Will someone please explain 3D!

  • Thread starter Neenor
  • 157 comments
  • 12,280 views
292
GTP_Neenor
I saw the news today of the confirmation of GT5 will be released in 3d. Great. But what exactly does this mean?

I remember watching Jaws in 3d about 15 years ago just by using the special red/green retro glasses. My question is, why is this news about a 3dtv so big and do we have to have a 3dtv in order to play in GT in 3d or will our current setups show 3d by using a pair of glasses.

If anyone can explain this 3dtv stuff, especially in relation to GT, then I for one would appreciate it.
 
I also think it would be good if somebody could clear this up, Is it all over for people who have brought brand new HD tv's yet are about to be old technology very soon?
 
hi

you will need a 3d ready tv from 1500gbp (a standard hd ready tv wont work (as far as i know and understand)) & a high speed hdmi cable 30gbp & some 3d glasses which cost around 100 gbp (depending on the brand of 3d tv ie panasonic & samsung), the glasses are different to the ones you used before they look like sunglasses as in grey lenses not green & red.
 
Last edited:
I'm still confused. Some places say we "might" be able to play 3d with existing Tv's / projectors and some people say you need to spend £1500 + for a tv, cables and spectacles.

Still confused, I have a GameTime GT7000 projector. All I'm trying to figure out is whether I can run in 3d or not...
 
As far as I know the 3D thing is just a feature and can only be run on a 3D Ready TV... I dont know if youve been paying attention but, Sony is going to launch their 3D TVs soon and now you can play GT5 on them... YAY!!!! Just what I was waiting for all these years.... 3D GT5!!!!

* Last bit was sarcasm btw.... ;)
 
I'm still confused. Some places say we "might" be able to play 3d with existing Tv's / projectors and some people say you need to spend £1500 + for a tv, cables and spectacles.

Still confused, I have a GameTime GT7000 projector. All I'm trying to figure out is whether I can run in 3d or not...
It might be possible to play on a regular screen with red / blue glasses, but for now only 3d on special 3d screens is confirmed.
I really hope for the possibility of red/blue (if implemented correctly, because it needs a color correction to work well).
 
For GT5 in 3D you will need a new 3D TV and matching pair of 3D glasses to go with the set. Sony and Panasonic 3D TV's will come with the glasses in the box, while the other brands you will have to purchase them separately.

Currently there is no way of getting 3D to work with older HDTV's, regardless if they are 100/120hz or 200/240hz. This may change in the future, but I doubt this
 
For GT5 in 3D you will need a new 3D TV and matching pair of 3D glasses to go with the set. Sony and Panasonic 3D TV's will come with the glasses in the box, while the other brands you will have to purchase them separately.

Currently there is no way of getting 3D to work with older HDTV's, regardless if they are 100/120hz or 200/240hz. This may change in the future, but I doubt this

Great, thanks for clearing this up for me!!
 
Your TV would need to be able to accept a 120Hz signal for 3D to work. The vast majority of TVs with a high refresh rate only accept 60(?)Hz signals and upscale it to whatever refresh rate your screen has.
 
Here is some information concerning 3d and ps3

"It was only a couple of days ago that Sony flicked the switch on 3D compatibility for the PS3 -- albeit without retail games that can yet exploit it -- so what better time to dig into the nitty gritty details of the company's implementation of the third dimension? Digital Foundry have done just that, starting off with a discussion of how Sony translated WipEout HD from 2D into 3D. Noting that the original version ran at 1080p, Sony's senior development manager Simon Benson explains that notching resolution down to 720p opened up some pixel processing overhead (one 1080p stream requires nearly 2.1 million pixels, whereas a duo of 720p images is around 1.85 million in total), while reducing the refresh rate to 30Hz allowed the devs the breathing room to complete the extra geometric calculations required by 3D. That's certainly not the 1080p video at 100Hz per eye that we were hearing about at IDF last year, but at least it shows that games that haven't been coded for 3D can be translated, albeit at more demure settings.

