Easiest road to universal 3D add-on? (shutter vs polar vs anaglyph vs 0 eyewear)

[tripletopper]

I know most of you are big screen movie types and therefore are advocating for the polar based projectors.

I am more of a game player who sometimes deals in cinema and I'm looking for a quick screen that's big enough to see the individual trees but small enough to see the whole Forest? In other words. 24 inches is the maximum for me.

I noticed that from Autumn 2011 there were 3D haters that were complaining (and rightfully so) that the 2012 Super Bowl that was scheduled to be 3D had the 3D portion abandoned when they was found out that broadcasting the 3D Bowl which shut out 2D viewers which was 70% at the time.

I noticed that later after 2012. Two TVs have identical brands identical sizes identical features except. one is 3D one is not, the 2D one is more expensive and the 3D one doesn't sell. The people who hated 3D, hated it so much that they were willing to pay an extra $200 to strip the feature.

Knowing what I do about the market, that adding 3D to a current TV would give it negative added value, or subtracted value for adding more cost, the only way it would be worth companies going back into 3D was it 3D was a separate component like Dolby surround sound.

Have you ever heard of a surround sound hater? What people complaining that you have to go surround sound or else you miss the boat on your programming?

No, the most people ask is it right for me. And most people who don't partake would say would be good to have it but not a necessity. You may have heard of people preferring Dolby or DTS but not protesting against the concept of surround sound as a concept?

As long as people will rebel against 3D if it's tacked on then the smartest way to sell it is to sell it as an add-on option to any TV. Pick any kind of TV you want and just add depth. That would be the ideal Market. 3D lovers could add it to whatever they think is great on a 3D TV. And 3D haters could just ignore.

What is the easiest way to make a universal 3D add-on kit?

Some people suggest the 3D wizard which turns it into analglyph (and strangely enough blue and yellow, not the traditional red and cyan).

Some people suggest glasseslrds TV but I heard the problem with that is that there is a sweet spot and if you're not in it it's very distorted plus multiple people cannot be tracked for sweet spots for communal viewing.

Some people suggest that there's a way to mod a TV to get a TV to add polarization. I know polar Shields are cheap and if they do not affect 2D viewing then that's probably the cheapest answer. However you'd have 3D haters protesting by not buying them and paying more for the non-polarized TVs. The solution would be going down to the TV shop and adding a polar screen for your particular model of TV which means making different sizes and makes of polar shields. And if you don't have both an exact model match and a perfectly laid shield, installed by professionals, you'll have miscommunicated 3D which will cause worse headaches.

I suggest the shutter kind of add-on 3D. Is it possible? Yes it's possible. In fact I own such a thing for the Sega Master System 3D?

Now people will say it works just for CRT TVs. The question now is why does it work for CRT TVs but not modern TVs?

I theorize it's a matter of timing. CRT timing is both very regular and very quick, sub microsecond quick.

However ping times are all over the place for every TV. In order for it to get working with every possible TV it has to know when the start frame signal enters the TV and when the frame exits the TV because it's taking at least a one millisecond trip through the TV and that's the generous low ping monitors. It could be up to 100 milliseconds.

Edison 3D tried it with I believe a manual timing tuner where you just have to tune it to your TV.

I got a better solution send an encoded signal through the audio on left and right channels, and plug a dongle into any audio port out whether it be an HDMI ARC, toslink, coaxial. R a lr or Headphone set that doesn't turn off the noise to the proper speakers, and then you can compute the timing and adjust accordingly.

I could see possibly one flaw in this when I convert my Segascope from Composite to HDMI to VGA , on my VGA monitor with the glasses it does make a clear picture but the problem is it's a clear 2D picture. I think it has to do with the difference between 240p30 vs 480i60. I don't know whether it uses 240p15 x 2 eyes or 240i30x2 eyes. The VGA conversion doesn't work right then probably it's 240i30x2 eyes and uses the alternating interlaced Fields as left eye and right eye. If that explains why a Sega scope in particular would not work on a VGA monitor then I assume it does not apply to post-DVD 3D material.

