Watching 3D Movies on VR (Virtual Reality) Headsets

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Does 24 FPS content look better/smoother on that headset if you run it at 72 hz? Besides the evenly divisible framerate, on a PC just increasing a monitor to 72 from 60 hz makes the movement of the mouse cursor and windows so much smoother.

I'm not sure because my software has settings to mitigate evenly divisible frame rates, so I assume it can be a problem. I did some experimenting yesterday and I think my PC is outputting at 60Hz no matter what I do. My picture quality is great so in theory I have less incentive to investigate too much. But there is a part of me that won't be satisfied until I understand what is going on.

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Now I'm curious as to what the effects of 60 Hz are with 3D, since that would be showing half of the frames for 50% longer than the other half.

According to something I read, the higher frame rate helps with 3D. I can't stand how HFR looks in 4K, but I can see how it would benefit 3D.

[cdx47]

Just thinking out aloud. The problem with what I am doing is that I have multiple ways to watch a 3D movie and because of that I spend a lot of time experimenting. For 4K I have one device which plays everything. I switch it on, I play the movie. For 3D I have multiple player options and settings.

I noticed previously that I had a minor color issue on my main 3D setup. It's only really noticeable on movies that use unusual colors. I compensated by making manual changes to colour, gamma and hue. But today when using my other 3D viewing setup it had the correct colors. So I spent some time and fixed the issue, but the point is that I spend more time experimenting than watching lol.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

I also find myself experimenting more than watching. I must have seen scenes from the first 40 minutes of Pirates IV a dozen times at least before I finally sat down and saw the whole film just recently.

To make sure I'm on the same page with frame rate, is your software interpolating frames to get your headset up to 60 hz?

[cdx47]

I was but now I'm using frame blending which works much better than interpolations and other supposedly better methods for me. It's probably to do with Wifi timing because on the TV, interpolation looks fine.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

I was but now I'm using frame blending which works much better than interpolations and other supposedly better methods for me. It's probably to do with Wifi timing because on the TV, interpolation looks fine.

What makes blending different than interpolation?

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

What makes blending different than interpolation?

Interpolation creates extra frames. Blending repeats frames and blends them. Google for more detailed info.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

Interpolation creates extra frames. Blending repeats frames and blends them. Google for more detailed info.

I see that SVP doesn't recommend frame blending due to artifacting, but this possibility hasn't presented a problem for you?

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

I see that SVP doesn't recommend frame blending due to artifacting, but this possibility hasn't presented a problem for you?

I'm surprised they would say that because interpolation is much more likely to cause artefacts than frame blending. That's why they have a settings to reduce it. I was using SVP for quite some time and I really want to use Optical Flow because it should be the best option. SVP works fine on the TV, but was never smooth for me in VR and Optical flow is just so glitchy as to be useless. I read that Nvidia has issues with its implementation on 30 series cards. Frame blending works perfectly for me. No blur and practically no lag.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

I'm surprised they would say that because interpolation is much more likely to cause artefacts than frame blending. That's why they have a settings to reduce it. I was using SVP for quite some time and I really want to use Optical Flow because it should be the best option. SVP works fine on the TV, but was never smooth for me in VR and Optical flow is just so glitchy as to be useless. I read that Nvidia has issues with its implementation on 30 series cards. Frame blending works perfectly for me. No blur and practically no lag.

If you're willing to not process the video in real time, have you looked at this Topaz Video Enhance AI? I see it hyped by TechTubers and it markets itself as providing interpolation superior to the "decades old" techniques of blending and optical flow.

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

If you're willing to not process the video in real time, have you looked at this Topaz Video Enhance AI? I see it hyped by TechTubers and it markets itself as providing interpolation superior to the "decades old" techniques of blending and optical flow.

I've heard of it. There's a guy using it to upscale HK movies from negatives to 4K and it's not bad at all. But I've finally got a fully working setup upscaling to 4k with smooth panning and great color and detail. After spending all this time setting it up, I don't want to spend even more time post processing 200 videos.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

I've heard of it. There's a guy using it to upscale HK movies from negatives to 4K and it's not bad at all. But I've finally got a fully working setup upscaling to 4k with smooth panning and great color and detail. After spending all this time setting it up, I don't want to spend even more time post processing 200 videos.

Don't mess with success, I get that.

I've wanted to try and chain Topaz's 4K + motion interpolation into 3Dcombine, but both programs seem to want a Nvidia 3000 series GPU and a modern CPU (but not so much Intel's latest chips, Alder Lake) and I'm livin' in the past, technologically.

If not SVP, what are you using for the frame blending?

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Don't mess with success, I get that.

