Multi monitor in 3D

[Chickaboo]

Hi I'am building my racing sim and thinking of going multi screens but wondering if 3D works across the screens.

 

[Cheeba]

Yes, multi monitor in 3D is awesome given the proper hardware/software.

 

[Chickaboo]

I'am thinking three PS3's and three lg 27inch 3D monitors manly just for GT5.

 

[museumsteve]

I'm sure people that tried ran into various issues when trying to use PS3's with active 3D TVs as the glasses couldn't sync to 3 monitors. I'm not sure if PC's are different/easier.
I assume passive screens would be a better bet perhaps?
Are the LG's passive 3D?

 

[Mr Latte]

Yes, multi monitor in 3D is awesome given the proper hardware/software.

I'd like to hear more of your experience/system.
Nvidia seems to be the way to go last I looked in Feb upon buying the 9790, their Eyefinity 3D seems to of had little support or information regards it.

For GT5 passive displays/glasses it should not be a problem, setting up multiscreen and 3D output for each console. In the past their was no issue with each PS3 setup to output 3D (I never tried on latest updates). So it should work with no issue of syncing glasses to contend with using passive 3D.

3D in GT5 is a very mixed bag, some car interiors are rather flat as are some tracks. In TT situations you don't get the full benefit with no other cars on track. Also the downside is the frame rate especially when playing races drops a lot. Some tracks and cars are much better and yes it adds to the experience but you also have the comfort issues and possible eyestrain to adapt too.

2D Vs 3D Framerates / Performance Differences?
For competitive playing/racing 3D may be for most a disadvantage. I would say it is better for single player fun.

I was breaking in the CSW last night and continued doing some laps on Eiger Nordwand in the Castrol Toyota Supra, using Sport Soft tyres, TC off and the real setting for wheels off track. Managed a 1:04.2 so far after an hours play and getting acquainted with the game again. Out of self interest I will try the same again but next time in 3D to see how I manage.

 

[bumer]

If you go triple screen, you'll probably sit very close to screens. Although I have not seen myself, as I have active 3D TV, I've read that you see black lines in 3D on passive screen (as passive doesn't support fullhd 3d) when sitting closer than 1m, so it should be checked out.

 

[museumsteve]

If you go triple screen, you'll probably sit very close to screens. Although I have not seen myself, as I have active 3D TV, I've read that you see black lines in 3D on passive screen (as passive doesn't support fullhd 3d) when sitting closer than 1m, so it should be checked out.

That's a very good point. Being close to the screens with any 3D will probably be a mixed bag.

 

[Mr Latte]

That's a very good point. Being close to the screens with any 3D will probably be a mixed bag.

Well not really any, as passive uses interlacing I believe but Nvidia or Active 3D glasses will output as a progressive image. Even old DVD players with SD resolutions showed a great improvement over interlaced video. Active 3D and Passive both have their own Pros/Cons.

Last night I was doing tests for a well known community person looking to consider 720p / 1080p 3D projectors for his new setup and videos he does. I had a 70" screen sitting up-to as close as 40" to the wall (part of his requests) to experiment how close it is possible to get before 720p res becomes a quality factor. Usually seeing pixel structure or unbearable jaggies.

 

[museumsteve]

I was thinking more about the 3D effect and how you'd lose the depth being so close.
If I watch a 3D movie on my projector and walk towards the screen, the closer I get the flatter the image becomes as the depth lessens the closer I get until I reach a point where objects that seem to come out now seem to turn to the side.
Saying that, I'd love the opportunity to try 3 3D screens

 

[Mr Latte]

I was thinking more about the 3D effect and how you'd lose the depth being so close.
If I watch a 3D movie on my projector and walk towards the screen, the closer I get the flatter the image becomes as the depth lessens the closer I get until I reach a point where objects that seem to come out now seem to turn to the side.
Saying that, I'd love the opportunity to try 3 3D screens

I think that is why PS3 video setup asks what size of 3D display you use. However games usually incorporate the ability to increase/decrease the 3D effect depending on a range of factors like screen size,seating position and user preference.

My own research when looking into PC triple 3D is that it can be troublesome and personally I don't want that, besides its also a 2x factor on the GPU so requires a substantial system to do triple 1080p in 3D on the latest upcoming games. Support seems rather flakey and you read of lots of issues. Triple 2D projection @ 120Hz may be less bother and a nice improvement yet still very taxing on a PC system.

Hopefully Mikemav will be around to give some advice/opinions.

 

[Cheeba]

I'd like to hear more of your experience/system.
Nvidia seems to be the way to go last I looked in Feb upon buying the 9790, their Eyefinity 3D seems to of had little support or information regards it.

For GT5 passive displays/glasses it should not be a problem, setting up multiscreen and 3D output for each console. In the past their was no issue with each PS3 setup to output 3D (I never tried on latest updates). So it should work with no issue of syncing glasses to contend with using passive 3D.

