Guys, I've been trying for months and months to get one of my wired shutterglasses to work using the newer 3D Vision drivers in Vista-64. As you can see in my sig, my monitor is a 24" CRT that can do well over 100Hz at anything under 1920x1080. I've tried all of the 181.xx, 182.xx, and the new 185.85 drivers (released yesterday). The more recent ones only allowed me to select anaglyph mode, but not DDC pageflipping mode (while the 181.xx ones refused to work at all with my GDM-FW900 monitor, saying that it had an invalid refresh rate).

I know that Nvidia wants us to buy their $200 wireless shutter glasses, but if there is a work-around in the registry that could enable $10 wired shutterglasses (of which I have 4 different pairs) to work, I would be happy. (To rant more, $200 is just plain silly for those glasses, when we were able to get similar wireless ones from years ago for 1/5 the price or less--with many being bundled for free with video cards. Nvidia used to provide S3D support for free, but is now trying to screw us over for $). Nvidia could have at least made a wired version that cost $50, and I would've taken the plunge for this.

So, is it true that you absolutely have to have their wireless 3D vision to be able to enjoy page-flipping on CRT monitors, in Vista?

I'm starting to get really sick of this ranting, so I'll provide my own counter-rant

nVidia provided stereo drivers in the past for free. If you bought shutterglasses, the money for those never went to nVidia, just the companies making the glasses. Now nVidia wants to provide stereo drivers again; just not for free. To prevent people from freebooting anyway they made the IR-emitter work as a kind of copy-protection just like big softwares used to have hardware dongles for this, and I at least know of a few audio production softwares that still do this as well. So basically it's not just the glasses you are paying for, but also the software. The new glasses they developed to ensure compatibility, lots of old glasses might not work on the new 3d capable LCD screens. Furthermore when they standardise the glasses, things like ghosting reduction and combating discolouring due to the tinted glasses could be done much easier; with a wildgrowth of different glasses you'd need to have different profiles for each of those, which would cost more development and testing time much better spent on improving the actual 3d experience.

Now whether the price is justified by all this, everyone can decide for themselves, do keep in mind nVidia has development costs to get a return on just as well as other companies. Don't just go badmouthing them every chance you get, hurting one of the big forces behind stereo3d is only going to hurt stereo as a whole.

I'll keep it short: you gotta pay to play.

I am not badmouthing Nvidia than you are badmouthing me personally. The $200 price is stunting stereo-3d growth--if Nvidia really wanted the market to take off, Nvidia could have as well made a wired version for a "modest" $99.99 or so, IN ADDITION to the wireless version for a luxurious $200, and still use the propreitary USB dongle. At least the wired version would be lighter than the wireless one, without the batteries and the additional hardware. It would not be funny if you grew gray hair before ever seeing the S3D market truly take off.

The price may be a little high to compensate for all the freebee years.

That is an inaccurate statement and belief. Nvidia got SALES on thier hardware because of this, had nvidia not had stereo stuff, I would have bought ATI. So it was not FOR FREE as you assume. The cost they assumed for the stereo was offset by the sales generated by the s3d community who bought nvidia versus a competitor - you do not agree?



But the money I spent on Nvidia hardware versus Ati hardware because nvidia had the stereo stuff went to Nvidia, do you not agree?




I Have a nuerok3d/iz3d monitor, I have headaches with shutter glass technology, I will gladly pay nvidia to re-enable what was once working - but they have told me to go FRAK myself. This is no way to treat a customer.




You still are not getting it, it is not FREE, I had to PAY nvidia for thier hardware that I ONLY bought because they supported S3d.




Iz3d charged me for the monitor, they do not ALSO charge me for the Iz3d driver, they make their money selling the hardware to us iz3d monitor users, do you not see the fault of your logic? With your logic, every HP printer I buy, I should also pay for the driver, and if I don't use a special HP printer cable, it don't work, every soundcard I buy, I should pay for the sound driver, if I don't use a special creative labs headphone cable - it don't work etc etc. Nvidia is a dying company, and they are trying to find new ways to generate revenue, but FORCING me to give up my CRT/wired glasses , my Iz3d, My z800, after I already PAID nvidia for their video card, and now am FORCED to go to shell out more cash for more hardware/driver support that many other companies include for free, is disgraceful.




From what I understand, none of the old glasses will work because of the special polarization of the LCD, but he has a CRT monitor that would work with his old glasses.




Yet I read about ghosting problems all over Nvidia forums and Nvidia not adressing so many damn complaints from thousands of people, so again your logic fails, even with "standardized" in house hardware and software they still have mega problems.

/quote] hurting one of the big forces behind stereo3d is only going to hurt stereo as a whole.[/quote]

Hitler promised an escape from the impossible debt reparations of WW1 and boom/bust cycles that plagued german society. Thyssen funded hitler with the utmost best of intentions to do good for the German nation. Hitlers reforms brought great wealth and prosperity during his early years and everyone was happy. Later thyssen was arrested and imprisoned by the very man he financed into winning the election. The ends justifies the means? That is what you are preaching, but there are so many examples to counter your logic. The customers do not come first, as many here will make very apparent with thousands of personal examples. Nvidia already had the development to support a few key pieces of stereo3d hardware, but iz3d and some russian folks showed them up, if Nvidia was so dedicated to s3d community as you believe, why?