I've still spent way too much time experimenting but recently it has delivered some very nice gains so I can't complain too much.It is software so things it's not as reliable as hardware which means there are times in the past I wanted to watch a movie and something goes wrong. But in general I am now very happy with the picture quality which is a good math for the 7.1/Atmos audio

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

If not SVP, what are you using for the frame blending?

madvr.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

I've still spent way too much time experimenting but recently it has delivered some very nice gains so I can't complain too much.It is software so things it's not as reliable as hardware which means there are times in the past I wanted to watch a movie and something goes wrong. But in general I am now very happy with the picture quality which is a good math for the 7.1/Atmos audio


madvr.

Madvr? How much gpu "horsepower" does it take to blend frames in 3D on that?

Madvr's reputation for being a GPU hog precedes it, but I realize I've been hearing that for years now, and GPUs have gotten far more capable. That said, I am curious about trying real time frame blending on a Haswell laptop GPU.

As I understand it I'd have to precompute it to try it on the stand-alone Oculus that I'd have access to, if I wheeled and prodded my pal to exhume it from his closet.

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Madvr? How much gpu "horsepower" does it take to blend frames in 3D on that?

Madvr's reputation for being a GPU hog precedes it, but I realize I've been hearing that for years now, and GPUs have gotten far more capable. That said, I am curious about trying real time frame blending on a Haswell laptop GPU.

As I understand it I'd have to precompute it to try it on the stand-alone Oculus that I'd have access to, if I wheeled and prodded my pal to exhume it from his closet.

Haswell is the CPU not the GPU but I have a laptop with an Nvidia 2060 which is a similar time frame. I tried to run madvr before but at that time I don't think I understood how relatively underpowered the laptop part is. I think I could get it running on that GPU now because I have a much better understanding of what madvr does and how it works.

Edit:
Just spent 5 minutes setting it up on my laptop and it works fine without frame blending but with fb it causes lots of frame drops. I didn't check but I think that would look even worse in VR over wifi. SVP works better on low spec machines.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

Haswell is the CPU not the GPU but I have a laptop with an Nvidia 2060 which is a similar time frame. I tried to run madvr before but at that time I don't think I understood how relatively underpowered the laptop part is. I think I could get it running on that GPU now because I have a much better understanding of what madvr does and how it works.

Edit:
Just spent 5 minutes setting it up on my laptop and it works fine without frame blending but with fb it causes lots of frame drops. I didn't check but I think that would look even worse in VR over wifi. SVP works better on low spec machines.

Thanks.

With SVP, it is possible to transcode the videos to 60 or 72 FPS in advance, which is what I would have to do for most any of my playback solutions, VR or traditional.

How can I do that with madVR? At a glance its user interface isn't as intuitive as SVP's.

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

Thanks.

With SVP, it is possible to transcode the videos to 60 or 72 FPS in advance, which is what I would have to do for most any of my playback solutions, VR or traditional.

Yes it is a feature of SVP. Check out the website forums for more details.

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

How can I do that with madVR?

You can't.

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

At a glance its user interface isn't as intuitive as SVP's.

Madvr does high quality rendering and scaling and picture processing. SVP mainly does one thing. SVP can do some scaling but probably not optimal and certainly not as flexible as Madvr. Madvr has a simple on/off frame blending setting. SVP has a slider control to prefer performance or video quality.

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by cdx47

Yes it is a feature of SVP. Check out the website forums for more details.


You can't.


Madvr does high quality rendering and scaling and picture processing. SVP mainly does one thing. SVP can do some scaling but probably not optimal and certainly not as flexible as Madvr. Madvr has a simple on/off frame blending setting. SVP has a slider control to prefer performance or video quality.

SVP has a shader options listed as "Simple" and "Simple lite", which the tooltip text states work by using frame blending. How do these stack up against madvr's?

[cdx47]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

SVP has a shader options listed as "Simple" and "Simple lite", which the tooltip text states work by using frame blending. How do these stack up against madvr's?

Never used them. Just try it out and see.

[cdx47]

I have access to a number of VR theatres but there were always compromises. One was the right size and distance but wasn't dark enough, others were a little too large and the closest was very good but now I realise still not quite right.

I have just received a couple of new VR theatres, one of which is loosely based on the IMAX private theatre concept. The size and positioning of those screens is just about perfect for 3D viewing. The screens are not as big as some but they seem to be just right for VR 3D viewing increasing the 3D viewing immersion. So when Shang-chi is swinging through the scaffolding I almost feel like I am there with him.

[Killer Meteor]

Originally Posted by Gellert

This is not a VR headset but in my opinion, even better for watching 3D and non- 3D video. All HDMI components are compatible.

https://www.cinera.net?kid=19VG6B

��

Anyone else had positive experiences of using this to watch 3-D?