Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 11 of 70«129101112136970»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress - 0.9.7.2
Work progress - 0.9.7.2
spacerDate: Saturday, 12.04.2014, 11:35 | Message # 151
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1258
Status: Offline
if i dont have 3D glasses for the computer, but i have 3d glasses for my 3d tv, can i connect the computer to my tv and play spaceengine in 3d?




"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan

-space engine photographer
 
SolarLinerDate: Saturday, 12.04.2014, 15:01 | Message # 152
Explorer
Group: Users
France
Messages: 267
Status: Offline
Quote spacer ()
if i dont have 3D glasses for the computer, but i have 3d glasses for my 3d tv, can i connect the computer to my tv and play spaceengine in 3d?

If your computer have a HDMI out then you can connect an HDMI cable to your TV, and put Space Engine in 3D on the TV.
Windows recognize the TV as a screen, so you can do a double monitor setup, which is cool to browse SE and let's say, the forum at the same time.
With the same setup you can watch 3D films from your computer or YouTube, as long as it is in full screen.





custom landing page to share: http://bit.ly/spaceengine
 
spacerDate: Saturday, 12.04.2014, 15:05 | Message # 153
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1258
Status: Offline
Quote SolarLiner ()
If your computer have a HDMI out then you can connect an HDMI cable to your TV, and put Space Engine in 3D on the TV.

yay! biggrin smile happy se in 3d!!





"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan

-space engine photographer
 
DJKiranDate: Saturday, 12.04.2014, 16:15 | Message # 154
Observer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 10
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
I have interlaced TV. This is currently used technology. Of course, it supports vertical anamorphic stereopair as native format, but you must switch TV to 3D mode with remote control. If engine can render interlaced image, it is even better - you don't need to switch anything. However, my TV have some sort of sharpness filter that cannot be switched off, so interlaced image is useless (this filter mixed lines a bit).


Yes, but you can see the difference between frames, when moving quickly, more clearly in interlaced than progressive, and this is a bit disorienting and would detach you from the full immersion
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Sunday, 13.04.2014, 10:01 | Message # 155
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4798
Status: Offline
Quote DJKiran ()
Yes, but you can see the difference between frames, when moving quickly, more clearly in interlaced than progressive, and this is a bit disorienting and would detach you from the full immersion

Are you talking about active 3D? This is when TV shows one frame for left eye, next frame for right eye, then for left again... And you must use active (shutter) glasses?





 
DJKiranDate: Sunday, 13.04.2014, 13:07 | Message # 156
Observer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 10
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Are you talking about active 3D? This is when TV shows one frame for left eye, next frame for right eye, then for left again... And you must use active (shutter) glasses?


I'm talking about the interlaced lines you see when moving fast enough to see the frames. This would not be the case if you used progressive
 
SolarLinerDate: Sunday, 13.04.2014, 13:43 | Message # 157
Explorer
Group: Users
France
Messages: 267
Status: Offline
Interlaced lines are either made by codecs in videos that outputs an interlaced video, or the left and right eye image that are then superposed via polarized glasses on a passive 3D TV.
In the case of the "interlaced lines you see when moving fast" is the video codec that does that.





custom landing page to share: http://bit.ly/spaceengine
 
midtskogenDate: Sunday, 13.04.2014, 16:08 | Message # 158
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1672
Status: Offline
Quote SolarLiner ()
In the case of the "interlaced lines you see when moving fast" is the video codec that does that.

"Video codec" sounds a bit misleading. Traditional interlacing of video is a 90 year old analogue compression technique - a tradeoff between motion and resolution, much like digital compression techniques. I've been working with video codecs professionally for the past 15 years, and it's somewhat a mystery for me why this interlacing technique has survived even into modern digital video codecs.





NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
 
Sev00Date: Sunday, 13.04.2014, 22:12 | Message # 159
Space Tourist
Group: Users
France
Messages: 20
Status: Offline
I have anaglyph 3D glasses and this one is bugging me :


the 3D effect doesn't work. The planet and it's moon in the background, their red and cyan "iterations" are really far from each other, while I think they should be really close to each other actually.