Hey I want some Nvidia new stereo glasses too, but it just seems I am always 2 years behind in premium computers vs budget. Really sucky! I can't even play TimeShift from SIERRA Entertainment on my edimensional glasses cause i gotta use 91.31 combo drivers. Ain't Nvidia since releasing their new stuff supposed to support the missing years to make others buy more from them? I am sure looking forward to getting a NVIDIA geforce 280 or something faster and 3d.
Hey when is a PCI-E x1 hardware stereo 3d transencoder that selects all formatable glasses coming out. I have schematics for a nice looking one. Might take a load off cpu with vista.

@bo_fox:

I did not mean my post as a personal attack on you. There just have been a lot of people who are just angry they lost something they got for free, and then start ranting about the one that gave it to them. It's just chance that I happen to reply to your post about this and not one made by another.


@martinlandau:

The fact that you bought nvidia hardware especially for stereo support doesn't mean everyone else did. For nvidia as a whole it just meant spending more money in keeping stereo alive then they made off the few people that were actually interested at the time, so they pulled out. The fact that they left us hanging and never made any real statements about this still makes me a bit mad though, I'm by no means the nvidia lover I seem to have presented myself at with my post Still companies have to make a profit to exist.

nVidia could probably make support for other technology then shutterglasses, but it won't be as easy as just re-enabling them. It would require more development and also more testing, they'd have to test and make new profiles for each game for each different technology. If the efforts for all this will pay off only they can decide, but since iz3d has their own driver, which you pay for when buying the monitor, nvidia would have a hard time selling you their own drivers as well, and besides that the market for it would be much smaller than the potential market for their own marketed shutterglasses, which they control.

I agree about your point about the ghosting, although the monitor used seems to be as much of a problem as the glasses themselves. My point though, was that they could eventually do something about ghosting within their software by adjusting the timing of the glasses (although they should let us do so manually) but they could also change the colors on the screen based on the known tinting of their glasses, both to reduce ghosting and to improve colors. Whether they will do so remains to be seen.

All in all, I'm remaining fairly neutral about nvidia right now, but I'd like to give them a(nother) chance. Besides, they have the only properly working solution for active projection.

Your last paragraph, comparing with Hitler, makes you lose the discussion by default, but anyway, nvidia is just a company trying to make money, not a massmurdering dictator.

thats bull we own the video card isnt that enough? The only reason I own a nvidia card is for the 3d support. It was not free ati cards for the same price runs faster in directx and why pay 200 for shutter glasses what about my projecter or the Emagin hmd! I cant use nvidia shutter glasses to watch a movie with friends.


Id rather get IZ3D and an ati card

Where did nvidia say you get stereo support with their videocards? You can't fault them for not delivering something they haven't promised you when you bought it. The fact that YOU bought something with the wrong expectations is not their fault.

Same here, I bought Nvidia hardware mainly because of S3D support. All the way from Geforce4 to the 7900 series, Nvidia always officially declared support for S3D. Just look at the driver history and search for the official drivers. And then I bought another 7900GTX just to keep on enjoying S3D with more GPU power (which proved me wrong since SLi does not really function properly in S3D), despite the fact that Nvidia tried its best to PREVENT S3D from working on G80 cards. It all started with the Zalman monitor "exclusivity" and then plausibly with the future plans for selling their own $200 glasses with a 120Hz LCD monitor. I think that the Zalman monitor was a failure, bringing both businesses greater losses than profit. Disabling S3D support for the G80 cards (in making it exclusive only if you had a Zalman monitor) did not make the Zalman venture profitable, after all. If it's not good enough, Nvidia cannot force us to buy Zalman monitors, which is what both businesses desperately tried to do.

Instead of buying a 9700Pro, I bought a GF4 Ti 4600. Instead of an X800XT, I got a 6800 Ultra. Instead of an X850XT PCI-E, I got another 6800Ultra PCI-E. Instead of an X1800XT, I got a 7900GT. Instead of an X1900XTX, I got a 7900GTX. Instead of another X1900XTX, I got another 7900GTX for SLi. And I refused to get an 8800GTX until one year later when I found out here on MTBS forums that there was a registry work-around with Nhancer that I could enable S3D for G80 cards. Now, I have two 8800GTX cards, just because of S3D support, rather than going for RV770 or RV790 cards.

On your other subject, about the ghosting, yes you are right that it's not just the glasses but the monitor too. I think that Samsung's 120Hz monitor is great with response times and ghosting, but still has some way to go in improving the ghosting. When each lens of the glasses shuts, you're still seeing a bit of ghosting with your other eye from the monitor. I would like to see less than 2ms response time with zero input lag, and optimal response accuracy from all shades of g2g. If the glasses still does not respond any better than my old glasses from years ago, then how do you feel about spending $200 on those glasses?

Bottom line: We are a minority (1-5%) of Nvidia's customers, and since CRT technology is dead and the true 120Hz LCD technology has not yet flourished, Nvidia does not give a rat's arse about us 3-D lovers.

Just like with Blu-ray for movies, 3D is where the real money is. It's a huge potential market that is waiting to take off. Blu-ray had 4 times the resolution of DVD movies, but 3D is an additional dimension of resolution! Heck, it could even be labelled as 10000x1920x1080, on a 1080p 3D-cabable monitor. If I were Nvidia, I probably wouldnt give a rat's arse about you 3-D lovers, because I cannot make enough money out of you guys for now.