cybereality wrote:In terms of the vergence-accommodation problem, would an HMD w/ fresnel lens optics solve this issue?
I've read that some devices like HMD or specific technologies used in 3D displays (not available for the consumer market) can produce an infinite focus distance using some sort of defocusing screens that may alleviate the vergence-accommodation conflict, but I would need to do some more research about this to be sure.
cybereality wrote:I am not sure those 12%, 10% numbers are accurate, or even remotely true. And just cause its in the news or the internet, doesn't make it a fact. Sure. But I still feel there has got to be some truth here.
Yes, that's a frequent trait in Human psychology. Someone says something without giving the slightest bit of evidence, some people repeat it because they lack basic critical sense, and then everybody start to believe it because it's said everywhere. That's how rumor propagation has been working for centuries.
If you were a journalist today, what would you do ? Try to look for reliable numbers in scientific publications or repeat what you've seen on websites ?
cybereality wrote:Clearly some people do actually get headaches when viewing 3D (as I have read on the internet and have been told by people in real-life).
As I already said headaches have nothing to do with stereopsis, but with the vergence-accomodation conflict. These same people wouldn't have any problem with holography, the problem lies in current stereoscopic displays, as I've been saying here for some months now.
cybereality wrote:For example, if the Nintendo 3DS becomes popular, then a lot of people will try it (those that buy it, and their friends and family). Now enough people will have seen it, to overcome the minority of people that haven't tried it.
[...]
So this perception could change very quick. But it requires people to actually try 3D for themselves, and do so with an open mind. And having popular bloggers try it for a couple of days and just give up certainly doesn't set a great example.
I'm not sure the Nintendo 3DS will necessarily help in this regard.
First, from the references I gave 2,7% of people can't see 3D, so those won't be convinced.
Then a significant part of people who have an otherwise correct stereoscopic vision still have problems with the vergence-accommodation conflict for high separation values. I don't know which percentage of the population is concerned, but the study I talked about gives around 40% for a non-representative population (5 out of 11 people).
I guess the several reports from reviewers saying that they needed to lower the 3D effect by using the depth slider show that it should still concern a more important percentage than stereoblind people. The problem is the same at the cinema, and probably the reason why filmmakers gradually lowered depth effects in many recent movies, as you seemed to imply in another post.
Next the stereoscopic technique used in the Nintendo 3DS is autostereoscopic, and it has already been known to produce even more problems than current active and passive 3D solutions available at home or in theaters. There is already the need to keep the head perfectly still and centered in regard to the screen, which is a big limitation considering it's quite hard to do that when playing a video game.
And there have also been several reports talking about dizziness and focusing problems after use, which I've been experimenting myself with lenticular screens, and that is probably related to the fact that the eyes are solicited in an unatural way when the observer is not exactly in the sweet spot.
So I think that the launch (and possible success) of the Nintendo 3DS won't necessarily change the regard people have towards S3D in general, because it will create problems for a larger part of the population than current 3D technologies. I still hope I'll be wrong though...