# 3D on 60Hz monitor



## IceCreamBarr (Jan 18, 2011)

I've been thinking: couldn't 3D be done on a 60Hz refresh television/monitor?  If "older" HD was 1080p 24Hz and now the smexy HD is 1080p 30Hz, doesn't that mean our eyes are getting a maximum of 30 unique images per second?  So if my tv is 480Hz, I see the same image 16 times before the new frame pops up.  I would argue that Blue-ray on my 60Hz monitor looks similar enough to my 480Hz plasma; the difference is negligible and I've dropped to each frame being displayed twice.

The difficulty I foresee would be changing the refresh sync of active glasses from 120Hz to 60Hz but I have a theory.  The 3D BR is 60Hz, so the shutter on the glasses is actually only 60Hz, it shifts after 2 frames on the TV have been displayed for one eye (can anyone corroborate this?).  The glasses would have to be synchronized to change after every frame input (instead of every two), which would be their normal cadence, just the "beat" would be different.

I'm not arguing that 120Hz is of equal picture quality than that of 60Hz but wouldn't this be good enough for semi awesome, semi ghetto 3D?

Barr


----------



## digibucc (Jan 18, 2011)

it would hurt your eyes, if you were even able to hack the drivers and make them work.

yes possible, extremely ghetto though. imo not even close to worth it.

but 480hz tv?  i think you mean 480 px, as in vertical size. not refresh rate. 
I have never heard of a 480hz anything in regards to displays.


----------



## Red_Machine (Jan 18, 2011)

640x480 on a HD TV?  Methinks it is indeed 480hz.


----------



## n-ster (Jan 18, 2011)

Plasmas are often 480~600hz
There are alot of 120hz and even some 240hz LED LCD TVs also


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 18, 2011)

it may be possible... but you will vomit all over your significant other. 

LCD televisions don't have a 480Hz refresh rate. LG has a LCD television with a 480Hz refresh rate but it's actually 240Hz with a backlight scanning technology.


----------



## n-ster (Jan 18, 2011)

BumbleBee said:


> it may be possible... but you will vomit all over your significant other.
> 
> LCD televisions don't have a 480Hz refresh rate. LG has a LCD television with a 480Hz refresh rate but it's actually 240Hz with a backlight scanning technology.



I'm guessing something similar for the Vizio XVT3D554SV ?

oh and http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1483358



			
				evilsofa said:
			
		

> No, this is not at all like watching film at 24Hz or playing video games at 30Hz. With LCD shutter glasses operating at 60Hz, you are flashing bright lights alternately into each eye at 30Hz, and doing that in the 10Hz to 30Hz range causes nausea, giddiness and even seizures. It may be possible to do what you want, but the puking and migraines won't be worth it.


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 18, 2011)

n-ster said:


> I'm guessing something similar for the Vizio XVT3D554SV ?
> 
> oh and http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1483358



yes. the same technology LG uses. LCD can't even achieve 1080 lines of motion resolution without the help of motion interpolation technology.

Edit: good to know I have a kindred spirit over at Hard lol


----------



## n-ster (Jan 18, 2011)

evilsofa said:
			
		

> I'll say it again. The 24FPS you are seeing in the theatre is not the same as the 30FPS per eye you get from LCD shutter glasses. The theatre 24FPS is being received in both eyes at the same time - no problem. The LCD shutter glasses at 60FPS (30FPS per eye) is being received one frame in one eye, then one frame in the other eye - puke city. Altnernating frames per eye needs to happen at speeds higher than 50FPS per eye to prevent the negative effects.



Another nice way to say it


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 18, 2011)

aka induced projectile vomiting


----------



## qubit (Jan 18, 2011)

As per n-ster's quote from evilsofa.

