Quote from Becky Rose :

One thing that is a bit difficult for me is the vibration when going over a rumble strip, it helped when I lowered the AA+AF enough to get 90fps whereas with max settings I was running around previously only gave me 45 on the grid to 60 on the open road, but even at 90fps the screen shake was a little uncomfortable comfortable and I really couldn't see much.

This is probably because the eyes aren't updating what's onscreen at the same time.

A way to reduce the amount of shake would be nice.

Try to reduce the head tilt in View options.

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.

Quote from luchian :

Looking at the track (what you usually do when racing) is just fine. But looking at the dashboard (formula cars especially) needs some readjusting time.

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.

Quote from Stölzel :

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

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.

Quote from Shotglass :

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)

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.

Quote from Scawen :

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).

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

Quote :

The second one I can't really understand. What would it be?

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

Quote from Shotglass :

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)

This is 100% correct, I already said that

Quote from Shotglass :

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

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

Quote :

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

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.

edit: Great link Shotglass.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Not true because the relative distance effectively changes based on the field of view.

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

Quote :

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

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

Quote from Shotglass :

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

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.

Quote :

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

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?

the effect doesnt fail completely it just fails to fool your brain into thinking something is in front of the screen when the screen edge that it touches tells you it most certainly isnt

Did I read somewhere that you don't have a 3D device to see this for yourself Scawen?

I'm moving house anyway so you could borrow my telly for a month or so if you wanted to test and have space for a 42" screen. That saves me finding a way of getting it on a lorry without it breaking.

Arr man, I just catch up with Multi Monitor gaming with LFS (triple screens) and now LFS moves to 3d

More expense.....but you 3D people already, tell me what I need

Fordie

This is the best solution out there at the moment:
http://www.nvidia.ca/object/pr ... eless-glasses-kit-us.html

If spending dough doesn't concern you, get 3 of the monitors and continue with triple screen, but in 3D

If it's only LFS you're wanting to run in 3D then you could just grab pretty much any 3D TV since LFS is going with native support.

edit: What kind of PC rig do you have however?
At this point, I'd actually wait until the Occulus Rift comes out next year some time

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

edit: What kind of PC rig do you have however?
At this point, I'd actually wait until the Occulus Rift comes out next year some time

Not a rig that would handle 3d. A simple nvidia card with dual out put, and an onboard intel hd gfx for 3rd monitor.

I3 3.3ghz Intel , with 8GB ram, and 2 x 240gb solid state Mirrored drives, i know its my GFX letting me down

Fordie

Thought lets see how this looks so I gave it a try

I think 3d effect is there but continued to show a slightly darker bar on the right side and a slightly brighter light bar to left side.

And it hurted my eyes really I don't have that watching 3d.

After this ..... I decided 2 let tv make 2d from 3d this normally gives full screen hd picture. But this wasn't the case screen was bit smaller and too the right.

Hope you can do something with this info.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

At this point, I'd actually wait until the Occulus Rift comes out next year some time

I second this notion. All the current screen-based 3D solutions have felt like a gimmick (cinema style 3D felt like a joke) in comparison to the Oculus Rift.

Quote from Fordman :

Not a rig that would handle 3d. A simple nvidia card with dual out put, and an onboard intel hd gfx for 3rd monitor.

I3 3.3ghz Intel , with 8GB ram, and 2 x 240gb solid state Mirrored drives, i know its my GFX letting me down

Fordie

If it can handle gaming at 1920x1080, then it can also handle a Rift. Atleast it's a lot less taxing than running triple screens.

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?

edit: I have an AMD 7750 graphics card...

Quote from Becky Rose :

Did I read somewhere that you don't have a 3D device to see this for yourself Scawen?

I'm moving house anyway so you could borrow my telly for a month or so if you wanted to test and have space for a 42" screen. That saves me finding a way of getting it on a lorry without it breaking.

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.

Quote from rediske :

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?

edit: I have an AMD 7750 graphics card...

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.

Quote from Scawen :

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.

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.

Quote from Scawen :

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.

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...

edit: seems like I need something like this: http://tridef.com/download/Tri ... LG-3D-Monitor-latest.html

http://www.novatech.co.uk/prod ... 3dmonitors/d2343p-bn.html

would this be all i need to use 3d display?

It's not 120 Hz, wouldn't buy it. No clue why they attached a 3D tag to it, it's just an ordinary monitor.

Probably works for movies but not for (future) gaming.

If you want true 3D immersion you should get Oculus Rift or something similar.

3D monitors are bit of a gimmick tbh.

Quote from rediske :

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...

edit: seems like I need something like this: http://tridef.com/download/Tri ... LG-3D-Monitor-latest.html

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.

Quote from jjones :

http://www.novatech.co.uk/prod ... 3dmonitors/d2343p-bn.html

would this be all i need to use 3d display?

Quote from geeman1 :

If you want true 3D immersion you should get Oculus Rift or something similar.

3D monitors are bit of a gimmick tbh.

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.

Quote from cargame.nl :

It's not 120 Hz, wouldn't buy it. No clue why they attached a 3D tag to it, it's just an ordinary monitor.

Probably works for movies but not for (future) gaming.

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.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

nVidia 3D Vision as stated always worked perfect with LFS, save the for topic I made a long time ago where there were frustum problems at the very edge of the screen.

nVidia uses some clever (but straightforward) maths to generate two different perspectives based on information in the frame buffers. The only time it doesn't work well is when rendering shortcuts (or deferred rendering) are used and there is no Z depth information present. It's actually possible to fix those shaders with an injector which is exactly what HeliXMod does - he's made a lot of fixes.

There is no translation needed for LFS's 3D options, these options will simply make it easy for everyone that has other 3D solutions to enjoy LFS in 3D. So anyone with 3D Vision doesn't need to worry about this test patch or use this new functionality.

Gaming in 3D is much much different than crappy "cinema" 3D which has barely any depth and kind of gives 3D entertainment a bad rap. LFS in 3D is excellent, as is everything else - couldn't go back now if I wanted to.

Edit: BMX Twins: 3D Vision works directly with specific 120Hz monitors. I'm using the Asus VG278H which has the IR emitter for their glasses built in. Using 3D Vision with a 3DTV requires 3DTVPlay software (yes it's lame that you have to buy that considering 3D Vision drivers are included with every nVidia driver install whether you use it or not; in fact you can try 3D Vision Discover using red/blue glasses just to get an idea of what the depth would look like at least) I'd guess it's just their cash grab so that you have to buy "something" in order to use 3D without buying their kit/glasses.

Well i dont think my TV is purpose built for 3d anyways so it would be no problem.