By the way I'm giving this idea because both I value the fact that can watch my movies more than any money or credit given and I'm on Social Security Disability, therefore if I do get some credit and money but not an astronomical amount which I won't get on this idea alone, it would hurt chances of keeping Social Security. Therefore I put it out in the public and hopefully someone who reads this can be sparked into making a universal shutter based 3D adapter

However I admit that I see things that others don't see, usually at the cost of not seeing things which most people see. At first I thought who could hate 3D but then when my friend told me why 3D is bad that it forces people to make a choice and it forces people to upgrade or be left behind (which no one thought of me, with my lack of ability to access broadband for my Xbox and Nintendo), as soon as I understood the 3D haters perspective I came up with a conclusions that 2D compatibility is the key to 3D inclusion.

By the way I shared the story of my ideas for a 3D compatible 2D broadcast standard and the head engineer at WEWS said it was brilliant, insightful, and I was thinking things no one else was thinking, like how to make 3D 2D-friendly.

So if you read this and think my idea is the best way to make sure we don't run out of 3D TVs to play on movies on then take my idea for all it's worth and you pay what it's worth: nothing.

However if you're proponents of one of the other technologies, am I missing something that you're seeing? I don't understand how one proposes to add polarization to TVs without polar shields.
Also is there a way you could communally watch glassesless 3D? Finally what color do I sacrifice with anaglyph converters like video wizard?

I say what I know but I'm open to other ideas. As I said, I share them to be used, not to be hoarded, and it's more to my advantage that it actually gets invented then getting any money or credit associated with it at least at my point of level of contribution.

Do you agree that enough people are 3D haters that they'll pay more to strip than we can pay to add?

Am I right the only way the industry can make money is to make 3D an independent transaction as opposed to part of a package deal with the TV set?

Ps. Someone should change the icon of th the guy wearing glasses, if that's supposed to represent 3D lover, to a red and cyan glass, because shutter and polar glasses could be easily confused with regular sunglasses unless you knew the context of the symbol. A red left eye and a right cyan eye is no mistaking for anything but 3d.

[2ndvizio]

3D wizard which turns it into analglyph seems to me would be the universal solution since that works with any 2D tv. Which is also why 3d archive is also releasing analglyph versions in with the latest movies I've been getting. They can sell more (3d enthusiasts who don't have a 3d tv).

Not sure if its possible to get a 2d tv to decode and display a 3d bluray. If that works then it would be easier to open the tv and find the Vsync signal and use that as the reference for the 3d glasses. That is how active shutter 3d tvs with Bluetooth glasses work.

3d was added to the premium models so it would be strange that non 3d tvs were more expensive.

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by 2ndvizio

3D wizard which turns it into analglyph seems to me would be the universal solution since that works with any 2D tv. Which is also why 3d archive is also releasing analglyph versions in with the latest movies I've been getting. They can sell more (3d enthusiasts who don't have a 3d tv).

Not sure if its possible to get a 2d tv to decode and display a 3d bluray. If that works then it would be easier to open the tv and find the Vsync signal and use that as the reference for the 3d glasses. That is how active shutter 3d tvs with Bluetooth glasses work.

3d was added to the premium models so it would be strange that non 3d tvs were more expensive.

Hi 2ndvizio,

I have the Wizard and it does an effective job playing 3d Blu-ray discs. Not as strong as true stereoscopic but certainly 3D and enjoyable.

Only drawback for many would be adjusting the user settings. Those already used for HD, Bluray and DVD can produce yellow ghosting, distorted color, etc. I figured out how to mostly eliminate these problems but even Spears and Munsil test patterns were not totally sufficient, being geared for stereoscopic. This could easily frustrate and turn off the average viewer wanting to keep things simple. The easy solution would be including a callibration disc geared for the specific anaglythic device.

[2ndvizio]

Originally Posted by Joe D.