In the case of Motorstorm: Pacific Rift, the game already ran at a 720p / 30fps clip, so the solution was to generate it at a lower resolution and to use hardware upscaling and a few optimizations to make 3D work. Lest you think the transition was all bad news on the graphical immersion front, the SCEE devs also mention that quitea few field-of-view and motion-illustrating effects could simply be disabled in 3D, as in that mode "you get [them] for free." Of course, we're still only talking about retrofitting 3D, and Sony's big hope is that developers will code for the new format right from the start, resulting in visually richer and technically more efficient implementations. Hit the source for more.

In regards to the PS3's 3D-enabling firmware update, Coombes said it will come in two waves; the first update hitting this Summer will allow the console to display 3D games, while 3D Blu-ray support will come "a short time after." Sony reiterated that the games being offered to UK customers who purchase a 3D-read Sony Bravia display, which includes PAIN, Wipeout HD, Motorstorm Pacific Rift, and others, may not be the same as those offered in the United States."


"Coombes also spoke about 3D on the PlayStation 3 from a development perspective. Most notably, he discussed that the 3D experience in PS3 games would always be implemented by developers, not by an automatic conversion process in the PlayStation 3 itself. While TV manufacturers may offer a conversion feature, the PS3 itself will not. In other words, once the console gets its firmware update, that doesn't mean you'll be able to play any game in pseudo-3D. You'll have to wait for the developers to produce an actual 3D version of the game.

He also addressed concerns that 3D images will cut the console's processing power in half, saying developers can actually find non-3D information that can be shared between left and right images. Shadows, for example, are generally flat. The PS3's GPU can share that data between left and right eye images, instead of having to render it twice.

Similarly, games that are already capable of running in split-screen will transition to 3D more easily, since they're already designed to display two simultaneous images. By finding ways to optimize 3D, developers won't necessarily have to sacrifice detail or framerates.

Coombes also announced that 3D PS3 games will be compatible with any and all 3D HDTVs that support the HDMI 1.4 standard. The PS3 will automatically scale 3D images to fit whatever screen you're playing on, while still making it a comfortable viewing experience.

The 3D software development kit has been available to developers since January, the fruits of which we expect to see at this year's E3. "


Taken from http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/23/playstation-3s-3d-implementation-explained-may-require-upscali/ and http://uk.gear.ign.com/articles/108/1085559p1.html
 
Last edited:
And yet, another 2 articles that you seriously need to read

"Well with Sony’s 3D firmware updates well on their way it has left a lot of websites talking about the firmware updates themselves. Honest I’m sure you have read more than enough of these to get sick of them. So rather than cover this matter again, I figured to look at this from another perspective. Sony could bring 3D to any TV with a refresh rate of 120 Hz or more.
How 3DTV’s Work
A 3DTV works by having a refresh rate of 120hz or more, this allows for the TV to display the left image and then the right image, while still maintaining 60 frames per second so you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. However you still need those LCD Shutter Lens glasses that have to plug into your TV. So if your TV doesn’t have the plug you cannot watch anything in 3D.
Or can you?
I would love to let you know that 3D has been around for computer gamers for quite some time now through nVidia and those monitors only ever required a 120hz monitor to function.
So think about your PS3 as a computer for a moment. What if Sony released a
peripheral that plugged into your PS3 which did the same thing?
I know my Plasma TV has a “600hz” refresh rate which would be well above that 120 Hz refresh rate. Granted it’s 600hz subfield, but the majority of TV’s out there work on the same technology.
What do you think?
So what do you think on this matter? Do you think Sony can do this, or do you think that the nVidia glasses might just able to plug into the PS3?"


