VRSurfer Wireless LC Shutter Glasses

[P3D Oliver Dean <3d-image@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Albert!

Welcome aboard!

Albert Lin quoted and wrote:

> Oliver Dean Says:
> 
> > 2.  The gray plastic cover over the outside of the glasses is not
> > optically flat enough.  Slight ripples in the flatness of the plastic
> > are clearly evident when the glasses are moved while you are looking
> > through them.  The result is a slight but distinct reduction in
> > sharpness when viewing images on a computer monitor.  The loss is not so
> > apparent when viewing the lower resolution images of a TV, but it is
> > annoying with the computer, especially at 1024 x 768 resolution.
> 
> I think it is not only the plastic cover reduces the sharpness but also the
> LCD shutter does it. Any LCD shutter consists of two polarizers, aligned
> vertically agaist each orther, which cut off at least 70% of the incident
> light. You found that the loss in case of monitor is worse than TV. The
> reason is the luminosity of TV is much better than monitor. Besides, in
> order to reduce flickering, vertical refresh rate of monitor will be
> increased up to 90 Hz, or higher, in stereo mode. This results in shortening
> the scanning time of electron beam and reducing more luminosity of monitor.
> However, this situation never happens on TV, it's always scanning at 60 Hz,
> 30 frames with 2 fields. You might already notice that TV always gives you
> uncomfortable flickering.
> 
Thank you for these comments, Albert!  But I'm afraid that the
luminosity factor has little to do with the degradation of sharpness I
observed.  The reason I say this is that I tested before I wrote!  When
I removed the plastic cover, which can be snapped off without damage if
done carefully, the view was restored to maximum sharpness for the
computer monitor, even when I turned down the brightness of the monitor
to simulate the brightness as seen through the glasses with the cover in
Received: by bobcat.etsu.edu; id AA14663; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:40:44 -0600
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 15:40:44 -0600
Message-Id: <199702262122.NAA14038@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Errors-To: 3d-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Originator: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
From: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Multiple recipients of list <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: PHOTO-3D digest 1906
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment:   The Stereoscopic Image (Photo-3D) Mailing List  
Status:   

place.  I also checked both the TV and computer monitor images with a
set of StereoGraphics SimulEyes wired glasses, which also have a dark
plastic cover, but one which is much closer to being optically flat than
the VRSurfer's.  The SimulEyes were a pleasure to use, with no apparent
loss of sharpness. But I agree with you that, as well as the lower
resolution of my consumer-level TV, the "uncomfortable flickering" of
the slower refresh rate of the TV would contribute to a less distinct
image. 

I should comment that, while the sharpness is better with the plastic
cover removed, this sacrifices the protection of the LC's and the
noticable reduction in flicker that the cover provides.  Neither
alternative is wholly satisfactory. 

> > 
> > 3.  The flat area on the gray plastic cover is not large enough.  The
> > edges of it, which severely distort the view, are clearly visible
> > through the LC openings.
> 
> The reason is that they are concerned with cost down. It's no necessary to
> make it larger if they offer a small LCD shuuter, e.g. 5cm x 3cm. LCD
> shutter is still an expensive component. The cost of LCD shutter is
> proportional to its dimension.
 
I have no quibble with the size and cost of the LC shutters. My point
was simply that it wouldn't have cost anything extra for them to tool
the plastic cover with a larger flat area, whose edges then would be
outside the field of view through the small shutter openings.  The truth
of the matter is that VRex tried to design an exciting and futuristic
appearance that would attract gamers and the younger users without fully
assessing the impact on function and quality.  The part of the plastic
cover that is not flat is no less expensive to manufacture than the flat
part -- it's all a mold that gets tooled once, and is then used for
cranking out thousands of copies. They could easily have made the flat
part 1/4" larger all the way around without costing a cent more for
production costs.

> > 5.  The software for use with computers seems unnecessarily complicated.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> I can not figue out how complicated the installation is because I don't have
> any VRSurfer at hand. But I really saw local distributor of VRSurfer failed
> to make it when they wanted to demonstrate it for me. The best realistic way
> is to run your applications directly without any installation of driver. But
> this seems impossible at this moment.

Right on!
 
> Sorry! I got to leave now. I'll
> continue talking about this issue tomorrow.

I've been up all night! I'd better go, too! Thanks for your input!
-- 
-- 
Oliver Dean -- 3d-image@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dominguez Hills (near Los Angeles), Calloushernia, USA


------------------------------