Hi 2ndvizio,

I have the Wizard and it does an effective job playing 3d Blu-ray discs. Not as strong as true stereoscopic but certainly 3D and enjoyable.

Only drawback for many would be adjusting the user settings. Those already used for HD, Bluray and DVD can produce yellow ghosting, distorted color, etc. I figured out how to mostly eliminate these problems despite even Spears and Munsil test patterns not totally sufficient being geared for stereoscopic. This could easily frustrate and turn off new users. The simple solution would be including a callibration disc geared for the specific anaglythic device.

I am impressed with how effective you've made the 3d wizard but I'm hoping I will never have to resort to that. I've already future proofed myself as best I can. Have two 3d plasma tvs, one in use, the other for a backup that only has an hour on it. And two 3d projectors, only one in use. Besides 3d blu ray players, have two Vero 4K+ devices to stream 3d. I've burned through 2 blu ray players while testing 3D so I know stuff with moving parts don't last. Over a dozen 3d glasses. May have to worry about replacing the batteries later but I should be set.

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by 2ndvizio

I am impressed with how effective you've made the 3d wizard but I'm hoping I will never have to resort to that. I've already future proofed myself as best I can. Have two 3d plasma tvs, one in use, the other for a backup that only has an hour on it. And two 3d projectors, only one in use. Besides 3d blu ray players, have two Vero 4K+ devices to stream 3d. I've burned through 2 blu ray players while testing 3D so I know stuff with moving parts don't last. Over a dozen 3d glasses. May have to worry about replacing the batteries later but I should be set.

Hi 2ndvizio,

Thanks for the nice words. To be honest I wouldn't want the video wizard to be my main source of 3D but it would be fine for the casual viewer

The old boy scout motto. "Be prepared".

.

[8traxrule]

Anaglyph 3D just looks awful. There's just no way to keep the color accurate on it. I keep hoping someone will come out with a way to add active shutter 3D to any 2D display; the system for standard-def TVs used with Sega video games and VHD videodiscs (and a few bootleg VHS tapes, and later some DVDs of IMAX films) worked decently enough.

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

Anaglyph 3D just looks awful. There's just no way to keep the color accurate on it. I keep hoping someone will come out with a way to add active shutter 3D to any 2D display; the system for standard-def TVs used with Sega video games and VHD videodiscs (and a few bootleg VHS tapes, and later some DVDs of IMAX films) worked decently enough.

Hi 8trax,

Often compared how the 3d montage on the Spears and Musil disc looked on the wizard compared to my Sony 3d monitor. It captures the color basically enough. Not at all washed out. It's just a little darker overall. Still a great trade off not having to buy another 3D set and junking a perfectly good standard HD monitor.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by Joe D.

Hi 8trax,

Often compared how the 3d montage on the Spears and Musil disc looked on the wizard compared to my Sony 3d monitor. It captures the color basically enough. Not at all washed out. It's just a little darker overall. Still a great trade off not having to buy another 3D set and junking a perfectly good standard HD monitor.

Where do you find decent anaglyph glasses? The Amazon ones are reviewed as being borked, at least the traditional red/cyan ones, and the ones that I have tried confirm this, and that (ahem) colors the perception of anaglyph.

I haven't done A/B testing with the pairs provided by Kino Lorber/3DFA yet, but I have noticed that, with their glases in Shogun Women, that the color of red objects will sort of flicker if I look at them in the real world.

For example, I have a bright red controller. Through one lens, it appears red. Through the other, it appears maroon/brown. When looking through both lenses, it can flicker a bit between the colors.

Have you noticed this?


With the Amazon glasses, I watched Tintin; Pirates IV; 3D concert in anaglyph via various converters (PotPlayer; VLC; PowerDVD 14, respectively) and the colors were very desaturated, bordering on black and white in some instances.

For video games, there is a free program to convert most of them to 3D, it is part of ReShade. It can convert into polarized formats or anaglyph. In polarized, it gives me some astounding depth, I tried it in a cave scene and, like the director of Dune 2021, I felt like I was in the cave. In anaglyph, I got convergence errors out the wazoo (in both red/cyan and green/purple).