"In an interview with NowGamer, Blitz CTO and co-founder Andrew Oliver explains why the recent PS3 '3D ready' firmware update has advanced the console into the next generation.
We announced yesterday that Sony's forthcoming firmware update would make the console compatible with the company's new line of 3D Bravia televisions. Good news for those with lots of spare cash to spend on a telly, not so good for the rest of us.
"The mass market consumers now think 3D is really cool" explains Oliver, "the 3DTVs are appearing in the shops, Hollywood is releasing 3D movies every month and the current generation of consoles are already capable of 3D. In my opinion all developers should be putting 3D options in their games, but sadly I don’t think this is the case as yet.
It takes a long time to write games and if the games industry isn’t careful it’s missing a golden opportunity to take their games to the next level."
With 3D quick becoming the new black, Nintendo is also jumping on the bandwagon with its 3DS console, due to be detailed at this year's E3.
However, Oliver explains why he thinks Sony is already leading the pack, "I think Sony giving all PS3 users an update to make the PS3 3D capable, free of charge and mid-console cycle is fantastic. It’s a reward for those who have bought the PS3 and a reason to buy one for those who haven’t. It makes it feel like the console has jumped into the next generation."
Oliver continues, "But now Sony has made every PS3 3D capable, there will be a catalogue of 3D movies and games available, giving the TV manufacturers a market for the 3DTVs. It’s kicked started the move from HDTV to 3DTV as the next major purchase, which will ultimately give people a better entertainment experience."
Click through to read the full NowGamer interview with Andrew Oliver.
Sony has always positioned PS3 as a media hub, with a desire to lead the field in console connectivity and multimedia options. If implemented correctly, 3D could just be the golden ticket it needs to draw fans away from Xbox 360.
Is 3D truly the way forward for the industry or is it just a gimmick? "


Taken from http://ps3.nowgamer.com/news/3018/blitz-ps3-has-jumped-to-next-generation
and http://emotionalninja.net/sony-bring-3d-tv/2304
 
Last edited:
"Is 3D truly the way forward for the industry or is it just a gimmick?"
I believe depth perception and parallax in displays is the way forward, but 3D as it is being implemented now, with flickering images and special glasses...that really is a huge gimmick.
 
I believe depth perception and parallax in displays is the way forward, but 3D as it is being implemented now, with flickering images and special glasses...that really is a huge gimmick.

Flickering images? Have you seen Avatar in 3d? Special Glasses? Whats the problem with the glasses?
 
Flickering images? Have you seen Avatar in 3d? Special Glasses? Whats the problem with the glasses?
OK, maybe flickering was a bad word - "switching" images so that each eye sees a different image (or using coloured glasses and opposing polarised lenses) is an old technique that is not really 3D at all, because you cannot look around things in the image. It's technology being pushed for the sake of it.
 
OK, maybe flickering was a bad word - "switching" images so that each eye sees a different image (or using coloured glasses and opposing polarised lenses) is an old technique that is not really 3D at all, because you cannot look around things in the image. It's technology being pushed for the sake of it.

Coloured glasses is not the case since ps3 supports stereoscopic 3d. It may be an old technique but it is enjoyable and a lot of people love it. You can not look around things in the image but does it really matter?
 
Cool, no glasses needed , I think you have to be there to experience it

But I wonder if 3D glasses over this might be better or not
 
Coloured glasses is not the case since ps3 supports stereoscopic 3d. It may be an old technique but it is enjoyable and a lot of people love it. You can not look around things in the image but does it really matter?
I know they do not use coloured glasses for the 3D they are currently implementing in HDTVs, but the fact remains that the pseudo 3D effect is based on an old technique and isn't really that effective. Yes, to me it does matter that you can look around things in images. If you cannot, then it isn't really 3D is it?

Don't think I'm against "3D", because I'm not. I'm just against the pace and method by which they are currently implementing it. If all you want is a bit of depth to the image (without being able to look around things) glasses are not needed. It's old tech, and that video above proves it. What glasses and image switching do offer, is an easy and relatively effective way for manufacturers to launch some new gear and get people to part with their cash.
 
I know they do not use coloured glasses for the 3D they are currently implementing in HDTVs, but the fact remains that the pseudo 3D effect is based on an old technique and isn't really that effective. Yes, to me it does matter that you can look around things in images. If you cannot, then it isn't really 3D is it?

Don't think I'm against "3D", because I'm not. I'm just against the pace and method by which they are currently implementing it. If all you want is a bit of depth to the image (without being able to look around things) glasses are not needed. It's old tech, and that video above proves it. What glasses and image switching do offer, is an easy and relatively effective way for manufacturers to launch some new gear and get people to part with their cash.

