Tweaktown reviews Zalman Trimon 3D Monitor

[pixel67]

Very positive review!

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1391/1 ... index.html

[apogrif]

yeah i read it and i can confirm myself i love my zm-m220w if are not affraid about VISTA don't hesitate and try gear of war
wahouuu i love my screen

Apogrif

[yuriythebest]

positive yes... but it's dependency on nvidia drivers scares me off..

[Okta]

What a terrible review. He just glossed over the entire thing with no relevant information. He didnt talk about driver setup and glossed over the fact of requiring Vista. Did he mange to get it working with his sli 9800gx2 setup? What the visual quality? What was the frame rate hit?

Worst review ever. All it left were a bunch of questions and supplied zero answers.

[nubie]

What a terrible review. He just glossed over the entire thing with no relevant information. He didnt talk about driver setup and glossed over the fact of requiring Vista. Did he mange to get it working with his sli 9800gx2 setup? What the visual quality? What was the frame rate hit?

Worst review ever. All it left were a bunch of questions and supplied zero answers.

While I tend to agree, I think the worst points are his almost ludicrous understanding of stereoscopic depth perception. Highlights:

If you do not wear the glasses, then you can’t get that third dimension feeling

at this point he recommends that:

but the content is still perfectly acceptable, as if it was a normal 2D monitor.

I wanted to take a snippet from this disaster, but I quoted the whole thing so you can fully experience the "interpreted . . . 3D tunnelling . . . adaptations of a 2D image"

Thus giving each eye a slightly different perspective, and allowing your brain to interpret the rest. This kind of stereoscopic 3D tunnelling is then interpreted as a 3D image. In the past you may have used the anaglyphic glasses (one red lens (L), one cyan lens (R)) but these tended to wash out colour aspects. The TRIMON does not dilute the colour in any way, so you see true 3D adaptations of a 2D image in true 32-bit colour depth.

Do people really get the message that the test proves that they can experience 3D?

Please remember to do the associated test that NVIDIA include in their 3D driver package that measures if you can indeed experience the 3D enhancements. Fortunately, I was able to pass the test and so began my foray into gaming wonders never before experienced.

Nothing to see here, move along (I can't even start to unravel this mess):

With the brain getting the rest of the picture from the other eye, it then warps the image into a 3D image that is extremely intense on the nerves,

This is how he refers to drivers that have been in development (and release) for a decade and are still incapable of rendering shaders:

Also something to consider is that while the drivers are still young, you can bet that with enough support, NVIDIA are going to pump out newer drivers as they do with every graphics card release. It’s a perfect opportunity for them to get good branding and maintain market share.

[pixel67]

My message about a positive review is that they are giving it a thumbs up and not a thumbs down. They could have just as easily said it was a piece of trash, but didn't. I agree that the quality of the review could be improved upon, but come on now... How many websites have done a so called "review" of a 3D solution and completely tore it up for the wrong reasons. This is an advocacy website. All positive reviews are good for the cause...

[LukePC1]

Nubie you can't expect all that 'advanced' stuff from someone not reading this fourm. Maybe he thought the drivers will be plug&play in some time...

however I was somehow impressed, how much the reviewer wrote about the product. I think he tried his best and set some (a lot) effort in it, but some days can't be compared to some years of experiance

Did you see those pictures with and without glasses? I expected to notice at least something from the interlacing, but I wasn't able to do so. I've got 2 explanations:
1) the picture was with about 0 seperation and convergence.
2) He made photos of the game in 2D mode (without interlacing) and one through the glasses - which show no ghosting...

If 1) is true, this shows, how easy people are fooled. Say them it's 3d and the'll believe it

If 2) is right... well then we have a screen with no ghosting

[cybereality]

Nubie you can't expect all that 'advanced' stuff from someone not reading this fourm. Maybe he thought the drivers will be plug&play in some time...

however I was somehow impressed, how much the reviewer wrote about the product. I think he tried his best and set some (a lot) effort in it, but some days can't be compared to some years of experiance

Did you see those pictures with and without glasses? I expected to notice at least something from the interlacing, but I wasn't able to do so. I've got 2 explanations:
1) the picture was with about 0 seperation and convergence.
2) He made photos of the game in 2D mode (without interlacing) and one through the glasses - which show no ghosting...

If 1) is true, this shows, how easy people are fooled. Say them it's 3d and the'll believe it

If 2) is right... well then we have a screen with no ghosting

Yeah, any positive review is good for stereo 3d in general. At least to get people initially exposed to 3d. You have to remember that most users don't even know s3d exists. Just hearing about the technology is enough to spread the word. So I think it was a decent review, but it didn't hit the hard questions (but if it did, it would have likely been a much worse message).

Also, there are ways of getting a quality stereo image without insane separation. In certain situations, the 2d image will only look slightly blurred, not doubled up, but the 3d image can be good. Maybe not for extreme depth, but still full 3d. Its hard to say. I know I've read some reviews where it the reviewer didn't understand a thing, but this review didn't come across as that bad.