If only glasses and conversion to anaglyph both that are as good as what you have were generally available nowadays.

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Where do you find decent anaglyph glasses? The Amazon ones are reviewed as being borked, at least the traditional red/cyan ones, and the ones that I have tried confirm this, and that (ahem) colors the perception of anaglyph.

I haven't done A/B testing with the pairs provided by Kino Lorber/3DFA yet, but I have noticed that, with their glases in Shogun Women, that the color of red objects will sort of flicker if I look at them in the real world.

For example, I have a bright red controller. Through one lens, it appears red. Through the other, it appears maroon/brown. When looking through both lenses, it can flicker a bit between the colors.

Have you noticed this?


With the Amazon glasses, I watched Tintin; Pirates IV; 3D concert in anaglyph via various converters (PotPlayer; VLC; PowerDVD 14, respectively) and the colors were very desaturated, bordering on black and white in some instances.

For video games, there is a free program to convert most of them to 3D, it is part of ReShade. It can convert into polarized formats or anaglyph. In polarized, it gives me some astounding depth, I tried it in a cave scene and, like the director of Dune 2021, I felt like I was in the cave. In anaglyph, I got convergence errors out the wazoo (in both red/cyan and green/purple).

If only glasses and conversion to anaglyph both that are as good as what you have were generally available nowadays.

Hi just,

The wizard came with its own unique anaglythic glasses. They are blue and amber.and meant to be used with the specific device. So I don't encounter the problems you mention. The colors come very close to when watching in stereoscopic though the picture is darker

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by Joe D.

Hi just,

The wizard came with its own unique anaglythic glasses. They are blue and amber.and meant to be used with the specific device. So I don't encounter the problems you mention. The colors come very close to when watching in stereoscopic though the picture is darker

Ah, I've heard of blue/amber "ColorCode", and it's an option in the software converters. I've yet to try it.

How do official anaglyph 3D titles look compared to your converter which turns traditional 3D into anaglyph? I bought some new in box Infinicolor glasses, which are green/magenta, and bought an old game that officially supports them as well as traditional 3D. Sadly the traditional 3D "flexed" hard on the official anaglyph.

Wiki tells me that this is the color scheme of Battle for Terra's anaglyph 3D version.




BTW, to get your 3D bluray player to recognize your Wizard as a 3D-capable device, did you have to jump through any hoops?

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Ah, I've heard of blue/amber "ColorCode", and it's an option in the software converters. I've yet to try it.

How do official anaglyph 3D titles look compared to your converter which turns traditional 3D into anaglyph? I bought some new in box Infinicolor glasses, which are green/magenta, and bought an old game that officially supports them as well as traditional 3D. Sadly the traditional 3D "flexed" hard on the official anaglyph.

Wiki tells me that this is the color scheme of Battle for Terra's anaglyph 3D version.




BTW, to get your 3D bluray player to recognize your Wizard as a 3D-capable device, did you have to jump through any hoops?

Hi just,

I remember before getting a 3D monitor I had Journey to the center of the earth and Polar Express anaglyphic and viewed through a HD crt. Journey had plenty of depth and a bit subdued color but also two different color outlines over certain objects.

Polar Express had nice depth with much less ghosting and nice color but gave me headaches.

The player goes directly into the video wizard and whenever it senses a 3D signal two lights go on and the anaglyphic signal sent to the TV. So the player doesn't need to recognize anything beyond a 3D disc being inserted.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by Joe D.

Hi just,

I remember before getting a 3D monitor I had Journey to the center of the earth and Polar Express anaglyphic and viewed through a HD crt. Journey had plenty of depth and a bit subdued color but also two different color outlines over certain objects.

Polar Express had nice depth with much less ghosting and nice color but gave me headaches.

The player goes directly into the video wizard and whenever it senses a 3D signal two lights go on and the anaglyphic signal sent to the TV. So the player doesn't need to recognize anything beyond a 3D disc being inserted.

