well to the op ........
take a look at ces and see all major electronic companies announcing 3d tvs and sets.......
its a really good idea to make ps3 3d capable and a really good selling point
to me ps3 in 2010 supporting 3d games/content, is like ps2 back at 2004 had an hdmi cable and could output 720p!
| Ssenkahdavic said: I never said anything about a 120hz LCD tvs. I said 120hz from SOURCE (no matter the type of TV). That article talks about 3D vision (nvidia), something that is not PS3/Sony's 3D TV plan. The second shows what it does, which is awesome but it does not offer any explanation. 3D Ready has always meant nVidia 3d... which is checkerboard 3d. I guess we can agree on one thing, we wont know until they actually release more data. |
Lol. This is true only for LCD/CRT displays. All I was saying is that for DLP projectors, plasmas an DLP TVs you need 60 hz source since they use checkerboad to show both images(for each eye) at the same time and don't need to refresh the screen.
The thing about the whole 3D fiasco...Nvidia 3D vision supports checkerboard, 120 hz lcd from the source thing and the old school red/blue glasses (anaglyph)...its very versitile.
While its true that we need more data to see how this bluray 3D with shape up, the 3D tech has been around for a while and nothing has really changed. The only thing thats different is that they finally have the means to do it in HD at a cost where a consumer can afford it...
On the gaming side, if Sony or Micosoft want to implement 3D in their games...they will need someone to make the 3D drivers for their consoles/games. There are 3 companes that can do it. Nvidia, IZ3d and Tridef. Starting from scratch for would be crazy since all 3 of those companies hve been doing what they do for over 5 years and have perfected their 3D...
I guess what Im saying is that, Sony, Samsung, LG...will come out all guns blazing in tryign to consumers to purchase the 120 hz refresh TV that supports 3D for...3000 dollars. And consumers won't realize that they can purcahse a DLP or a plasma which have equal if not better results for half the price...and they could have done this 2 years ago.
| BoneyBoy said: Avatar sucked in my opinion. Crappy cliched story. Beowulf in 3D was 10 times better than Avatar. Until we get 3D porn .... I'm not getting a 3DTV |
Err ???
There's about 60 millions people that disagree, most likely 100 millions+ by the end Avatar's run is over at the movies...
PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !
PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !
Ail said:
Err ??? There's about 60 millions people that disagree, most likely 100 millions+ by the end Avatar's run is over at the movies... |
Lol, yeah. Beowulf? Seriously? That piece of dung borefest? XD
Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee 3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046
Garcian Smith said:
3D at the movie theaters works because it's a one-shot gimmick. You pay the normal price for a ticket, put on those stupid-looking glasses, get awed for two hours, and then go home. It's cheap, convenient, requires no commitment, and offers an experience that you can't get anywhere else - in other words, it's exactly what consumers want. However, what works at the theaters doesn't translate at all into the living room. Your average person wil pay ten bucks to see a 3D movie, but not several thousand to upgrade their A/V gear for home 3D viewing (and subsequently possessing the "privilege" of having to wear those stupid glasses just to catch the evening news... in 3D!) Home 3D TV viewing is neither cheap, nor convenient, and requiring a complete shift in their TV-watching habits. And while it does offer a new experience, the things that people normally watch on TV (news, reality shows, sitcoms, and such) translate poorly into the 3D format, as opposed to a cinematic glitz-fest like Avatar. In other words, there's simply no comparison. |
but the thing is NOW YOU CAN! And if you care about stupid-looking glasses, well too bad for you. What about people that already wear glasses? are you going to look yourself in the mirror while you play/watch? are you really that obsessed with how you look? I guess you always look incredibly handsome when you play games, always keeping that pretty face intact. I can't do anything but laugh about people that care about "cosmetics" like that... I don't give a shit if I look like a moron when there's a chance I might experience the best gaming, movie and sports experiences out there. you go ahead and laugh when this tech fail, and I will laugh at a sissy like you for not joining the party because you're afraid of looking "stupid" with some 3D glasses. Actually, you "look" even more stupid saying that you care about your looks than you would ever do with those 3D glasses.
and how do you know that ESPN 3D or Discovery 3D will translate poorly into the 3D format? Have you tried it?? and btw, I don't think your TV will be LOCKED in 3D-mode. If you don't want to watch in 3D you don't have to, but you got the choice. What is wrong with having choices?
for instance: do you think you look handsome when you're taking roller-coasters??? no, you look like an ugly piece of shit. we all do. do you care? no. do you still enjoy roller-coasters? yes.
disolitude said:
Lol. This is true only for LCD/CRT displays. All I was saying is that for DLP projectors, plasmas an DLP TVs you need 60 hz source since they use checkerboad to show both images(for each eye) at the same time and don't need to refresh the screen. The thing about the whole 3D fiasco...Nvidia 3D vision supports checkerboard, 120 hz lcd from the source thing and the old school red/blue glasses (anaglyph)...its very versitile. While its true that we need more data to see how this bluray 3D with shape up, the 3D tech has been around for a while and nothing has really changed. The only thing thats different is that they finally have the means to do it in HD at a cost where a consumer can afford it... On the gaming side, if Sony or Micosoft want to implement 3D in their games...they will need someone to make the 3D drivers for their consoles/games. There are 3 companes that can do it. Nvidia, IZ3d and Tridef. Starting from scratch for would be crazy since all 3 of those companies hve been doing what they do for over 5 years and have perfected their 3D... I guess what Im saying is that, Sony, Samsung, LG...will come out all guns blazing in tryign to consumers to purchase the 120 hz refresh TV that supports 3D for...3000 dollars. And consumers won't realize that they can purcahse a DLP or a plasma which have equal if not better results for half the price...and they could have done this 2 years ago.