3D in GT5 is a very mixed bag, some car interiors are rather flat as are some tracks. In TT situations you don't get the full benefit with no other cars on track. Also the downside is the frame rate especially when playing races drops a lot. Some tracks and cars are much better and yes it adds to the experience but you also have the comfort issues and possible eyestrain to adapt too.

2D Vs 3D Framerates / Performance Differences?
For competitive playing/racing 3D may be for most a disadvantage. I would /*-say it is better for single player fun.

I was breaking in the CSW last night and continued doing some laps on Eiger Nordwand in the Castrol Toyota Supra, using Sport Soft tyres, TC off and the real setting for wheels off track. Managed a 1:04.2 so far after an hours play and getting acquainted with the game again. Out of self interest I will try the same again but next time in 3D to see how I manage.

I was intentionally vague because without proper setup and configuration 3D can definitely be underwhelming and a PITA. But with proper execution some incredibly immersive gaming can be had!

To be honest 3D gaming on consoles is OK but not a good representation of the technology. GT5 is my only 3D racing experience on console and if that's all I had to judge by I would say it may not be worth it, especially just for one game. Frame rate issues, lack of 3D optimization in software, and lower resolution are reasons why I think racing titles on consoles in 3D can be a bit lacking, compared to PC.

A robust computer is a must for 3D, ESPECIALLY multi monitor 3d. I use a TRI-SLI setup, basically a graphic card for each monitor. I chose to go with Nvidia because they seem to have the best 3d drivers and profiles. Tri-Def also has some good 3D profiles. A gpu with AT LEAST 2gigs of vram is a must, (the more the better). Currently I'm using 3 four gig GTX-680's.

I am using 3d tv's instead of 3d monitors for the size aspect. Biggest 3d monitor I'm aware of is only 27". I wanted a larger display area to exacerbate the 3d effect so at first I went with 3 55" Samsung "One Design" displays but decided that was a bit overkill at my seating position so I down sized to 46" displays (should have kept the 55" ). I sit about 3 feet from the displays which is considered close for 3d viewing but I've no ill effects from sitting so close. The perceived depth is incredible once your settings are dialed in, the monitors simply seem to disappear and I truly feel like I'm looking through a windshield.

I prefer Active 3D to passive. If going the active tv route (instead of monitor or passive), make sure the tv can process all 3d formats, especially checkerboard, not just top/bottom, side by side. One benefit to using monitors over tv's is you get full resolution in 3d while being able to maintain a 60 hz framerate. Due to the HDMI 1.4 spec tv's are limited to only 24hz when in 3d mode (fine for movies, SUCKS for games) at 1080. You can achieve 60 hz in 3d but instead at a 720 rez. I use roughly 3840x720 at 60hz.

The lower resolution is not too noticeable, and aids in easing the load on the gpu's, just crank up the AA (you did get a gpu with more vram right ) and the increased screen size more than makes up for the lower resolution in my opinion.

While I am very happy with the feeling of immersion 3D affords, and would not go back to not having the capability, there are times when 2d may be more suited, like in a room with a lot of ambient light, or playing with others watching, or just online in multiplayer. When I'm racing online I rarely use 3D (like to keep the playing field level ), but simulated driving when solo has garnered some memorable moments for me....more than once I have touched the front glass of my tv thinking I'm about to grab something on the dashboard , and then there was a time practicing laps on the nurburgring and I got into a zone and literally felt I was in the forest!! Something about the added depth perception can really grab you in.

Sorry for long post, 3D seems to get a bad rap sometimes and I can understand why. It is definitely a process but a very rewarding one if implemented properly.

For anyone wanting more info regarding 3D tech I've found this site to be very helpful. http://3dvision-blog.com/forum/index.php?sid=39cc3e250d8191e04c4f50631bba2155

 

[museumsteve]

I was intentionally vague because without proper setup and configuration 3D can definitely be underwhelming and a PITA. But with proper execution some incredibly immersive gaming can be had!

To be honest 3D gaming on consoles is OK but not a good representation of the technology. GT5 is my only 3D racing experience on console and if that's all I had to judge by I would say it may not be worth it, especially just for one game. Frame rate issues, lack of 3D optimization in software, and lower resolution are reasons why I think racing titles on consoles in 3D can be a bit lacking, compared to PC.

A robust computer is a must for 3D, ESPECIALLY multi monitor 3d. I use a TRI-SLI setup, basically a graphic card for each monitor. I chose to go with Nvidia because they seem to have the best 3d drivers and profiles. Tri-Def also has some good 3D profiles. A gpu with AT LEAST 2gigs of vram is a must, (the more the better). Currently I'm using 3 four gig GTX-680's.