Thanks.

My conversion box claims it is 3D Bluray compatible, but so far, no bluray player (or HDMI-standard 3D video game) recognizes it as such. I want to have faith in it, and it does work well for other 3D conversions, but I'm starting to suspect that China just played fast and loose with allowing the 3D Bluray compatible logo to be stamped onto the product. Or I could be doin' it wrong, but the instructions are not particularly useful.

It sure is a shame, as one of my portable DLP projectors only consumes 48W of power and that would be nice now that summer is approaching.

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Thanks.

My conversion box claims it is 3D Bluray compatible, but so far, no bluray player (or HDMI-standard 3D video game) recognizes it as such. I want to have faith in it, and it does work well for other 3D conversions, but I'm starting to suspect that China just played fast and loose with allowing the 3D Bluray compatible logo to be stamped onto the product. Or I could be doin' it wrong, but the instructions are not particularly useful.

It sure is a shame, as one of my portable DLP projectors only consumes 48W of power and that would be nice now that summer is approaching.

Hi just,

Do hope you resolve the problem.

[tripletopper]

Originally Posted by 8traxrule

Anaglyph 3D just looks awful. There's just no way to keep the color accurate on it. I keep hoping someone will come out with a way to add active shutter 3D to any 2D display; the system for standard-def TVs used with Sega video games and VHD videodiscs (and a few bootleg VHS tapes, and later some DVDs of IMAX films) worked decently enough.

I'm assuming the only thing that is keeping a universal 3D shutter adapter from happening is the various ping times of when the signal gets into the 3D TV input and when it comes through the circuits and out through the display.

A 3D TV system is all designed to work together therefore would have a constant timing Factor relative to itself. But relative to other TVs it would be off.

The reason why the Sega system works so well was because A) it was sub-microsecond and B) it was consistently submicosecond.

If that's the case the only thing preventing a universal shutter adapter is various timings of various TV then you just got to get an accurate measurement or a device that will provide the accurate timing like slipping a encoded device from the HDMI in to the HDMI ARC out. If it get properly sync the audio with the video then it should properly sync the left right timing with the video too.

Is that true that that's the only obstacle preventing Universal shutter add-ons to 2D TVs making them 3D?

What about the idea of adding polar Shields to existing 2D TVs to make them 3D? That's less Universal more TV model specific and more labor intensive requiring a TV shop to do something to an existing TV other than just sell you something.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by tripletopper

I'm assuming the only thing that is keeping a universal 3D shutter adapter from happening is the various ping times of when the signal gets into the 3D TV input and when it comes through the circuits and out through the display.

A 3D TV system is all designed to work together therefore would have a constant timing Factor relative to itself. But relative to other TVs it would be off.

The reason why the Sega system works so well was because A) it was sub-microsecond and B) it was consistently submicosecond.

If that's the case the only thing preventing a universal shutter adapter is various timings of various TV then you just got to get an accurate measurement or a device that will provide the accurate timing like slipping a encoded device from the HDMI in to the HDMI ARC out. If it get properly sync the audio with the video then it should properly sync the left right timing with the video too.

Is that true that that's the only obstacle preventing Universal shutter add-ons to 2D TVs making them 3D?

What about the idea of adding polar Shields to existing 2D TVs to make them 3D? That's less Universal more TV model specific and more labor intensive requiring a TV shop to do something to an existing TV other than just sell you something.

I've been seeing sportsbars that feature some really sad projector setups.

While they're only rigged for 2D, since they're only viewable from certain angles it occurs to me that a way to get 3D going could be to have a lenticular filter that goes in front of the projection screen, and project a HSBS image to fit the grid?

The same could be done for TVs, a stick-on lenticular screen overlay, but then you'd probably have to put a box around the TV to ensure that it can only be seen from the angle that works.

Maybe a passive polarizer screen overlay could also be made? That would be cool, though it would require glasses. Modern TVs might be bright enough for that to work.

