Okay that might sound weird but I think my eyes have just lost a ability
To make it short, I have a 3DS for one day thanks to a friend who lend it to me and well, I always could see the 3D effect perfectly, when I looked at the demo units in stores and I could also see it on my friends 3DS.
Then after playing about 40 minutes of Zelda with 3D I took a break of about half an hour and guess what, I couldn't see 3D anymore when I played on, all I see is either blurry vision or double vision
Not that I mind much since I will give the 3DS back tomorrow and I can always play without 3D but is there such a thing as temporary loss of stereo vision? o.o I will see how it is tomorrow after I slept^^
Did you turn the 3D slider off...?
8D
No I didn't, it's on
Strange thing is, if I focus perfectly I don't see anything blurry or doubled, it just appears like 2D xD
Welp.
I've done all I can do! Hope your eyes feel better! :O
The 3D effect on the 3DS is very dodgy (well, like anything "3D" really).
Unless you can't see normal IRL objects in 3D, there's nothing wrong with your vision. The 3D effect is really just some lame trick to fool your eyes into seeing some depth - it lacks many other properties our eyes/brain uses to recognise 3D from 2D so there are plenty of people who really don't see it.
Could also be one eye dominating another, in which case, stereoscopy is kinda useless.
well i don't have problems in 3D in zelda, in fact i can still see the 3d effect after ive rest around 1hr or so, maybe your eyes cope in 3D so as you can't see the difference in 3d or not
ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote: [ -> ]Could also be one eye dominating another, in which case, stereoscopy is kinda useless.
that what happens to me. i have a very bad lazy eye and can't see 3d at all.
Hmm thanks for all the replies!^^ Yeah I heard about the eye domination issue, I can't really say if I have a dominant eye but I guess I will find out soon when I watch my first 3D cinema movie so yeah...
Also thanks for the info Zinga, I knew the 3DS' 3D effect is rather a cheap trick and I can see real 3D object just fine so I guess it's nothing with my vision, it would be just interesting to know if this kind of technology can ever "emulate" all aspects wee need for real 3D as it evolves.
@krystabegnalie: That's actually a very good thought, my eyes do tend to adjust to things rather quickly so maybe it was just that though, I don't have the 3DS anymore but I will check it out next time I see a demo unit :3
And Trademark, don't worry you are not missing out much to be honest, it does look nice but it isn't a kind of magic that makes something better^^
SkyDX Wrote: [ -> ]it would be just interesting to know if this kind of technology can ever "emulate" all aspects wee need for real 3D as it evolves.
Quote:Humans use at least 5 tricks to determine the three-dimensional makeup of a scene:
1. Focal depth: based on how much the eye's lens has to focus
2. Convergence: based on the slight differences in pointing of the two eyes to a target
3. Stereopsis (static parallax): based on the slight differences between the left and right eye images
4. Motion parallax: based on the different displacements/motions of objects at different distances (e.g. as you move your head)
5. Visual inference: reconstructing using cues like occlusion, lighting, etc.
In the real world, all 5 of those systems work in concert, giving you a consistent understanding of your environment. The problem with modern 3D implementations is that they only trick you using only two, or maybe three, of the above. For instance "3D glasses" are showing you different left/right images, creating fake stereopsis, but the focal distance is still "to the screen" and doesn't match the apparent parallax-based distance to objects. So your brain is rightly confused because the various systems are giving conflicting answers. Amazingly our brains have no problem looking at two-dimensional images like pictures and conventional movies: in such cases 1-4 don't work, and our brains instead just use #5 to fully reconstruct/guess at the three-dimensional nature of the scene. A few optical illusions notwithstanding, this works remarkably well.
[...]
In principle wee could combine techniques to make for a more convincing sort of 3D. E.g. combine motion parallax (eye tracking) with stereopsis (3D glasses). But it won't be truly convincing (and thus headache-free) until wee fully reconstruct the three-dimensional light-field that should properly be emanating from the virtual objects. Doing this requires some very good holography, to fully reconstruct the required light waveforms, or something like anisotropic pixels that can control their emission as a function of viewing angle. In the meantime, 3D will remain a bit of a gimmick outside of some niche applications.
ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote: [ -> ]SkyDX Wrote: [ -> ]it would be just interesting to know if this kind of technology can ever "emulate" all aspects wee need for real 3D as it evolves.
Quote:Humans use at least 5 tricks to determine the three-dimensional makeup of a scene:
1. Focal depth: based on how much the eye's lens has to focus
2. Convergence: based on the slight differences in pointing of the two eyes to a target
3. Stereopsis (static parallax): based on the slight differences between the left and right eye images
4. Motion parallax: based on the different displacements/motions of objects at different distances (e.g. as you move your head)
5. Visual inference: reconstructing using cues like occlusion, lighting, etc.
In the real world, all 5 of those systems work in concert, giving you a consistent understanding of your environment. The problem with modern 3D implementations is that they only trick you using only two, or maybe three, of the above. For instance "3D glasses" are showing you different left/right images, creating fake stereopsis, but the focal distance is still "to the screen" and doesn't match the apparent parallax-based distance to objects. So your brain is rightly confused because the various systems are giving conflicting answers. Amazingly our brains have no problem looking at two-dimensional images like pictures and conventional movies: in such cases 1-4 don't work, and our brains instead just use #5 to fully reconstruct/guess at the three-dimensional nature of the scene. A few optical illusions notwithstanding, this works remarkably well.
[...]
In principle wee could combine techniques to make for a more convincing sort of 3D. E.g. combine motion parallax (eye tracking) with stereopsis (3D glasses). But it won't be truly convincing (and thus headache-free) until wee fully reconstruct the three-dimensional light-field that should properly be emanating from the virtual objects. Doing this requires some very good holography, to fully reconstruct the required light waveforms, or something like anisotropic pixels that can control their emission as a function of viewing angle. In the meantime, 3D will remain a bit of a gimmick outside of some niche applications.
Thanks for that Zinga! That's interesting indeed^^ So I guess it really will take a long while till wee get real 3D and the 3DS only uses number 3 so no wonder it gives so much trouble like everybody says :/
And it seems that Motion parallax will be one of the more difficult hurdles to get perfect as our screens are basically still just flat, oh well wee will see I guess^^