I think I am right ? It's far off in the distance so the picture that we get from it in each of our eyes should be almost similar ? And I just saw that it's the same thing on the anamorphic stereopair pictures.
There's something wrong with that I think, but nice work on implementing all of these smile

EDIT : actually it does work I think, I managed to focus on the planet, so I was wrong. But makes me curious, as I don't understand why it works like this, I thought it was the exact contrary when rendering 3D stuff... Closer objects are more different for each eye, meaning the red/cyan would be bigger, than say far objects which are basically the same image for each of our eyes, thus being very similarly placed in the red and cyan sides... right ?


Edited by Sev00 - Sunday, 13.04.2014, 22:18
 
DJKiranDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 00:05 | Message # 160
Observer
Group: Users
United Kingdom
Messages: 10
Status: Offline
Quote Sev00 ()
the 3D effect doesn't work. The planet and it's moon in the background, their red and cyan "iterations" are really far from each other, while I think they should be really close to each other actually.

I think I am right ? It's far off in the distance so the picture that we get from it in each of our eyes should be almost similar ? And I just saw that it's the same thing on the anamorphic stereopair pictures.
There's something wrong with that I think, but nice work on implementing all of these

EDIT : actually it does work I think, I managed to focus on the planet, so I was wrong. But makes me curious, as I don't understand why it works like this, I thought it was the exact contrary when rendering 3D stuff... Closer objects are more different for each eye, meaning the red/cyan would be bigger, than say far objects which are basically the same image for each of our eyes, thus being very similarly placed in the red and cyan sides... right ?


You are right, closer images have a larger difference in each eye, so their red/cyan positions should be further apart, whereas further objects have a negligible difference, so red/cyan should be closer together. It doesn't matter if you can focus on it, it's the case of how our brain puts the two images together, similar to real life.
 
anonymousgamerDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 01:26 | Message # 161
World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 1011
Status: Offline
So I found a way to get crazy depth out of red-cyan anaglyph pictures.










Desktop: FX-8350 4.0 GHz, 8 GB DDR3 RAM, EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW 8 GB, 2 TB HDD, 24 inch 1920x1080 screen
Laptop: Core i5 480M 2.66 GHz (turbo 2.93), 8 GB DDR3 RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6550m 1 GB, 640 GB HDD, 17.3 inch 1600x900 screen
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 04:00 | Message # 162
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
Quote Sev00 ()
the 3D effect doesn't work

It's because the filters are backwards. Read the other posts (particularly mine).





All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
laiodDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 05:04 | Message # 163
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 95
Status: Offline
Looks like this will be a good update. biggrin




ASUS Radeon HD 7770 2GB, Crucial Ballistix 8GB x2, AMD FX-4130 3.8GHz, 1TB 7200rpm drive
 
SolarLinerDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 18:12 | Message # 164
Explorer
Group: Users
France
Messages: 267
Status: Offline
anonymousgamer, your images have a good 3D depth, but you should let more of the depth going out of the screen. The eye will have less work to do and a headache will be saved. For example in the first picture the shuttle could have been completely detached of and going out of the screen. With the landscape in the background still "behind" the monitor, this gives a nice 3D effect.




custom landing page to share: http://bit.ly/spaceengine
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Monday, 14.04.2014, 20:33 | Message # 165
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4798
Status: Offline
Quote DJKiran ()
I'm talking about the interlaced lines you see when moving fast enough to see the frames. This would not be the case if you used progressive

VSync fixes that.

Quote Sev00 ()
the 3D effect doesn't work. The planet and it's moon in the background, their red and cyan "iterations" are really far from each other, while I think they should be really close to each other actually.

Anaglyph mode have the same perspective that other modes. On my passive 3D TV, I look on image on fullscreen from 1.5-2 meters (42" screen). Try to do the same with anaglyph image (swapping left and light lenses if needed). Note that immersion of depth is strongly depends on your distance to the screen: as far you are, as more depth have rocks in the background.

Screen distance between left/right images of objects at infinity (stars, plnets) must be equal to your interpupillary distance. And for objects that are on the screen plane distance, left/right images must fit each other (interface). Objects that are closer than screen, have red/cyan swapped (arm of astronaut). These pictures are made fon my 42" TV and 6.3 cm interpup. distance. So maybe problems with depth are simply because of different geometry of your system?





 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress - 0.9.7.2
Page 11 of 70«129101112136970»
Search: