or S3D was "nerdy popular" back in ole CRT monitor days.
With the advent of TFT/LCD technology they were incapable of displaying 120HZ so the rise of the flatscreen technologies killed off the chance for S3D to contine to grow. It is only recently that TFT monitor technologies could operate in with adequete response times and at 120HZ.

Tokyodrift, you seem very anti 3DTV and I think you need to wait to you play a few good games before you comdemn it. The internet has loads of personal reports of it being great with games and new games coming will make clever usage of it. Sony are going to completely ROCK the console games market with this, yes it will take time but trust me Stereoscopic 3D in games is not going to go away. As for the glasses part, many just overreact to it. Gamers are used to playing with headsets on, earpieces and what matters to gamers or even with 3D is that if the effect is worth putting up with the discomfort.



3D Vision Monitors/Projectors
Past/current 120Hz monitors will NOT WORK with the new HDMI 1.4 3D Specification. Some 1.3 devices can indeed work but they need to be capable of detecting the "3D Flagging" for various formats of 3D and how it is arranged. Once a display is cabale of detecting that "3D flagging" it knows how to display the 3D data automatically.



Nvidia 3D Vision
This technolgy requires the glasses to be connected to the PC. The glasses do not sync with the actual internal hardware of the screen itself. Now this is fine for everything the PC is sending out in a 3D format even movies will be possible but for external sources how do the glasses work. Their still is a market for 3D vision in the PC industry even for multimonitor support but at least now its going to be possible to play both on 3D HDTVs or on 120HZ monitors but still two seperate standards.



The Problem
Originally I too was considering doing a 120HZ monitor for 3D as well but in thinking about it the problem is how do you get a 120HZ monitor to work with glasses that connect to a PC and you want to use PS3? Nividas work with PC drivers and software on a PC only. Therefore you cant just plug in Nvidia 3D vision glasses to a PS3.

3DTVs use glasses that sync with the TV itself, these monitors/projectors may not have inputs for seperate 3D glasses to sync with or the hardware and no manufacturer has compatibility with other brands. Basically you cant swap around glasses. If you buy a 3DTV and use the glasses on the TV you cant go use them with a 120HZ monitor as well. As such their is no agreed standard for 3D glasses, Panasonic glasses wont work on a Sony 3DTV etc. This makes creating a standard for monitors very difficult.



New 3DTV HDMI Standard Agreed
Only recently has a standard for 3D over HDMI been set.
Games will be 720P @ 100Hz /120Hz (including PS3)

All HDMI 1.4 3DTVs will be compatibile with all devices that meet this standard.



Nvidia/ATI - The Future
Recently both these companies have now agreed to join the HDMI 1.4specification. Therefore at somepoint in 2010 graphics cards will be released that support HDMI 1.4 3DTV. This for the PC market means that PC Gamers will be able to play their 3D PC games on a much larger sized 3DTV than be restricted to smaller 120Hz monitors. The difference now is you do not use the Nvision Glasses but the glasses the 3DTV uses. It is unclear yet if HDMI1.4 is able to allow higher than 720p resolutions in 3D games at 120HZ. Movies in 1080p 24Hz are not a problem though. Previously high resolutions in 3D on Nvidia was done by dual linking DVI / Displayport as a single DVI did not have the bandwidth.

Personally what Im amazed at is their are no 3DTVs available in small sizes for the gamer market. The smallest I am aware of is by Phillips and 32". I would expect however in the future some "120HZ PC Monitors" might just appear that may come with 3DTV glasses included taht work enterily with the display and not PC to meet the new HDMI 1.4 3D standard.

For 3DTV Skeptics
Have a read

Skeptic Gets Convinced!

Ive included this which I had on other forums....

Agreed HDMI Standard
PS3 3D Utilises the newly agreed industry standard for "3D Packet Data" which can be used on HDMI 1.3 and the new HDMI 1.4 hardware and displays.
Upto now their was no agreed standard and various hardware used various methods of creating 3D.

3D Via HDMI Frame Packing Structure
The 3D support of 1.4 supports up to 1080p resolution and structures including: full side-by-side, half side-by-side, frame packing, field alternative, line alternative, left + depth, left + depth +
gfx + gfx depth.

For displays to work with HDMI 1.4 the display device must support all mandatory 3D formats.
As for source devices it must support at least one of the mandatory 3D formats. The mandatory 3D formats include:

Mandatory 3D Formats

•For movie content:
•Frame Packing
•1080p @ 23.98/24Hz

•For game content:
•Frame Packing
•720p @ 50 or 59.94/60Hz

•For broadcast content:

•Side-by-Side Horizontal
•1080i @ 50 or 59.94/60Hz

•Top-and-Bottom
•720p @ 50 or 59.94/60Hz
•1080p @ 23.97/24Hz

Implementing the mandatory formats of the HDMI Specification facilitates interoperability among devices, allowing devices to speak a common 3D language when transmitting and receiving 3D content.

Mandatory requirements for devices implementing 3D formats are:

•Displays – must support all mandatory formats.
•Sources – must support at least one mandatory format.
•Repeaters - must be able to pass through all mandatory formats

Therefore now that an industry standard has been agreed for 3D via HDMI with hardware and content suppliers means this will avoid confusion and ensure compatibility.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What About Recent 3DTV Games Like Avatar on X360 or PS3?
X360 and indeed some PS3 games used 3D but it was inferior and relied on interlacing which reduces the image quality by using 1/2 resolutions.
Additionally some games had support for various 3D hardware so setup wasnt as easy as it could be.

Avatar game as an example allowed upto 5 different 3D methods that the user had to manually set depending on whatever type of 3D display/glasses they had. The current 3D has been achieved by transmitting the image using the Texas Instrument DLP3D checkerboard pattern or an interlaced image for interlaced display.

Basically the interlaced method allowed the L/R eye information to be split in two and this used the same bandwidth working within HDMI 1.2 limations. This however doesnt use the full resolution but combines both fields using half the resolution available. As such this half resolution, "interlaced" method is similar to how 3D will be used with SKY 3D again limited by bandwidth and HDMI 1.2







------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Facts Of PS3 3DTV Gaming.
Firstly we will not have 1080p 3D this generation on consoles.
Even if a game like "Wipeout" supported 1080p resolutions in 3DTV form this will not be the case.
The standard is set for Dual 720p @ 120Hz

• Upto Dual 720p Native resolution in games is supported
• Games will be 60Hz each eye = 120Hz
• Game code for the games is needed to be rewritten to utilise the hardware
• Individual 3D Patches for current games is unlikely
• New 3D Specific releases are expected
• Games should auto detect the 3D/TV
• PS3 will be compatible with other brands of 3DTVs not just Sony models

PS3 3DTV Games Already Demonstrated
Take note that Sony will be wanting to use popular franchises to promote 3D gaming.
All of the below tech videos are from games that sell very well and many of the titles are owned by studios Sony controls.

GT5 was the first title shown to use this technology in 2009 and now actually seems to be Sonys leading title for 3DTV.
It has been shown in playable form at various trade shows and recently at CES in Jan 2010. Rumours are that GT5 will be one of the main titles to push the 3DTV sales as the game is also Sonys most profitable franchise.

Games Demonstrated:

GT5 Prologue
Motorstorm
Wipeout
Killzone 2
Little Big Planet
Baseball










Ive searched many forums and games sites and in general the comments are mostly productive for the games in 3D. However just as no different to comments you would find regards peoples experience and opinions of "Avatar" in the cinema the opinions of people for 3D gamming vary from not very good to really good. I myself dont know what to believe or expect but Im certainly curious and want to buy or believe in the technology and in many cases the 3D effects can be really good but part of that comes down to the individuals ability in processing 3D imagary it seems...

Announced 3D Specific Titles
So far I can only find word of two games being officially announced/confirmed.
These are GT5 & Super Stardust.

Many more games will be coming and it is likely those demonstrated as tech demos will appear if not in re-incarnated versions of the original games in 3D but possibly as new titles. Would it be unbelievable to expect new Wipeout or Motorstorm titles to offer 3D. Sony is likely to have several games to be launched this year to make use of it and with 3DTV releasing these games and the firmware update have been reported to in the past make a summer 2010 release.

Okay this confuses me. Dude seems to think the shutter 3d requires your head to be at the right angle or the effect is roont. I know this was a problem with the old polarisation but they got round it by inventing circular polarisation. What the hell does any of that have to do with LCD shutters? Is this issue for real?

P3nT4gR4m

Okay this confuses me. Dude seems to think the shutter 3d requires your head to be at the right angle or the effect is roont. I know this was a problem with the old polarisation but they got round it by inventing circular polarisation. What the hell does any of that have to do with LCD shutters? Is this issue for real?

Click to expand...

Heres an example for you these arent polarised glasses they are shutter basesd....
Here

Notice the shutter glasses get darker when in rotation...
Panasonic VT range looks to be one of the best sets and their Plasma and glasses do not suffer from this.

I was reading some comments in another thread, and I got to thinking about bandwidth issues regarding 3D gaming, after having read in passing that HDMI 1.2 cannot "do" 3D...

Well, apparently the HDMI 1.3 standard can handle 10.2 Gb/s - The PS3 supposedly has a HDMI 1.3 port.
HDMI 1.2 can do 4.95 Gb/s, for comparison's sake.

120 Hz, 12-bit (Deep colour?) 1080p requires ~4.5 Gb/s (3 Gb/s for 8-bit)
Interestingly, 120 Hz, 12-bit 1440p requires only 8.2 Gb/s
Clearly Sony were thinking ahead about something - we now know they were definitely going 3D, but is HDMI 1.3 over-spec'd?

Now, Blu-ray speeds allow a 1x BD player to pull ~36 Mb/s, and the current standard is apparently 1.5x for BD movies - this gives a total of ~55 Mb/s, but only 48 Mb/s is allocated to A/V transfer.
The PS3 has a 2x BD player - giving ~73 Mb/s max bandwidth, or 64 Mb/s accounting for the same 12.5% overheads as for 1.5x. This is an increase of 33% over 1.5x (as you'd expect).

Going from 1440p to 1080p of the same quality requires an increase of ~78% in bandwidth, so unless the compression of the video data is "improved" we won't see 1440p Blu-Rays working on PS3 (at least by my simplistic, linear calculations...)

And now, seeing as the standard is 720p for 3D (assumedly because the hardware can't throw decent enough visuals out at 120 Hz) it makes even less sense:

So, why does the PS3 have HDMI 1.3?

Refs:

• HDMI 1.3 Overview
• Cable tests for future standards
• Forum where I done got ma BD figures...

Video compression for 3D does not require 2x Bandwidth.
I dont have the technical details but it uses less, approx 1.5 I think I read somewhere.

As for 3D games already produced for X360 and PS3 to this date in time.
They are "interlaced" half resolution A/B fields combined.

You ask why hdmi 1.3. PS3 was the very first announced hdmi 1.3 device.
HDMI 3D is dual 720p as in PROGRESSIVE not interlaced like previous 3D games.
The quality will be higher and it will work automatically with a 3DTV not needing manual setting selected for various 3D display types or 3D glasses.
Thats all encoded in the 3D flagging that the TV will recognise.


X360 cant do dual 720p 3D as indeed its 1.2 bandwidth is too low.

Sonys 2010 3D Blu Ray stand alone players are 1080p 3D and guess what they are hdmi 1.3
PS3 should then have no problems with 1080p 3D in Blu Ray Movies.

But the second link in my post has the required bandwidths for (simulated) progressive signals of various "qualities" - HDMI 1.2 would be adequate for 3D on the PS3, given it is the processing power that is the limiting factor, not A/V transfer bandwidth.

By my, again simplistic, calculations, the PS3 ought to be able to put out 120 Hz of 720p, given that it is approximately 10% less taxing on the framebuffer than 1080p at 60 Hz. This of course, does not take into account the rendering pipeline before this, which has other bits added on and potential bottlenecks left right and centre.

If the 3D movies are interlaced, then of course they wouldn't require the full 2x bitrate.

My point is: the HDMI 1.3 connection seems horrendously over spec'd for the application - unless there's something I'm overlooking.



EDIT: Funnily enough, I was. The bandwidths quoted were only one third of the required bandwidth for HDMI transport. Thus, HDMI 1.3 is definitely needed for HD in 3D, though we could just about squeeze 120 Hz, 8-bit 1080p down HDMI 1.3 (without audio, or other overheads...) Hence, I see why the standard is 720p, and why the Xbox will indeed "struggle".

Thanks for making me question my post! 👍

Spagetti69

I suppose people will have to buy new DVD/Blue ray comparable 3D stuff again.

I've got a mate who is massively into star wars. He bought the collection on VHS then on DVD. Then they brought out the extra scenes versions which he bought again. I don't suppose star wars is possible to release in 3D but who knows. When I mentioned the possibilty to my friend he just groaned.

Click to expand...

Your mate's gonna be pleased about this:

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/106/1061786p1.html

I wish Lucas'd leave those movies alone though, the re-mastering was ok but then the special edition crap was going to far and ruined the masterpieces those movies were.
And it's to be some wierd not really 3d way of making them into 3d.

P3nT4gR4m

Okay this confuses me. Dude seems to think the shutter 3d requires your head to be at the right angle or the effect is roont. I know this was a problem with the old polarisation but they got round it by inventing circular polarisation. What the hell does any of that have to do with LCD shutters? Is this issue for real?

Click to expand...

Yes and no.

Circular polarisation as used in cinemas cuts out the problem he describes.

But LCD TV screens are polarised as are LCD shutter glasses, it's not to do with the 3d, it's just the way they are. So tilt your head with LCD shutter glasses on while watching an LCD screen and the image could well be affected, whether any manufacturer can or has got round this problem I don't know.

Watching plasma TVs with shutter glasses shouldn't have this problem.

Another issue with tilting your head is that your eyes are no longer in the alignment they were assumed to be when the movie was being filmed, that is level eyes, and the 3d effect gets ruined anyway whether you can still see the screen or not although you probably have a bit more than the couple of degrees he talks about.

Thats why i wont buy a 3D TV right now. The end of a technology is far better than a new one!

3D will be a passing trend, just like motion-sensing controls. Noone wants those glasses on their head more than 2hours and it's uncomfortable for people with actual glasses. 3D technology existed for a long time, but they need something new to sell more ****. Side note, Avatar with 3D or not is a bad movie notheless.