|
Did you read this? Look back at what checkerboard actually does. It takes the signal, splits it between both eyes to equal a 1080p signal @60hz per eye (equievelent of 120hz) Read the bottom right of the page you posted elsewhere. It says "Combine: the left and right sampled images into one full 1080p image for display"
From the press release: "Notably, the specification allows every Blu-ray 3D player and movie to deliver Full HD 1080p resolution to each eye, thereby maintaining the industry leading image quality to which Blu-ray Disc viewers are accustomed. Moreover, the specification is display agnostic, meaning that Blu-ray 3D products will deliver the 3D image to any compatible 3D display, regardless of whether that display uses LCD, Plasma or other technology and regardless of what 3D technology the display uses to deliver the image to the viewer’s eyes."
This means one of 2 things.
1) 120hz output (which the ps3 cannot natively support. Need HDMI 1.4 for this)
2) 2x60hz outputs @1080p (one for each eye)
Ssenkahdavic said:
Did you read this? Look back at what checkerboard actually does. It takes the signal, splits it between both eyes to equal a 1080p signal @60hz per eye (equievelent of 120hz) Read the bottom right of the page you posted elsewhere. It says "Combine: the left and right sampled images into one full 1080p image for display" From the press release: "Notably, the specification allows every Blu-ray 3D player and movie to deliver Full HD 1080p resolution to each eye, thereby maintaining the industry leading image quality to which Blu-ray Disc viewers are accustomed. Moreover, the specification is display agnostic, meaning that Blu-ray 3D products will deliver the 3D image to any compatible 3D display, regardless of whether that display uses LCD, Plasma or other technology and regardless of what 3D technology the display uses to deliver the image to the viewer’s eyes." This means one of 2 things. 1) 120hz output (which the ps3 cannot natively support. Need HDMI 1.4 for this) 2) 2x60hz outputs @1080p (one for each eye) |
So what you are suggesting is that 3D bluray wont support checkerboard displays? You will need a 120 hz input for the TV or it will not work at all...
Cause I dont see option #2 working on any TV...no TV has resolution of 1080p X 2 that it could dedicate 1080p to yeach eye and stay at 60 hz.
disolitude said:
So what you are suggesting is that 3D bluray wont support checkerboard displays? You will need a 120 hz input for the TV or it will not work at all... Cause I dont see option #2 working on any TV...no TV has resolution of 1080p X 2 that it could dedicate 1080p to yeach eye and stay at 60 hz. |
They do not say any tv. They say any TV compatible with this technology, which could be a TV that has the tech for checkerboard built in, but it just isnt using that mode. Doing 1080p x2 (each @60hz) is duable via HDMI 1.3 (which the ps3 has and other blueray players have). Meaning the cable has enough throughput to support this much data. Im betting the PS3/blueray 3D tech will use this type of signal to generate the full 1080p per eye. The Xbox360 and their plans for 3D gaming are different. I bet those will definitely use checkerbox, since they are using HDMI 1.2 (which does not support this). Post up your tv? Im curious and Id like to take a look at it.
Ssenkahdavic said:
They do not say any tv. They say any TV compatible with this technology, which could be a TV that has the tech for checkerboard built in, but it just isnt using that mode. Doing 1080p x2 (each @60hz) is duable via HDMI 1.3 (which the ps3 has and other blueray players have). Meaning the cable has enough throughput to support this much data. Im betting the PS3/blueray 3D tech will use this type of signal to generate the full 1080p per eye. The Xbox360 and their plans for 3D gaming are different. I bet those will definitely use checkerbox, since they are using HDMI 1.2 (which does not support this). Post up your tv? Im curious and Id like to take a look at it. |
I use 2 displays when gaming in 3D. I have the Samsung HL67a750 and viewSonic VX2265wm FuHzion monitor.
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktop-monitors/lcd/x-series/vx2265wm-fuhzion-lcd.htm
http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/about/458892796/samsung-hl67a750
Monitor is LCD with 120 hz input and screen refresh.
DLP TV is 120 screen refresh (only 60hz input) with checkerbox 3D capability.
Monitor is very good...but ghosting is evident and its only 1680x1050. I know that the DLP supposedly cuts the pixels in half with the checkerboard pattern but they do some trickery cause I really can't notice it. Its not as obvious as when you interlace a 1080 signal in to 1080i.
DLP has no ghosting what so ever and looks a little better in motion to me than the monitor.
| disolitude said:
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktop-monitors/lcd/x-series/vx2265wm-fuhzion-lcd.htm http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/about/458892796/samsung-hl67a750 Monitor is LCD with 120 hz input and screen refresh. DLP TV is 120 screen refresh (only 60hz input) with checkerbox 3D capability. Monitor is very good...but ghosting is evident and its only 1680x1050. I know that the DLP supposedly cuts the pixels in half with the checkerboard pattern but they do some trickery cause I really can't notice it. Its not as obvious as when you interlace a 1080 signal in to 1080i. DLP has no ghosting what so ever and looks a little better in motion to me than the monitor. |
What is the source you are using for this 3D? what cables from source to function? Your monitor has DVI-D ports, while the TV has HDMI ports. There might be a reason for the ghosting (not caused by the actual monitor itself). Im just curious.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