30Hz alternate to each eye is intolerable and will make you throw up within 10 seconds. And I know because I've tried it; I've got 3D Vision. Even 50Hz is bad. It's got to be 60Hz and above, or nothing.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jan 18, 2011)

evilsofa said:
			
		

> I'll say it again. The 24FPS you are seeing in the theatre is not the same as the 30FPS per eye you get from LCD shutter glasses. The theatre 24FPS is being received in both eyes at the same time - no problem. The LCD shutter glasses at 60FPS (30FPS per eye) is being received one frame in one eye, then one frame in the other eye - puke city. Altnernating frames per eye needs to happen at speeds higher than 50FPS per eye to prevent the negative effects.



The reason that 24 fps is compfortable on theatres is that every one of those frames are displayed 3 times: 24 fps == 72 Hz

The human eye can see fluid motion perfectly with only 24 fps*, but it's sensitive to flickering up to 100+ Hz, although 60-80 Hz is what the average can notice.

So at any rate you do need 50+ Hz on each eye for a good experience with 3D.

*24 (sometimes even 18) as long as we don't have to interact with it. So in games you want much more than that, on movies it's not necessary.

EDIT:In Europe it's typical for 50 Hz to be better than 60 Hz. It has to do the frequency at which each country (continent) gets its electricity, because it affects the frequency of the light sources and can create annoying interferences between light coming from lamps (50 Hz) and the monitor (60 Hz?). That's why TV broadcast is 60 Hz in North America and 50 Hz in Europe.


----------



## IceCreamBarr (Jan 20, 2011)

My television is a 2 year old plasma that is 480Hz, pretty common actually, nothing fancy.

To revisit the idea: I can appreciate the nausea comments, probably true.  Here is an alternate idea; flicker the glasses twice per eye (1/60 Hz on the television, 2/120 Hz per eye) before moving to the other eye.  This would give my eyes the 120Hz needed to avoid nausea and would allow the television to stay at 60Hz.

the image chain would go like this:

1 frame Blue-ray, non 3D is "double pumped" to my television (30fps data source, 60Hz refresh).

1 frame Blue-ray, 3D is "single pumped" to my television (30fps per eye, 60fps, 60Hz refresh).

1 frame of "fake 3D @ 60Hz" is double pumped ON my 120Hz glasses.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 20, 2011)

IceCreamBarr said:


> I've been thinking: couldn't 3D be done on a 60Hz refresh television/monitor?  If "older" HD was 1080p 24Hz and now the smexy HD is 1080p 30Hz, doesn't that mean our eyes are getting a maximum of 30 unique images per second?  So if my tv is 480Hz, I see the same image 16 times before the new frame pops up.  I would argue that Blue-ray on my 60Hz monitor looks similar enough to my 480Hz plasma; the difference is negligible and I've dropped to each frame being displayed twice.
> 
> The difficulty I foresee would be changing the refresh sync of active glasses from 120Hz to 60Hz but I have a theory.  The 3D BR is 60Hz, so the shutter on the glasses is actually only 60Hz, it shifts after 2 frames on the TV have been displayed for one eye (can anyone corroborate this?).  The glasses would have to be synchronized to change after every frame input (instead of every two), which would be their normal cadence, just the "beat" would be different.
> 
> ...



Actually, the 3D TV's still only give you 2x24FPS so its 24 per eye. i actually see flicker with the stupid thing.


PC 3D realised this long ago, and stuck with 100Hz as a flicker free requirement (120 with LCD, since its a nice double of the standard 60)


something people really need to understand is the difference between the 'advertised' bullshit refresh rate on their HDTV's (EG 480Hz) and the INPUT refresh rate.

Its like saying the TV is 1080p capable and then you find out its only resolution over HDMI is 1024x768... its almost false advertising.

(If anyone still doesnt get it:  HDTV's only have 60Hz inputs thanks to HDMI. thats it. seriously. stop trusting the damn sticker on the TV or the box it came in, and research it.


