Open-Source NVIDIA 3D Vision For OpenGL Library

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Open-Source NVIDIA 3D Vision For OpenGL On Linux

An open-source, independent developer has written an implementation of NVIDIA 3D Vision for OpenGL with Linux compatibility...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU3NDQ

[Thunderbird]

This library is not what people think it is. The library allows Windows developers to create 3D applications using OpenGL-DirectX interop. Normally developers don't get access to stereo3d support using consumer hardware (there are no stereo3d visuals reported), but Nvidia provides it using Direct3D. This library using Nvidia's OpenGL-DirectX interop to allow OpenGL apps to essentially get stereo 3d buffers using Nvidia-specific Direct3D functionality.

The code doesn't support Linux and can't really support it either, because on Linux no stereo3d is exported using consumer OpenGL. The GPU really needs to send out stereo 3d frames (and the correct flags for this in the HDMI signal), which for which there is no way without driver support. Also a synchronization signal needs to be generated for the glasses, which can likely be done from user space though (but maybe with unreliable timing)

[emblemparade]

You are 100% correct (I'm the dev) though I think what the library does is clear in its description.

However, I will now add another note about your point to the project page...

3D Vision is simply not supported in consumer NVIDIA cards, period.

[droidhacker]

You are 100% correct (I'm the dev) though I think what the library does is clear in its description.

However, I will now add another note about your point to the project page...

3D Vision is simply not supported in consumer NVIDIA cards, period.

It used to be. I had one, it came in a box with a set of stupid goggles that plugged into the video card separately from the monitor, and did a great job of causing a headache.

IMO, 3d vision on computers/tv's is a fad, it will fade. Hopefully sooner rather than later. To this date, there has never been *any* implementation of 3d vision (besides *natural*) that doesn't cause significant loss in image quality, and strain on the viewer's eyes.

[ssokolow]

It used to be. I had one, it came in a box with a set of stupid goggles that plugged into the video card separately from the monitor, and did a great job of causing a headache.

IMO, 3d vision on computers/tv's is a fad, it will fade. Hopefully sooner rather than later. To this date, there has never been *any* implementation of 3d vision (besides *natural*) that doesn't cause significant loss in image quality, and strain on the viewer's eyes.

I'm waiting to see the results with HMDs like the Oculus Rift and whatever Valve claims to be working on.

1. They don't use shutters, so no flickering.
2. I remember hearing somewhere that the Rift uses lenses to focus the image at optical infinity, so no eyestrain. (Let your eye muscles fully relax. You'll find that your eyes default to being focused at optical infinity.)
3. Head-motion parallax does more for immersiveness than eye-distance parallax and revision 2 of the Rift gives you both, which is even better.
4. Since they have head-tracking, they also double as an input device.

[emblemparade]

I wouldn't call it a "fad," because it's been around for a long enough time, but it's definitely a "niche." Still, the small group of people who enjoy 3D are very big fans. I personally still dual boot to game on Windows because NVIDIA doesn't support 3D on Linux. I will go out of my to prefer games that have good 3D Vision support. (Trine 2 with 3D Vision is a delight!) I install special mods (Helix rulez!) to improve 3D Vision support. And of course I created this library, and also bake anaglyph and SBS TV support into my games.

3D Vision is the best stereoscopic tech out there, for now. It really blows any other out of the water: much better than passive glasses. You don't see any "flicker" at its required 120hz. The challenge has been brightness, however, and some ghosting, though these are minimized with a better monitor, and 3D Vision 2's "lightburst" technology really does help. The loss of quality, I would say, is in the color range.

Is there some strain? Yes. But there is also strain just looking at a regular monitor. Mileage will vary per person. Generally, people see *very* differently, and it is strongly recommended that you fiddle with convergence settings to get the best effect. Generally, games that were not tested with 3D Vision (and instead rely on the driver's "automatic" mode), look worst (assuming they are not riddled with 3D bugs). Getting it look best requires the devs to do careful tuning of the depth of field as well as other parameters.

The real problem, if you ask you me, is that stereoscopy is itself very limited optically, and these limitations exist also with the Rift and other VR devices that rely on it. Real life doesn't just project different images into each of our eyes: rather, our eyes cooperate to change their focus according to what we're looking at. Until computers can mimic that (likely via a sophisticated eye-tracking device), the 3D effect will be limited. (Research is being done on it, but we're still very far away from a consumer device.) The inability to change focus means that the depth effect is only really visible in a shallow depth-of-field: that's why first person shooters (and nost movies) don't have a very noticable 3D effect with stereoscopy, but games like Trine 2 look amazing. That why movies have to "pop" stuff out at the viewer so that the viewer won't forget that they're seeing something in 3D (and really got something extra for that more expensive ticket price).

I call it the "aquarium limitation": the best stereoscopic games are those in which the monitor mimics a window into box, like an aquarium, with both a shallow depth of field and a small sense of size. It's only there that the optical limitations of the tech are minimized, effectively making the monitor appear like a hologram, a 3D image floating in front of you. Another metaphor is a "dollhouse."

Indeed, this is why I'm *not* so excited by the Rift: like other VR techs that have come and gone, it will be plagued by the same limitation. I expect that, as usual with 3D tech, it will be a niche. Most people would want to try it once out of curiosity, but it won't actually be very immersive.

Well, actually I'm excited about one aspect of the Rift: head tracking. Out computers are fast enough these days to give a sense of almost instantaneous responsiveness to our head movements in the game. I think that it in itself will contribute to a sene of "immersion," even if there is no stereoscopic effect.

But, wanna talk about strain? Having to move your whole head will be awful for your neck! You will not be able to play for very long. Niche.

[ssokolow]

But, wanna talk about strain? Having to move your whole head will be awful for your neck! You will not be able to play for very long. Niche.

As far as gaming goes, I'm actually more interested in the immersiveness gains to be had just from letting the head tracking react to the small movements and adjustments our bodies make without us even noticing.

The main thing I'd like to see as far as "headlook" (as opposed to mouselook) goes will require something high-enough resolution to be "retinal" by Apple's definition. (I'd like to fake a monitor setup like this even though I only have enough room for the two monitors I already have.)