Hello everyone!

This guide was co-written by myself and Yuriy Nikshych (Yuriythebest!).

We have written The Nine Shameful Sins of S-3D Hardware Review Journalism as a tool to help users measure the credibility and validity of S-3D display hardware reviews.

We appreciate that this guide may make one manufacturer appear more ethical than another. This is not our intention or the subject of this article. In fact, the display manufacturers should not have any influence or responsibility in how reviews are written or printed. What is up for discussion is whether or not display reviewers and media are following the correct ethical practices when reviewing stereoscopic 3D displays for their audience, and what telltale signs readers should look out for if this is not the case.

If you would like to see additional articles or "sins" referenced, please do so here. Also, which reviews do you think have been ethically done and why? Are these ethical standards reasonable?

Please share your thoughts.

Regards,
Neil

My suggestions :
Add to the list of 3d brands : Elsa 3D revelator shutter glasses

Modify in the list of 3D vocabulary :
- Ghosting or Crosstalk

add to sin #3 :
Sin #3: Reviewers That Write As Though 3D Was Invented TODAY and the reviewed product is the only one on the market

Very good suggestions.

Let's see how the list grows!

Regards,
Neil

That list is so true. So much mis-information floating about. The worst is the "dorky glasses" potshot. I hate that.

Yea and other commets are I wouldn't buy it unless it had no glasses.

And people keep thing it's red/blue back then but it wasn't it was polarized

The red/blue is in there, but the no-glasses part is new - that's a good idea.

Regards,
Neil

hi guys!

i have a question to all you which is only partially related to this article. do you think that the article is too long? would you like to see a short version (lenght of 2/3 times the news) and a link to the full lenght version?

my problem is that i dont have neoguh time to go trough these articles and so i often dont even start reading. but i would really like to read them if they would be shorter. what do you think?

Where is the medical science? Neil I haven't read ANYWHERE that IZ3d or Nvidia or anyone has optical or neurological scientists working with 3D developers to minimize stress and fatigue on the eye/brain system. I have posted links to some papers where the defense department was running studies like this for thier virtual soldier type initiatives. I think a HUGE disservice is being done to the general public.

They will try certain solutions, get bad headaches/eyestrain and then you have cost yourself, iz3d, nvidia, and all the game developers a customer possibly for LIFE.

Where is the medical scientists talking to the developers of call of duty 5 telling them what effects and settings they need to optimize so that the human doesn't get nauseated? Where is the research that doing thing A in a game versus thing B will result in more brain/eyestrain?

A new game will come out - say fallout 4 and I want to know their developers were using best practices based on medical science that will minimize pain. Developers are not doctors, they are not opticians or neurologists - they need to consult with the experts and there needs to be data.

Otherwise you are going to have people hurt and unleash a lot of games that will hurt the s3d using public and s3d will go away for another 10 years. The games need to be designed to alleviate motion sickness, where is the medical doctor that MTBS3d has on staff to bring all the latest research and science to bear on game design?

The link you send me neil - this guy got motion sickness, nobody is going to use something that require they take dramamine to play a game.

http://jonpeddie.com/blogs/i_love_stere ... reovision/
And now your eyes and brain, and maybe inner ear are really taking a beating. (Yes, you may experience some nausea - I got woozy in Stalker after running around dodging Freedom fighters.)

Where is the medical doctor to do some peer review testing of why he got nauseated and how best to alleviate that - then he can go give that data to the developers and they can make games that conform to better design. Where is the set of rules how I need to design my s3d game to minimize this wooziness in Stalker?

There might be an opportunity here. Are you suggesting we do a study about S-3D and best settings to avoid nausea, etc.? Is this what you are after?

It's not a bad idea...let me wrap my mind around how to do this properly. It's not as easy to implement as it sounds, but it has potential.

Regards,
Neil

It would actually be an important thing! I read on a few italian websites they had nausea issues after half an hour of playing... if there is a way to avoid it, it should be cleared to everybody

Hey Sharky, im totally with you. I had a quick look but was put off from the length..........
Short and to the point I say but with the added option for an in depth article if you got the time....

I still think yous should do a audio podcast that we can listen to with all news articles and then i can work and still listen to all the news etc.
anyway
Cheers

I can understand where this is coming from but it also translates to -

'Sin number 10- Anyone who bashes a stereo 3d solution is just wrong.'

Lets keep an open mind, some people are just simply not impressed with what they have seen.

Hi Okta!

I don't agree with you here. This isn't about whether or not the journalist liked it. As far as I'm concerned, a well written "bad" review could be a golden opportunity to improve a product. If these sample writers did their job properly, they would have written a fact based review that the manufacturers and the consumers can benefit from. Instead, it's just destructive drivel.

Take NVIDIA. When I connected with them in person, they said "Neil! We don't mind bad reviews. We like to see where the problems are so we can fix them." After a recent product review in a magazine (which I didn't care for either, by the way), iZ3D said "the journalist is right about this. We will work to improve X, Y, and Z".

A mentor taught me that failure is a prerequisite for success, so bad reviews in themselves aren't terrible things if we can learn from them. The problem is in these particular situations, the reviewers failed to deliver because they either didn't take the time to research responsibly, they did not test the equipment in the environment it was designed and intended for, and they probably had a bias against the reviewed products long before they put pen to paper. This article is our review of THEIR work, and it is equally their responsibility to fix their products to meet the needs of the consumers and industry alike.

Regards,
Neil

I dont disagree Neil. My point was that some reviewers will compare apples to oranges in that they are compareing a 22inch s3d lcd to a 30inch 2d lcd with no glasses and higher framerates, less ditraction and eye focus problems and that it is easier to play games in 2d rather than 3d in many situations.

Another thing, disregarding wether a review is negative because the reviewer is an idiot or if he genuinely has issues with the product it is still a judgement of the product in the shops and the damage is done. Its difficult for a company to fix a released product. Software can be addressed and Iz3d have been 'playing' with new glasses for a while butit is what it is.

When a propagander minister for a company like Nvidia says he doesnt mind a negative review because it helps makes me sick. As if Nvidia have been listening to anything we have been saying for years.

+1

Hi Okta,

You make a valid point about comparing the convenient experience of a 2D display versus the more complex experience of an S-3D display. There is no completely right and wrong answer here.

Regards,
Neil

great article, it would be nice if some reviewers did read this but sometime when I read some reviews about 3D solutions, I wonder if they read anything at all

something else... I see is that if you read recent Buying Guides for monitors (at least here in france), they never mention if those screen are compatible with 3D.
I know this sounds like a details but I think people who buy a screen at this time should be aware that they may have to change it soon if they want to experiment 3D in the near future

Another sin is that they always wear or show anaglyph glasses when doing the new 3D articles. I don't want to see people show or wear anaglyph it will confuse.

They should say that iz3d is poop.

I meant ****

Hi Winch8,

I think you are posting in the wrong forum with the wrong language. Did you go through the COPPA registration process properly?

Regards,
Neil

Another are the comments in these articles many people seem to bash without experiencing it once and people are actually influenced by these peoples opinions.

another would be that BBC short clip which is utterly bad it should be an example in the article
http://www.mtbs3d.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3104