----------



## IceCreamBarr (Jan 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> Actually, the 3D TV's still only give you 2x24FPS so its 24 per eye. i actually see flicker with the stupid thing.
> 
> 
> PC 3D realised this long ago, and stuck with 100Hz as a flicker free requirement (120 with LCD, since its a nice double of the standard 60)
> ...



My television IS 480Hz.  It's refresh rate is 60Hz but it cycles the phosphors on and off 480 times per second while refreshing the frame buffer 60 times per second.  I see 480 images per second, 60 unique images 8 times in a row.


----------



## qubit (Jan 21, 2011)

IceCreamBarr said:


> My television IS 480Hz.  It's refresh rate is 60Hz but it cycles the phosphors on and off 480 times per second while refreshing the frame buffer 60 times per second.  I see 480 images per second, 60 unique images 8 times in a row.



That's just it, they're not properly "unique". All those inbetween frames are interpolated from the real frames either side. While it may smooth animation, it can and does lead to motion artifacts. Frankly, all the TV makers have to do is make sure that the interpolation gives you 50Hz ie 50 fields per second that the TV standard works at in the UK (60 US) to smooth out the animation and eliminate judder.

Just look at any video shot at 50Hz to see what how beautifully smooth it is. Unfortunately, most content, including the CGI animated TV logos are done at 25Hz for some stupid reason and judder terribly.  There's no reason for doing it this way nowadays and hasn't been for the last 20 years at least.

My DVR can smoothly play back at double speed with no sound. All this 25Hz crap then looks wonderfully smooth, backing up my point.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 21, 2011)

IceCreamBarr said:


> My television IS 480Hz.  It's refresh rate is 60Hz but it cycles the phosphors on and off 480 times per second while refreshing the frame buffer 60 times per second.  I see 480 images per second, 60 unique images 8 times in a row.



yes... but you can never get more than 60 unique images. for 3D, that means no more than 30Hz per eye (which is a flickery mess to many people)


You seem to understand the difference at least, most people dont.


----------



## Kreij (Jan 21, 2011)

When you get to my age, about 12 Hz is good as you are sleeping half the time.

Anyway. 3D on 60 Hz? No. If you don't barf, you'll get headaches for sure.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 21, 2011)

Kreij said:


> When you get to my age, about 12 Hz is good as you are sleeping half the time.
> 
> Anyway. 3D on 60 Hz? No. If you don't barf, you'll get headaches for sure.



when it comes to 3D bluray, thats all you get. people see "oooh a 240/480Hz LCD/plasma, that'll be GREAT for 3D!" but it still flickers like a bitch due to low FPS of source.


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 21, 2011)

current use of the technology hasn't impressed me and it's not like Schindler's List is ever going to be 3D.

yo dawg I heard you like 3D.. ugh nevermind


----------



## Kreij (Jan 21, 2011)

In all honesty, the advances in 3D tech are impressive. It's just not ready for prime time yet.
I'm not sure if it ever will be with the current methods of creating it.
Next gen 3D wil be interesting, and we will all enjoy trashing discussing it here on TPU.


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 21, 2011)

companies are looking for products to sell you until the OLED revolution begins. the gaming industry revolves around the console market and they have enough problems with frame rate. the use of the technology has been unimpressive. I personally don't like Disney or Pixar films and 3D without glasses is only going to make the viewing angles on LCD televisions worse than they already are.


----------



## qubit (Jan 21, 2011)

Kreij said:


> In all honesty, the advances in 3D tech are impressive. It's just not ready for prime time yet.
> I'm not sure if it ever will be with the current methods of creating it.
> Next gen 3D wil be interesting, and we will all enjoy discussing trashing it here on TPU.



+1... and fixed!


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 21, 2011)

3D on 60 Hz is not possible.  At that refresh rate it would just be alternating frames of the image.  The flashing it would create could possible induce an epileptic seizure and kill you at the worst.

As all 3D inputs will be looking for a 120Hz minimum, it would most likely just fail.  Even if you hacked the drivers and forced it, the TV should just display "No Signal Input" in large white letters.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 21, 2011)

3D 60Hz pr0n.