I am using 3d tv's instead of 3d monitors for the size aspect. Biggest 3d monitor I'm aware of is only 27". I wanted a larger display area to exacerbate the 3d effect so at first I went with 3 55" Samsung "One Design" displays but decided that was a bit overkill at my seating position so I down sized to 46" displays (should have kept the 55" ). I sit about 3 feet from the displays which is considered close for 3d viewing but I've no ill effects from sitting so close. The perceived depth is incredible once your settings are dialed in, the monitors simply seem to disappear and I truly feel like I'm looking through a windshield.

I prefer Active 3D to passive. If going the active tv route (instead of monitor or passive), make sure the tv can process all 3d formats, especially checkerboard, not just top/bottom, side by side. One benefit to using monitors over tv's is you get full resolution in 3d while being able to maintain a 60 hz framerate. Due to the HDMI 1.4 spec tv's are limited to only 24hz when in 3d mode (fine for movies, SUCKS for games) at 1080. You can achieve 60 hz in 3d but instead at a 720 rez. I use roughly 3840x720 at 60hz.

The lower resolution is not too noticeable, and aids in easing the load on the gpu's, just crank up the AA (you did get a gpu with more vram right ) and the increased screen size more than makes up for the lower resolution in my opinion.

While I am very happy with the feeling of immersion 3D affords, and would not go back to not having the capability, there are times when 2d may be more suited, like in a room with a lot of ambient light, or playing with others watching, or just online in multiplayer. When I'm racing online I rarely use 3D (like to keep the playing field level ), but simulated driving when solo has garnered some memorable moments for me....more than once I have touched the front glass of my tv thinking I'm about to grab something on the dashboard , and then there was a time practicing laps on the nurburgring and I got into a zone and literally felt I was in the forest!! Something about the added depth perception can really grab you in.

Sorry for long post, 3D seems to get a bad rap sometimes and I can understand why. It is definitely a process but a very rewarding one if implemented properly.

For anyone wanting more info regarding 3D tech I've found this site to be very helpful. http://3dvision-blog.com/forum/index.php?sid=39cc3e250d8191e04c4f50631bba2155

lol..many thanks for taking the time to post that mate. It makes me want to try it even more now

 

[Mr Latte]

Cheeba, actually great to get your input.
Thank you for the reply.

May I ask you to list your top 5 3D games and while they may not all be racing sims can you give more details on which multi-screen 3D racing titles work/look best in 3D on PC.

My own projector model is 16:10 @ 1280x800 which gives a bit more height/size but runs in 16:9 for hdmi 1.4 720p 3D gaming. Personally I think 5x 720p projectors in portrait will be amazing but very costly and hard to setup. Yet in pixels/processing terms is surprisingly not that bad.

Id love a short throw 1080p model that supported 60Hz but unlikely to come anytime soon as it will require new HDMI spec. I do believe newer TV models will support this 1080/60 as will apparently the PS4.

 

[Cheeba]

Cheeba, actually great to get your input.
Thank you for the reply.

May I ask you to list your top 5 3D games and while they may not all be racing sims can you give more details on which multi-screen 3D racing titles work/look best in 3D on PC.

My own projector model is 16:10 @ 1280x800 which gives a bit more height/size but runs in 16:9 for hdmi 1.4 720p 3D gaming. Personally I think 5x 720p projectors in portrait will be amazing but very costly and hard to setup. Yet in pixels/processing terms is surprisingly not that bad.

Id love a short throw 1080p model that supported 60Hz but unlikely to come anytime soon as it will require new HDMI spec. I do believe newer TV models will support this 1080/60 as will apparently the PS4.

Resident Evil 5, Mafia 2, Just Cause 2, Batman, Dirt 3, F1 2012 are some of my favorite titles for experiencing proper 3d. The codemasters titles take a bit of work sometimes but Nvidia normally comes out with a driver to make their games work pretty well. I got a couple new titles recently that have very good 3d also, Euro Truck Simulator 2 and F1 Allstars, they may soon be in my top five. Borderlands 2 looks pretty good but drivers still need a little work.

Left for Dead 2 is also good. I really did not play this game until I tried it in 3D. Very entertaining experience .

As far as purely racing, I'd go with rFactor2, GameStockCar 2012, Codemasters Dirt or F1, iRacing, most of the newer sims coming out i.e. Assetto Corsa, Race Room Experience, Pcars.

 

[Mr Latte]

Thanks again for the help friend..

For 3D, Nvidia is likely to be my next card, however I do not want SLI issues and some games (still I assume) not properly supporting it. Normally I consider buying the fastest single card solution at the time. I have a decent motherboard and 1200w PSU with massive Cosmos II case but my new entry back into PCs is to minimise the hassle factor as before I never stopped upgrading and tinkering.

Would you say that multi-screens is better than single screen 3D, well regards immersion or fun factor?

Oh and retried GT5 again turned the 3D effect up more which helped but was .2 slower after trying for the same length of time. So GT5 for me anyways with the lower frame rate does have in my case a performance hit.