Hardware 3DS screen in 2D mode - 800x240 or 400x240 ?

[pachura]

Hello,

Does anyone have an idea how might the upper screen behave when the 3D effect is completely disabled ? Do we get effective 800x240 pixels and the game automatically switches to rendering with double horizontal resolution, or does it simply disable one eye's 3D channel and we only get "flat" 400x240 ?

For instance, OperaDS would profit from double horizontal resolution - web fonts would look clearer, sharper, easier to read. The same for classic (non-3D) movies - twice the horizontal resolution, clearer picture. Another advantage would be reducing horizontal aliasing (jaggies).

 

[tk_saturn]

I would imagine atleast for games, it will be 400x240. The reason is because if the 3DS looks better in 2D mode than 3D, it will be bad for the console.

If the 3DS is going to be a major sucess, it's going to be down to the 3DS screen. This will be the first time many would have seen 3D technology on a consumer device. Nintendo will want it to 'wow' people. The 3D screen is the primary selling point, and is what makes it unique in teh handheld market.

Take the PS3, in 3D mode it has to halve the resolution. You have games which feature 2 player split screen, the PS3 will scale one of those up for single player 3D. Now, are people going to be impressed with 3D on the PS3? no, because it's so much better in 2D.

An alternative trade-off is you could get battery battery life when you run it in 2D, which wouldn't hurt it really.

I would imagine that physically the screen will be displaying 800x240, displaying both channels at the same time. But by 400x240 i'm refering to the resolution the 3DS is internally rendering at. It could render anamorphc 400x240 on a 800x240 screen no problem. The Wii does it when you select Widescreen mode, internally it's still rendering at 640x480 despite the screen ratio.

 

[pachura]

I would imagine atleast for games, it will be 400x240. The reason is because if the 3DS looks better in 2D mode than 3D, it will be bad for the console.

Well, 3D would also look kind-of-800x240, in the way that each eye would get its own picture So when the human brain blends the two pictures into one three-dimensional, I would say it will be perceived way better than regular 400x240 in 2D. This blending will probably introduce a side effect of something like antialias. So no, I don't think that flat 800x240 will look so much better than 2 x 400x240 in 3D...

QUOTE(tk_saturn @ Jun 25 2010, 11:24 PM) But by 400x240 i'm refering to the resolution the 3DS is internally rendering at. It could render anamorphc 400x240 on a 800x240 screen no problem.

The question concerns more the physical properties of the paralax barrier used in Sharp's screen. Can it turn totally transparent and allow both eyes to see two sub-pixels side by side, or not ?

 

[tk_saturn]

Well, 3D would also look kind-of-800x240, in the way that each eye would get its own picture So when the human brain blends the two pictures into one three-dimensional, I would say it will be perceived way better than regular 400x240 in 2D
You have a valid point, I didn't think of that. But in that case wouldn't they need to double the refresh rate when it's in 3D mode?

In one way or another you are still halving the amount of data the eyes are seeing, to me it's 400x240 but in 3D. But I can understand it's feasible the brain could interpolate that as 800x240.

QUOTE(pachura @ Jun 25 2010, 10:42 PM) The question concerns more the physical properties of the paralax barrier used in Sharp's screen. Can it turn totally transparent and allow both eyes to see two sub-pixels side by side, or not ?

Yes, it can be turned off.

It's believe it's similar to having a second LCD which blocks light.

 

[Rydian]

You have a valid point, I didn't think of that. But in that case wouldn't they need to double the refresh rate when it's in 3D mode?
In one way or another you are still halving the amount of data the eyes are seeing, to me it's 400x240 but in 3D. But I can understand it's feasible the brain could interpolate that as 800x240.

I've noticed that upon closing one eye things don't look as good. I'm not talking the lack of depth perception, as I can be looking at a flatscreen, and when I close one eye things just don't look as correct, no matter which eye I close.

The screen is probably designed to take advantage of all the little tricks our eyes and brains pull to present a quality image.

 

[Overlord Nadrian]

The screen is probably designed to take advantage of all the little tricks our eyes and brains pull to present a quality image.

I think it's the other way around, actually: our eyes have already adapted to seeing a screen like we're watching it now, and watching through just one eye makes the image seem weird just because we're not used to seeing it that way.

Just a guess though, as I have no idea how this works.

 

[alucard77]

Here is the thing I don't understand. How will the human mind perceive what it is seeing. I know you get 400x240 per eye. Will the effect be additive in 3D, or do the two images create a 3D effect that is 400x240.

I think it is item number 2 is the way it works. Would be nice to read up on this a bit more.

 

[Tanas]

I would imagine atleast for games, it will be 400x240. The reason is because if the 3DS looks better in 2D mode than 3D, it will be bad for the console.

Well, 3D would also look kind-of-800x240, in the way that each eye would get its own picture So when the human brain blends the two pictures into one three-dimensional, I would say it will be perceived way better than regular 400x240 in 2D. This blending will probably introduce a side effect of something like antialias. So no, I don't think that flat 800x240 will look so much better than 2 x 400x240 in 3D...

I think your're spot on with this

Try doing the cross eyed trick with these pictures and you see that the 3d image has a superior picture quality compared to the 2d images, and I dont see why the 3DS should be any different.

There's plenty more to see here

 

[wolfmanz51]

I would imagine atleast for games, it will be 400x240. The reason is because if the 3DS looks better in 2D mode than 3D, it will be bad for the console.

Well, 3D would also look kind-of-800x240, in the way that each eye would get its own picture So when the human brain blends the two pictures into one three-dimensional, I would say it will be perceived way better than regular 400x240 in 2D. This blending will probably introduce a side effect of something like antialias. So no, I don't think that flat 800x240 will look so much better than 2 x 400x240 in 3D...

I think your're spot on with this

Try doing the cross eyed trick with these pictures and you see that the 3d image has a superior picture quality compared to the 2d images, and I dont see why the 3DS should be any different.

yep its because one images pixels are different form the other and your brain combines the two for the 3d effect and more detail so in short 3D is more detailed

 

[ryan90]

you are getting way more detail, you are getting the full 800 x 240 and because anything 3d will be taken from 2 different perspectives, there definitely will be an AA effect, and the detail is superior to anything in 2d even at a higher res in my opinion, the things you can do with 3d will be really awesome with point and click games btw think of the possibilities