Slashdot Mirror


3D Monitor

jed101 writes "I just stumbled upon this news release by Sharp introducing a 3D monitor that doesn't require special glasses. The technology was devised for high end medical instuments and such but this could be the gamers new dream toy."

13 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Notebook Version by Klar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is this the same technology that has been around on Sharp 3D Notebook LCD's since last year and just brought to the desktop market, or are there any hardware advances?

    1. Re:Notebook Version by DarthStrydre · · Score: 5, Interesting

      While I have not seen one of these monitors operational, it sounds like the technology is something thats been around for quite awhile, albeit in cheap children's toys and advertisements. The toy images are non-holographic where there is what looks like a linear fresnel lens adhered to a specially printed paper. These are able to give multiple images if you move your head, and some are intended to simulate 3D, depending on the shape of the lensing and printing on the paper.

      If this is the case, then the sweet spot for these monitors may be quite limited to a certain distance, and angle, but this does not limit the coolness factor.

      This is just conjecture, however, based on their claim of using parallax.

    2. Re:Notebook Version by Stripe7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have the DTI3D-2018XLQ monitor. It works by creating zones of view. You keep your head placed so that each eye is in a different zone. As a result you see a different image with each eye and get a 3D effect. You cannot read fine text id 3D mode. The only game I had where I could read the text was the Star Wars Racer game. First time I played Never Winter Nights with the monitor I got killed by fire giants in a forest glade because I was too busy admiring the view.
      this is a link to how the technology works.
      http://www.dti3d.com/About/dti_technology.htm

  2. Another stupid IE site... by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I thought at first I'd need the 3D monitor to view the article correctly. In Firebird the text is all down the right side, like a margin.

    That aside. It would have been nice to see even a 2D picture of this monitor at work.

    I suppose Id will have to release a special Doom 3D for those with l33t enough bank balances to afford one. Talk about getting into the game...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  3. Re:Fourth post plus by iocat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I saw it at ComicCon! Or maybe it was E3. But I think it was ComicCon. Anyway, it was kind of nifty, but you had to be right in front of it for it to work well. I have pretty shitty depth perception to begin with (although I can see those Magic Eye things great... go figure), but it was neat. It was hard to imaging a great application though, because it felt like looking at one of those little lenticular things, and it was kind of an effort for me to keep the 3D in view. The monitors (a laptop and a PC monitor) were just showing stills, not moving images, so I can't evaluate that, and also they were on a table and I was standing, so I was not at all at an optimum viewing angle (I had to crouch down, which is not a super sustainable posture at which to evaluate a monitor).

    --

    Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

  4. Re:3-D eh? by scherbi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously, I *have* only one functional eye. The brain uses, IIRC, about 6 different methods to sense 3-D, and only about half of them require two eyes. Having lost vision in my left eye at the age of ten,I believe my brain did some significant compensation to rely on the available methods. This system will not work for me, as it uses only one of the methods, one that requires two eyes.

    Could a display be developed that exploited only non-two-eye-3d-perception methods?

  5. Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ... by mskfisher · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funny, yes, but true for me. I was cross-eyed at birth, and in the course of my surgeries, I lost stereoscopic vision. I have vision in both of my eyes, but it isn't in 3d. All of my 3D vision is from learned depth cues and unconscious motions.
    The upside, of course, is that Doom, Half-Life, and any other FPS is more fun for me.

    Holograms are effectively 3d for me - I can see the change when I move my head. But the Magic Eye posters and anything with red-blue glasses doesn't work at all.

    So I always keep a watch out for these 3D monitors and any new 3D tech to see if it'll work for me - I'd love to see something that actually did change depending on what angle you viewed it.
    It doesn't look like this one will do the trick - it still depends on stereoscopic effects.

    Oh - neat party trick I gained from this, though, is that I can change my dominant eye at will. Quite fun - and useful, since I'm nearsighted in only one eye.

    --
    0x0D 0x0A
  6. Re:Gamers? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Several years ago at the Northwestern they showed a 70s porno film in 3D. I think it starred John Holmes. I showed up to see it, but so did a thousand other people at a 500 seat lecture hall.

    Can they convert the old red/blue 3D films into this new technology?

    -B

  7. Re:Still need two good eyes? by pclminion · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It really sucks being blind in one eye sometimes.

    I would think it would be easier to create 3D display technology for one-eyed individuals than for people with two eyes.

    For people with two functioning eyes there are three major depth cues: stereovision, focus, and attenuation. With one eye you still have focus and attenuation, but no stereovision. (You also have parallax as the eye is moving, but this isn't as helpful.) So a one-eyed person doesn't rely on stereovision at all to gauge depth.

    Notice that it is only the stereovision which is hard to simulate with a display device -- software could be written to simulate focal blur and distance attenuation, and since these are the only depth cues available to people with a single eye, this should be a pretty convincing representation of a 3D scene.

  8. Re:3D hurts my eyes by Jacer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you're having a problem view 3D images, you could be stereoblind. It's very rare to have it, and most people don't realize they do because stereoblindness doesn't affect things like image perception, nor is it useful at 100+ feet. It's typically only caused by infantile strabismus. If you're that interested, tell your optomotrist to check you for it next time you go in. They quit checking it routinely because there isn't anything they can do about it. Sorry, I was a Psychology major and was really interested in perception.

    --
    --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  9. Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ... by peculiarmethod · · Score: 4, Interesting

    nope. he means he can change his brains focus between the two eyes. camera 1, camera 2. i can do the same thing, and i also have one near sighted eye. interestingly enough, i also see differnt hues of colors between the two eyes, so when i pick a different eye to focus on, i get slightly redder purples, or greener blues, etc. strange how cones and rods work.

    pm

    --
    ** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
  10. Re:Maybe, maybe, maybe... by damium · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Picture a driving game, where roadside signs fly past you.. Rather than properly rendering them in 3D, they're just sprites that expand as they're "closer". Rendered in real 3D, they look like some screwed up floating box that expands and shrinks..

    This would depend entirely on how the sprite display was programmed. If it went through a transform to expand and skew properly (Strictly a 2D transform) there would be little or no difference in a 2D vs. 3D dislplay. Granted this takes more work than a simple makeLargerAsViewerNears(); but it is quite simple.
    Also with the graphics of today it is better and sometimes faster to make the object a simple static 3D object so that it is better optimized.

  11. Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ... by Enigma_Man · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I get the slightly different color effect too. Mine are red-left, and green-right (very slight tinting for either eye). I also have developed the skills to switch which eye is dominant at the moment but I never use it (both my eyes see clearly equally well). I always notice it when my brain auto-switches the dominant eye though, everything will either red or green shift :D

    Learn something every day :)

    -Jesse

    --
    Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.