Really Thank you Scawen that you try to bring LFS into 3D but why is this now more important then other important things?
For me its useless then i dont have a 3D PC Monitor i only have a 42" 3D TV but i dont Play Games from PC on my TV for it i have a PC Monitor
as far as i understand a single setting for 3d isnt enough
what you want is 2 settings for changing both the
- maximum image seperation which should occur at distance infinity ie eyes perfectly parallel (ideally set to match the useres interocular distance)
- convergence/zero point ie the distance at which the images match exactly and are thus seen in the monitors actual image plane (for monitors that are too small to cover your whole fov ideally set to whatever touches the edges of the screen)
At the moment it's very easy to put too much "3D adjustment" if you have a large screen, and that causes diverging eyes... not good. I think we need two modes - headset / TV. In TV mode there needs to be a setting for your screen width. Then the "3D adjustment" can be made to operate in a safe range.
With the current version, to get it "correct" I think you need to do two things.
1) Set "3D adjustment" so that the very distant objects appear no more than 6 cm apart on the screen, when you remove the glasses and just measure the separation between the two versions of that distant object. I say 6 cm because that is slightly less than the distance between the average adult's eyes. This way, divergence will be avoided.
2) Set the FOV close to the real angle that you can see. If you use a wider FOV setting, the 3D effect is too pronounced.
It's not more important than other things, it's just something I was inspired to do. Actually some people emailed us about setting up a commercial race setup using a Sony headset plus tracking. We could have just said "no that is impossible" but when I had a little look into it, I became quite interested in having a go, knowing that it doesn't need to take too long. I don't just do the most important thing all the time, I do what interests me.
However, I do know that there are some important things to do that have been left for too long. But that doesn't have to stop me doing interesting things that help some people and make LFS support more hardware.
The first setting would be covered by the TV width setting (get out your tape measure) and an adjustment setting to bring that horizon a bit closer (a user preference).
The second one I can't really understand. What would it be? Render the image from very short or very long eye separations? I can't think of any other option. If we regard the eye separation as a constant, I think the only real variable remaining is the FOV (see my reply to luchian).
Maybe there is some way to compensate for wider FOV setting than your real FOV to the TV, by using unrealistic eye separations for the generation of the two images? I haven't thought this through but as I said I can't think of any other variables.
width should do it for adjusting the offset beween the images for infinitely far objects
my instincts tell me distance between you and the screen doesnt matter for this
there must be a plane inside the virtual 3d world where the rendered 2d images have 0 offset
a sort of focus distance that defines where the line of sight from both cameras meets http://eww.pass.panasonic.co.j ... nt/guide/EN/3D_02_en.html
objects that are rendered at that convergence distance will appear in the same plane as the actual tv screen youre looking at
since in my experience objects that are rendered to be in front of the screen only appear in front of it if they dont touch the edges of the screen this should be adjusted accordingly
i believe what happens is when looking at a 3d object at the edge of the screen the 3d perception of the real world (ie the edge of your screen) overrides any 3d perception from the "fake" 3d on the screen
Not true because the relative distance effectively changes based on the field of view. This is why Avatar the game has adjustments for both monitor size and distance from the screen
I sit close enough (about 16 to 18" from a 27" monitor) that this doesn't really matter. If you're look at a screen far away, obviously as soon as an object crosses the bezzels it's no longer visible, but even broken objects still "pop out" just fine in my experience, just like objects with depth are still perceived fine - quite literally just like looking through a window into the game world.
Scawen regarding convergence point, Shotglass hit the nail on the head.
Basically, objects will appear either inside the screen, at screen depth, or outside the screen.
Inside the screen the objects are separated in the same relative direction of each eye to produce depth. Objects at screen depth obviously have no separation. Objects outside the screen are separated in the opposite relative direction to your eyes (slightly cross-eyed, because the convergence point of your eyes is in front of the screen).
The zero depth point of the rendered scene is the convergence point of the two images, and drastically affects the perception of the gameworld. This is why I can have, for example the gauge cluster just slightly "out of my screen" so that it lines up really nicely with my physical steering wheel - by adjusting the convergence point of the images.
Shotglass might be able to explain it better but for some reason it also tends to "elongate" the world and create a greater sense of depth - everything isn't "far away"; and yet the closer objects appear smaller as well - I don't understand why this is.
still the most you can make your eyes diverge is looking parallel
and with the lines of sight being parallel the offset between the rendered images will be the same as your interocular distance regardless of how far away the screen is
might be different when sitting close to the screen
my experience was in a cinema setting where a had came way out of the screen until it was lowered until it touched the screen border at which point it immediately jumped to the actual distance of the screen
That's what I was thinking as well because it makes perfect sense... but... as you said maybe it only applies to objects in the far plane. But how far is that? The whole idea is forming a triangle between your eyes and an object. I think I'm over-thinking this maybe. But I will say this, in my experience of using 3D for a few years, generally at least an hour a day mostly more, if I roll my chair backwards the scene seems to elongate and if I force my noggin right up to the screen the scene contracts. So its definitely affects something.
Balls on cinema 3D, but that shouldn't happen - if both images are present there's no reason for it to revert to screen depth - if the effect failed you'd see double images, not a single one at screen depth?
Pardon me for asking, but I have an LG 3D Desktop Monitor.
Do I need a special piece of in between software that converts the LFS output for my monitor?
Just like I need that special SBS Video Player to watch 3D Videos?
Thanks for the offer. I do have a Vuzix VR920 that I can use to view single frames in parallel mode if I save a JPS file. I am thinking I can do the TV / monitor support just by talking on the forum so don't need to take you up on your kind offer.
You should not need to. I think your monitor has an option for "side by side" or "SBS" mode. You should just need to set LFS to SBS mode and also the monitor, then it should work.
wow, stop one moment mr. Scawen . If you ever played your own game in 3d you will never ever go back to 2d. I follow every development process from you, but this point i dont understand. LFS is much more Intensive in 3D.
Best solution is for me Nvidea 3d vision & Beamer & TrackIr, but i am waiting for the Oculus Rift and are very happy to see you are interested too in 3d.
I checked every single option in the monitor's menu but it doesn't seem to have an option like that. As I said, I also need a special SBS video player that interleaves the two sources together line wise. Will try to update the monitor's firmware if availlable later today though...
edit: I got an LG D2342P and it does not seem to have an option for SBS...
Does the monitor have an option for "top and bottom" input? Top and bottom mode outputs all the lines of image that an interleaved monitor should display, just not interleaved. That software you are talking about, I think does too much! I don't know if software is available that can convert a top-and-bottom image into an interleaved image, for display on a passive screen. That is a really simple operation - it would be nice if LFS could do that, but I couldn't find an option to render only to alternate lines. If anyone knows a method, that would be really helpful for the people with passive 3D displays.
This is what I think. I don't really want people to buy a monitor or TV to see this - it's not worth it in my opinion. for those people who have a large 3D TV, it's probably worth moving their computer into the other room to try it out. I really think VR headsets are the real way to have 3D and I think the Oculus Rift consumer version is worth waiting for.
It is 3D monitor, but unlike 120Hz ones which require active glasses, this one is passive 3D monitor.
This means it's 60Hz, and 3D picture is interlaced (1st row for left eye, 2nd for right, 3rd left.. etc).
Picture is polarized, and thus you need passive glasses for it.
This type of monitor probably works also with ATI solutions for 3D.
With Nvidia you can also use other custom drivers for 3D on that type of monitor.