First of all, I think you dislike 3d because of 3 reasons:
1 It delayed GT5
2 You can't afford a 3d tv
3 You hate the glasses

As far as the video above is concerned, this tv is a prototype, it will propably cost a lot more than the Sony Bravia LX900, this technology would be far more demanding and will require to cut down the resolution and its far far away from us now
 

Annoyingly I forget the guy's name, but an Asian university student studying in America (correct me if I'm wrong with the background info...) has been toying around with various things with the Wii, one of which was to create a proper 3D effect using a normal 2D TV.

Basically, tracks where your head is, and renders the image differently depending on where you are, so you can look 'around' objects.

It even works on a youtube video, and is definitely worth checking out.
 
First of all, I think you dislike 3d because of 3 reasons:
1 It delayed GT5
2 You can't afford a 3d tv
3 You hate the glasses

As far as the video above is concerned, this tv is a prototype, it will propably cost a lot more than the Sony Bravia LX900, this technology would be far more demanding and will require to cut down the resolution and its far far away from us now
1. Did it really delay GT5? You have proof? If it is true, you really think I'd let it bother me that much?

2. No, you're right, I can't afford a new 3DTV right now - I just spent a few grand on replacing my amp, speakers, speaker cable and interconnects :rolleyes: How old are you, 12 or something? "Lack of money" responses usually indicate a low age group.

3. True, I don't like the glasses, but if you want the facts, I don't have perfect 20:20 vision, so do not get the full effect anyway. Given that I don't need 3D glasses to see the world in proper 3D, why would I be happy having to need 3D glasses to see a display in pseudo 3D?

Yes, the TV is a prototype, just as every 3DTV started out. Why do you assume the technology will be far more demanding? As for the need to cut down on resolution, it's ironic that they are doing that very same thing with 3D on the PS3...

Annoyingly I forget the guy's name, but an Asian university student studying in America (correct me if I'm wrong with the background info...) has been toying around with various things with the Wii, one of which was to create a proper 3D effect using a normal 2D TV.

Basically, tracks where your head is, and renders the image differently depending on where you are, so you can look 'around' objects.

It even works on a youtube video, and is definitely worth checking out.
Yep, I've seen that before - basically uses the IR sensor in the Wiimote fixed near the TV, and uses that to track IR emitters attached to your head. Very cool, but tracking head position is going to be key going forwards, especially with multiple viewers! I think true 3D with parallax will be a fair way off yet, but I don't think it will be long before TVs are released that offer pseudo 3D like we are getting now, but without the need for glasses.

Edit: Just went off and watched it again. Even off-screen, you get the impression that some of the targets are leaping forward off the screen, so 3D with glasses...no thanks. I want to be able to look around things.

 
Last edited:
1. Did it really delay GT5? You have proof? If it is true, you really think I'd let it bother me that much?

2. No, you're right, I can't afford a new 3DTV right now - I just spent a few grand on replacing my amp, speakers, speaker cable and interconnects :rolleyes: How old are you, 12 or something? "Lack of money" responses usually indicate a low age group.

3. True, I don't like the glasses, but if you want the facts, I don't have perfect 20:20 vision, so do not get the full effect anyway. Given that I don't need 3D glasses to see the world in proper 3D, why would I be happy having to need 3D glasses to see a display in pseudo 3D?

1 It propably did delay it
2 I am older than you think and thats completely irrelevant. I can't afford a 3d tv either
3 I am perfectly happy with the glasses. They don't any have disadvantages
i can think of so why so much hate? Do they take something away from the experience? No Do they add something to the experience. Hell yes

Yes, the TV is a prototype, just as every 3DTV started out. Why do you assume the technology will be far more demanding? As for the need to cut down on resolution, it's ironic that they are doing that very same thing with 3D on the PS3...

Having watched the video and searched a bit more about the technology, its not more demanding than the stereoscopic 3d. In my opinion, this is a very poor represantation of 3d and if it looks like that when its launched, then its not going to be a success. Stereoscopic 3d is far better than this and head tracking combined Head Tracking is not even 3d
 
Annoyingly I forget the guy's name, but an Asian university student studying in America (correct me if I'm wrong with the background info...) has been toying around with various things with the Wii, one of which was to create a proper 3D effect using a normal 2D TV.

