Why Should We Bother With 3D Now?
Are we willing to sacrifice image brilliance and saturation for our content to slightly pop out?
Nvidia went through the trouble of putting up its own tent a block away from Taipei 101 for COMPUTEX 2010 visitors. Inside were showcases of various products and hardware using Nvidia technology, including laptops, all-in-one PCs, and reference GPU cards.
But the focus of the venue was clearly Nvidia's push into the 3D market. There were multiple three-display workstations, all running popular video games in 3D mode. For those who haven't tried viewing 3D yet, the screens presented a slightly blurry picture to plain sight. Users have to wear a pair of glasses for a clear image. If the format of the content supports it, objects slightly pop-out for the viewer.
Basically, current 3D technology creates the illusion of depth. Objects closer to the viewer pop out more. The problem is that this illusion isn't usually convincing. Worse, the tinted 3D glasses usually take away some of the saturation and brightness of the picture. The image is still clear, albeit darker and with less difference between the colors.
So there we were, showing off our mad driving skills on NFS: Shift, weaving through a virtual racetrack perceived via 3D glasses. And while we handily won the race, we left with the impression that nVidia's offering was pretty much the same as everyone else's. Wear the glasses for a clear, yet slightly darker image.
Sure, it's sometimes great to see objects pop-out slightly from the screen. But when the experience isn't impressive enough to be a must-have, it's probably best to wait for companies to make consumer 3D level technology more convincing.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
-
Parsian Yes the 3D technology needs a lot of improvement but I hate to see it disappear again... The only way these things can become feasible and improve is through increase in demand and popularity.Reply -
hokkdawg Completely agree - 3D is overrated; it's a good idea on paper, but the practical technology just isn't there yet.Reply
Anyone here see Avatar in 3D? I thoroughly enjoyed watching a high res, bright & saturated image on my home TV vs. the 3D version at the theater. -
twbg4cq I'm not too big on the whole 3D thing either. In fact, when I go to see movies in a theater, I would prefer viewing it without the glasses, but sometimes they don't give you a choice; 3D is all they have.Reply -
dravis12 I played 3D BC2 at PAX East and while it looked impressive it seemed a bit gimicky.Reply
Top that off with >$4000 in hardware to be able to recreate the environment they had...no thanks. -
wolflive I agree, it doesn't look all that wonderful and the cost = performance for 3D right now just isn't worth it. I'd rather put my money into a better looking 2D image.Reply -
3D has been the rage since the 1950's. I guess it's the most tireless dead horse ever....It always require huge costs and fades away only to resurface later on and repeat the cycleReply
3D= Money wasted. -
mattclary Just in case playing an FPS didn't give you motion sickness, lets surround you with monitors. In 3D. :O*****Reply -
Tomtompiper It's a Gimmick and an overpriced and uncomfortable one at that.Reply
Sure some people will get it and the rest will nod and whisper to each other "But he isn't wearing any clothes?"