Can you imagine? Some kind of weird addictive torture? A pain/please punishment on your enemies?


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 21, 2011)

3D Porn. I didn't think of that. my opinion has changed lol


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 21, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> 3D 60Hz pr0n.
> 
> Can you imagine? Some kind of weird addictive torture? A pain/please punishment on your enemies?



I know you guys are still thinking about this one.  You can't decide. It sits on an asymptotic divide between pain and pleasure. You could force your enemies to watch. What torture. Then again, you'd want to watch with them too!


----------



## m4gicfour (Jan 21, 2011)

Bonkers: 3d porn at last (gizmodo)

Hack a video codec...

We're nearer than you think. Anybody know a good video software coder?


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 21, 2011)

No no, it's the concept of *3D at 60Hz* pr0n I'm referring to!


----------



## m4gicfour (Jan 21, 2011)

I know. All we need if for content to become mainstream enough for you to be able to easily get it on your computer, and hack a codec to discard half the information (frames), now double up the display time of each frame to prevent sped-up playback. Now, I'm sure there would be easier ways of doing it, but hey:

You get the benefit of pukeyness, and stuttery, shoddy playback.


EDIT

hey... anyone know what rate These ran at? I know it couldn't have been faster than 60 unless they pulled some trickery to "simulate" faster display. I remember them being flickery but it never bothered me. I quite enjoyed shooting at 2D enemies positioned in 3D-space lol. (think cardboard cutouts at varying depths of a shooting gallery. That was space harrier 3D.)


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 21, 2011)

Top find. Wow, 3D on a 64k z80 running at 3Mhz. Note that is Mhz not Ghz. That is seriously impressive.

Reminds me of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_Monster_Maze on a much simpler Z80 with 16k.

THAT was the first game I bought! Was still at school. Memories!


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 21, 2011)

it's easy to forget 3D has been around since the 1940's. 

you would think the porn industry would be the first to capitalize and exploit 3D technology with so many sadist like Completely Bonkers <snorts>


----------



## m4gicfour (Jan 21, 2011)

Yeah I'm aware it's Mhz.

the emulator Meka can run original Sega 3-D glasses if you build a serialport (or was it parallel? way too long ago) adaptor for it. I Imagine it could be rewritten to work with modern stereoscopic hardware. Nvidia 3D-vision! Your quad-core sandybridge and GTX 5XX unleash their AWESOME POWER to reveal the TRUE PINNACLE of 3D GAMING! 

(Z80 emulation.)


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 21, 2011)

^lulz

Anyway, back on topic, has anyone tried watching those 3D clips on youtube... where you dont use glasses, but you use the "crosseyes" projection.  It's difficult to focus, but pretty impressive.  Quite fine on 60Hz.

example:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RFuRY7azgA

note... read the instructions and set 3D to "crosseye"... then spend 5 minutes training your eyes


----------



## m4gicfour (Jan 21, 2011)

Nah. Linky?

EDIT

AGH my eyes! perhaps trying this on a 55' 1080P TV with 360P content isn't the best method lol.


----------



## MilkyWay (Jan 21, 2011)

Plasma tvs use interpolation so its not really 600hz (random figure). Its called sub field motion rate or something like that.

In the UK we use 50hz for broadcasts, in the USA (NTSC REGIONS) you use 60hz. Its because in the UK we broadcast in 576i at 25fps. NTSC broadcasts 480i at 29.97fps. So some tvs in PAL regions are 100hz for 3D but it doesn't matter about monitors because games all should run at 60fps so you need a 120hz monitor for that.

You also get PAL60hz but ive only seen this on consoles.

Film is shot in 24fps to get 3:2 pulldown, that's why a lot of tvs now offer 24p.

PS. There is 3D and live porn in the UK i know that because its on regular tv over here as a pay per view channel. Note to other users i don't use that channel.