Basically, tracks where your head is, and renders the image differently depending on where you are, so you can look 'around' objects.

It even works on a youtube video, and is definitely worth checking out.

Johnny Chung Lee. Using the wiimote and sensor bar connected to a PC to do headtracking, Sony are looking into doing this only using the PSeye. This solves the issue Tokyodrift has with stereoscopy and combining headtracking with stereoscopy has a fair bit of potential.

cobraagent90
A 3DTV works by having a refresh rate of 120hz or more, this allows for the TV to display the left image and then the right image, while still maintaining 60 frames per second so you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. However you still need those LCD Shutter Lens glasses that have to plug into your TV. So if your TV doesn’t have the plug you cannot watch anything in 3D.
Or can you?
I would love to let you know that 3D has been around for computer gamers for quite some time now through nVidia and those monitors only ever required a 120hz monitor to function.
So think about your PS3 as a computer for a moment. What if Sony released a
peripheral that plugged into your PS3 which did the same thing? I know my Plasma TV has a “600hz” refresh rate which would be well above that 120 Hz refresh rate. Granted it’s 600hz subfield, but the majority of TV’s out there work on the same technology.
What do you think?
So what do you think on this matter? Do you think Sony can do this, or do you think that the nVidia glasses might just able to plug into the PS3?"

Unfortunately there's the issue of input lag on the TVs so it'd be imposible (EDIT:just thought, maybe with some sort of delay adjust on the glasses it might be posible) for the PS3 to control the glasses. The only way it could be done is if the glasses themselves could sense the frame switching. Another problem is that all LCD screens are polarised and the LCD shutter glasses are also polarised so since an older TV wasn't designed to work with shutter glasses they might not match.
 
Last edited:
1 It propably did delay it
2 I am older than you think and thats completely irrelevant. I can't afford a 3d tv either
3 I am perfectly happy with the glasses. They don't any have disadvantages
i can think of so why so much hate? Do they take something away from the experience? No Do they add something to the experience. Hell yes.
I don't care how old you are or what you earn. I can afford a 3DTV, several of them. It's just not something I'd ever mention without being provoked, because it has nothing do with anything said on these forums.

Having watched the video and searched a bit more about the technology, its not more demanding than the stereoscopic 3d. In my opinion, this is a very poor represantation of 3d and if it looks like that when its launched, then its not going to be a success. Stereoscopic 3d is far better than this and head tracking combined Head Tracking is not even 3d
Well, until you have seen them both in person I'm not sure how you are able to comment on the relative effectiveness.

So head tracking is not even 3D? You think a stereoscopic image seen with glasses is 3D, just because the image "floats in front of you"? It might be able to fake depth from one perspective, but that's why I call it pseudo 3D. You cannot move your head around and effectively look around something.

With head tracking, just like in real life, if you move your head around you are able to look around thigs and experience parallax. Current steroscopic 3D is a gimmicky effect. Head tracking (or anything allowing you to look around things) is far more reflective of how you see and perceive things in the real world, and you don't get much more 3D than that.
 
I don't care how old you are or what you earn. I can afford a 3DTV, several of them. It's just not something I'd ever mention without being provoked, because it has nothing do with anything said on these forums.


Well, until you have seen them both in person I'm not sure how you are able to comment on the relative effectiveness.

So head tracking is not even 3D? You think a stereoscopic image seen with glasses is 3D, just because the image "floats in front of you"? It might be able to fake depth from one perspective, but that's why I call it pseudo 3D. You cannot move your head around and effectively look around something.

With head tracking, just like in real life, if you move your head around you are able to look around thigs and experience parallax. Current steroscopic 3D is a gimmicky effect. Head tracking (or anything allowing you to look around things) is far more reflective of how you see and perceive things in the real world, and you don't get much more 3D than that.

pseudo=fake right? (another word from the greek language)
By "afford" i don't mean that you can't buy it. I am pretty sure all of us can spend 2000$ or even more but its gonna hurt our pockets a little and its not something you do everyday day. Anyway, i think you judge stereoscopic 3d before you play-watch it because it is "unrealistic"?
 
Back