madVR - General discussion thread

[mclingo]

...not saying content does exist on youtube, just that most people consume high quality media elsewhere and that i doubt vp1 decoding is near the top of many peoples cards requirements list.

[huhn]

VP9 is a default feature on all GPU except amd and the only way to get high resolution YT videos. netflix plans on using VP9 too.

there are other features missing. an working API to flag the stream as BT2020 at the player choice, d3d9 overlay is simply missing and the HDR api doesn't work with 8 bit these are just some of the thing i can spontaneously bring up.

[mclingo]

most will be going av1, vp9 will be obsolete. Cant see a reason for 8bit hdr either, all hdr movies are 10 bit anyway.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13365...oded-using-av1

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/ne...streaming.html

[huhn]

and HEVC will be obsolete too one day... what the reasoning behind that.

they are 10 bit YCbCr not RGB and i'm not going to tell you why that matter.
and well know Tv produce banding when feed with 10 bit and i really really want to see you sending 10 bit RGB at 60 HZ.

[mclingo]

no banding here, never been able to reproduce those issues people have reported.

[Asmodian]

It is pretty obvious you are an AMD fan, you do not mind their issues and limitations while Nvidia's bother you a lot, and you assume everyone else should feel the same way. That is fine but don't expect everyone else to judge the differences as completely in favor of AMD as you do. What limitations matter to you change with your use case(s).

No HDR at 8 bit is huge for me, 8 bit HDR works great on my TV (even better than 10 bit, 2017 LG OLED ) and I can watch 60 Hz HDR content. I do have HDR games as well, 60Hz HDR is really important for those. When Nvidia broke 8 bit HDR it was not good, this newest driver (430.39) has a lot of fixes which are really appreciated. AMD really needs to allow 8 bit HDR as well.

I have been doing custom installs of Nvidia's drivers to avoid installing the 3D support for a long time, so removing that is a minor improvement in my mind; not a negative. For me, right now, the limitations that come with an Nvidia GPU are much better than the ones that come with an AMD GPU.

[nevcairiel]

I agree with Asmodian, I was never a fan of 3D at home either (or even at the cinema for that matter, it just doesn't improve the experience for me, and the glasses bug me), so the improvements in the recent drivers are definitely a net gain.

[mclingo]

3D wasnt that important to me initially as I had to use active glasses to get full frame 3d and they were cumbersome and where the flicker was barely noticeable it was there, I put up with it as for me it did add something for me even though I was only using a 55 inch TV at the time.

This changed completely when I moved up to a 65inch OLED with passive 3D, this was night a day difference, you barely notice the glasses are there as they weigh nothing at all and 3D depth coupled with pure black and the dynamics of OLED makes a truely incredible experience, better than cinema picture-wise.

If you havent exeprienced this first hand with a well made 3D blockbuster its hard to describe, to the point where I think people who say they still dont think OLED 3D is any good, havent actually experienced it properly. This is why there was a massive petition to LG about keeping 3D, it was one of the OLEDs best features.

i'm no AMD fan boy by the way, I always buy what I need from whoever is doing it best at the time, if NVIDIA hard sorted out their 3D years ago i might not have ever tried AMD cards, I had been using NVIDIA cards since the first Geforce 256 cards decades ago.

You are right though, we are all more sensitive to those features we require and less so to those we're not, this should be obvious though, I still think though for the average HTPC user who doesn't game an AMD is better card generally but I get thats still going to be subjective even though there are a number of objective differences.

[Asmodian]

The focal plane not matching the depth makes this fake 3D never really work for me. It is a problem for VR as well. We really need good light fields for 3D.

[mclingo]

hmm, seems a bit nit picky to me, its more about the wow factor than accuracy, the wow factor watching something like avator in 3D on a big OLED is palatable.

[Asmodian]

The first time, sure, but the second or third time? It looses the wow really fast and the focal plane being wrong keeps it from felling real, it is always seems like an effect rather than being more immersive. At least for me.

The problem with 3D OLEDs is that you have to make the panel worse for everything else to be able to do it, and it adds cost. The film that polarizes every other row of pixels differently blocks light, unnecessarily when not using 3D. Even without 3D we have trouble getting enough brightness for good HDR with OLEDs, HDR + 3D is harder. 3D lost to HDR.