They must've been able to get 3D on 50hz and 60hz tvs because the Sega Master System has an official 3D headset that plugged into it!


----------



## Mussels (Jan 21, 2011)

MilkyWay said:


> They must've been able to get 3D on 50hz and 60hz tvs because the Sega Master System has an official 3D headset that plugged into it!



every 3D HDTV on the market right now does it using 60Hz.


the problem is that those of us with good eyesight see it as a flickery mess.


----------



## MilkyWay (Jan 21, 2011)

Mussels said:


> every 3D HDTV on the market right now does it using 60Hz.
> 
> 
> the problem is that those of us with good eyesight see it as a flickery mess.



So how do 50HZ broadcasts work in 3D on a 120hz TV?
Dont tell me its as simple as changing the refresh rate?


----------



## Mussels (Jan 21, 2011)

MilkyWay said:


> So how do 50HZ broadcasts work in 3D on a 120hz TV?



at 50Z, doubled internally to 100Hz. you'd get 24FPS per eye iirc, thats how it works on bluray 3D at least.


----------



## MilkyWay (Jan 21, 2011)

Im not sure what Sky broadcast 3D at in the UK, i do know however that they send HD at 1080i 50hz.

Ive checked and all i can find is tvs that are marketed but not displayed in the specs as 50/100/200/400hz over here (checked a few retailers and then the manufacturers sites). Im pretty sure that the PAL region is just different but it could be as simple as just lowering the refresh rate on NTSC spec tvs.


----------



## qubit (Jan 21, 2011)

@MilkyWay

For broadcast TV in 3D, they made up a new transmission format with higher bandwidth - it sends twice as many pictures per second as a regular broadcast, alternating left and right views. A regular TV cannot receive this signal.


----------



## IceCreamBarr (Jan 21, 2011)

I think my idea was missed.  Everyone keeps referring to the television being 60Hz, 100Hz, 50Hz or whatever... take the television out of the equation for this idea.  If you wear 120Hz glasses and stare at the wall, you are seeing the wall in 120Hz instead of "infinite".  If you wear 120Hz glasses and stare at a television of 60Hz, you are still seeing the television in 120Hz regardless of what the tv is showing you; same argument for smexy 240Hz tv's, still seeing it only in 120Hz through the glasses.

Can you "fake" a 120Hz image by using the 120Hz glasses by reprogramming the glasses' software to sync with your television in a different cadence than with 120Hz televisions.

This idea is for movie viewing on BD 3D and not gaming... playing a game at 30fps would be painfully slow.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 22, 2011)

IceCreamBarr said:


> I think my idea was missed.  Everyone keeps referring to the television being 60Hz, 100Hz, 50Hz or whatever... take the television out of the equation for this idea.  If you wear 120Hz glasses and stare at the wall, you are seeing the wall in 120Hz instead of "infinite".  If you wear 120Hz glasses and stare at a television of 60Hz, you are still seeing the television in 120Hz regardless of what the tv is showing you; same argument for smexy 240Hz tv's, still seeing it only in 120Hz through the glasses.
> 
> Can you "fake" a 120Hz image by using the 120Hz glasses by reprogramming the glasses' software to sync with your television in a different cadence than with 120Hz televisions.
> 
> This idea is for movie viewing on BD 3D and not gaming... playing a game at 30fps would be painfully slow.



if you wear 120Hz glasses and stare at a wall, you see 2x60Hz. thats only 60Hz per eye.

I'm sure you've seen the effect of a CRT screen after recorded on a video camera, with the flickering. thats the problem we get when they dont match up.


the PROBLEM is that HD content these days is only made and transmitted in 24FPS - so movies and such totally suck. 24x2 is not acceptable for most gamers (not for GAMES, for gamers - people who have trained their eyes to see high speed motion)


of course, gamers on a PC with 3D games (nvidia style, with their glasses for example) can get higher refresh rates... but its still only half of whatever the refresh rate is, per eye.


----------