Because I think you're right about active shutter glasses being too complicated to work as a retrofit with all the unknowable timing delays in digital displays.

[tripletopper]

Actually I think I may have solved the timing issue in theory but I don't know how to build one and practicality.

You notice how the audio is synced with the video using HDMI ARC or using the back of the TV outputs to speakers like Toslink directly built in the back of the TVs. That's how you extract the audio from after all the processing time it takes to get to the TV.

The modern way to do that is HDMI ARC

If the sound can adjust based on timing, then shouldn't the 3D Left Right sinking be just as easy to time based off that technology?

Actually I was saying active shutter is the easiest thing to do to make a universal 3D add-on kit because all you have to do is factor in timing universally by measuring when the signal goes in the TV and when it comes out the TV.

It can work for TVs that have one second millisecond delay time or 100 milliseconds delay time. (Of course you wouldn't want to play video games with a hundred millisecond delay time.)

The biggest culprit in causing delay time is the TV display itself because I was able to get a composite signal from the Sega Master System converted to HDMI via the Retrotink 2x Pro M, and then converted to VGA using a standard HDMI to VGA connector and I was able to watch and play the Sega Master System through the VGA CRT monitor.

I think timing is the only issue you have to solve with 3D add-on kits using the shutter method, and don't they already do that with sound with the HDMI ARC to sync the sound with the outputs of the video to your eyeballs?

It's a lot less complex than trying to solve it with a polar based add on solution. You need a specific model shield to go with your specific model TV then you have to have it professionally installed to make sure there's no warping or other misapplication of the shield, which will distort 3D viewing.

It was easy enough with a wired solution but chances are you could probably have a wireless solution to the 3D signal like a dongle in between the hdmi input to the tv, and a dongle on the HDMI ARC out to get the 3D sync signal before it goes to the audio box.

The fact that my conversion test going from composite to HDMI via retrotink, and then HDMI to VGA via typical Amazon unpowered connector, shows that the timing is less precise than the sound needs to be. I heard that sound is thought of as 128 different noises that occur 44,100 times a second, and that could output the various human voice, sound effects, and music in all the world. For the sound to sound right it has to be accurate within 20 microseconds. That's plenty of accuracy needed for a 3D signal to work right. Especially when compared to the one millisecond to 100 milliseconds most TVs have today. (If you don't care about delay, which is anytime you're not playing a video game, you can have very beautiful pictures if you're willing to delay 100 milliseconds)

[Lee A Stewart]

HDMI ARC and HDMI eARC explained: The evolution of the Audio Return Channel

https://www.techhive.com/article/584...explained.html

Notice that no type of video is discussed during the subject of ARC/eARC. The reason: it's specialty is AUDIO not video,

[Jlardonio]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

HDMI ARC and HDMI eARC explained: The evolution of the Audio Return Channel

https://www.techhive.com/article/584...explained.html

Notice that no type of video is discussed during the subject of ARC/eARC. The reason: it's specialty is AUDIO not video,

I think he's using the audio output signal to make the glasses to sync with the emitter. It's not the first time that something done for one purpose ends to have another purpose or be able to add another function to the first purpose.

[tripletopper]

By the way it's only in theory stage. I know you could send inaudible signals through code through audio. That's exactly what dobie and DTS is. If you can make an inaudible yet detectable code you could alternate the flashes of left right in that code is so that when the left eye is showing the "main left" (would be front left in most surround systems or the only left if brought down to two track stereo.) Would have this signal when the left eye is supposed to show and similarly with the right eye.

That's how the old plug in Sega Scope glasses worked with 3.5 mm. it sent a signal to the left channel and the right Channel that was purely a sync signal.

[tripletopper]

The idea it was it would be a live stream of Left Right signals. When prices through the TV it would delay the appropriate amount and then when it is sent back out through the ARC signal, no matter what kind of delay is in between those signals should be in sync relative to the projection of the screen, not the disc processing of the screen.