[SamuriHL]

It's why I moved my panny plasma to another room for the 3D titles I have. I agree that HDR is where it's at right now. That's how these things go. 3D will be back, but, it'll be when 8K comes around as a true standard and glasses free. Until then, I'll enjoy the content I have on my plasma and my HDR on my OLED.

[NoTechi]

On a projector 3D is stunning and I am not gona give up on that. Most movies are in 3D more impressive then HDR where the picture depth just can't be reached as in 3D. However it is a bit anti social to watch 3D with friends and having glasses on

I will wait and see how AMDs new Navi will perform. Or I even might try the Radeon 7 and if it is just to support the manufacturer who keeps supporting 3D.

NoTechi

[mclingo]

Originally Posted by Asmodian

The first time, sure, but the second or third time? It looses the wow really fast and the focal plane being wrong keeps it from felling real, it is always seems like an effect rather than being more immersive. At least for me.

The problem with 3D OLEDs is that you have to make the panel worse for everything else to be able to do it, and it adds cost. The film that polarizes every other row of pixels differently blocks light, unnecessarily when not using 3D. Even without 3D we have trouble getting enough brightness for good HDR with OLEDs, HDR + 3D is harder. 3D lost to HDR.

yeah, toally agree about 3D filter and its affect on HDR brightness etc, my EF950 isnt really a HDR TV even though it supports it.

Here's the thing though, i've seen HDR movies on a 2018 OLED and Sony ZD9 on my mates TV's and I just wasnt impressed at all, it was better sure but even my mates say that sat in a pitch black room in front of mine OLED 3D decimates HDR for immersion.

I now HDR has got better since the ZD9 but I just dont think it will ever top the depth and dynamics of OLED 3D, remember in a pitch black room you dont need oodles of nits.

but yeah subjective, i'll be genuinely devastated when 3D blurays finally croak though

[mclingo]

Originally Posted by NoTechi

On a projector 3D is stunning and I am not gona give up on that. Most movies are in 3D more impressive then HDR where the picture depth just can't be reached as in 3D. However it is a bit anti social to watch 3D with friends and having glasses on

I will wait and see how AMDs new Navi will perform. Or I even might try the Radeon 7 and if it is just to support the manufacturer who keeps supporting 3D.

NoTechi

just remember you wont really need a massively high performing card to watch MVC 3D movies, they are already high quality, you only really need to run NGU high with no other processing and the current RX580 can already do that, as long as you can contain the fan noise. I run my card alsmost silent at NGU sharp medium for both chroma and upscaling for 3D movies, I also add a tiny bit of super-res on the TV itself just the shapren up the grain, this works really well as takes the processing off my PC.

[Alexkral]

Passive 3D is stunning for me as well on a big screen, and even more if you do frame interpolation by SVP or any other method. I don't know why, but the feeling of the light coming from the scene is much more realistic, I think it must be related to the fact that the light changes are smoother.
I have an EDID override for 3DVision but I have not used it for some time, if I remember correctly Tridef is a pretty good alternative, but in any case I don't plan to update the drivers. And I encode the 3D Blu-rays to full OU with Frim source, so for the movies I don't care.

Originally Posted by Asmodian

The focal plane not matching the depth makes this fake 3D never really work for me. It is a problem for VR as well. We really need good light fields for 3D.

I agree that in the worst case it feels like a pop-up book, but when the 3D is well done I hardly notice that, and even less with the VR.

[mclingo]

yeah there are some really poorly done movies, cant disagree there, most of the MARVEL ones have been pretty decent though, star wars ok but could have done with a bit more depth and pop. One of the best ive seen is actually titanic which is a full conversion, its pretty incredible what they've done there.

I could probably name loads that look great, I own nearly every one released.

[SamuriHL]

Avatar remains one of the best 3d experiences.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[NoTechi]

Originally Posted by mclingo

just remember you wont really need a massively high performing card to watch MVC 3D movies

Yes but I need/want it all like 1080p upscaling, all the new dynamic HDR stuff near max settings and so on. Beside that it never hurts to have a fast card where you don't have to go to it's limits.

NoTechi

[Charky]

Originally Posted by SamuriHL

Avatar remains one of the best 3d experiences.

The fact that "one the best 3D experiences" is ten years old says lots of things about the current state of that tech...