Comments on: LED Inverse Shutter Glasses

By: Mario

Mario — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:55:21 +0000

Please admin send me a email and I will tell you more details, I am thinking on a patent.
crisgortega@hotmail.com
Mario Padilla.ç
Málaga-spain

By: admin

admin — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 18:31:44 +0000

Do you have any more detailed instructions?

By: Mario

Mario — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:07:45 +0000

Yes admin, the way I do it is adding a sound track to the video to synchonize both.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 18:31:35 +0000

That’s really interesting! Do you have more information on how to build the glasses? I would love to attempt such a project.

You probably need to make a special system for creating the videos as they need to be made for each specific framerate configuration.

By: Mario

Mario — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:20:44 +0000

Hello, my name is Mario and I tested the led glasses before you wrote this comments, they work, but you have to plug the leds on a little more time than the duration of a frame. In dark scenes the 3d effect are more powerful because the images that changes in the 3d movies is the bottom of the scene, and usually the actors are in the top, then a bright led makes more difficult to see the bottom in the dark scenes, what we want in the 3d fims. I used led flashes 20 times/sg because with more frequency the flash is not very powerful. I would like to find a 3d film to test my glasses because what I found on the net is a video whith two pictures one next to the other. I tested my glasses with a video of 2 still pictures changing one to the other 20 times/second and I am thinking about a new kind of glasses that can change 30 fps.
Please send a email if you know where to find a video to check the glasses. (I am not still blind) crisgortega@hotmail.com

By: nomel

nomel — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:20:32 +0000

This is VERY cool. Great idea making it savable.

By: nomel

nomel — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:17:54 +0000

I think that this would, technically, work. Is this a better system is a different question The dark scenes would be somewhat drowned out by the bright lights. And, no matter how bright the light (well, non damaging at least), you would still be able to see some of the image on the screen, causing a blurry image (since the left and right image would appear to overlap). Our eyes focus points of light to points on our retina. So, the bright led’s would appear to be bright points (or huge blobs if they were close) of light, but still only covering the area that they occluded. An example being holding your hand up next to the sun. You see a bright spot that is the sun, and your hand…the light from the sun doesn’t drown out your hand. For an example a little closer to an image, if you look towards at the sun, you can usually see bugs and dust floating around at close angles.

night7day was somewhat incoherent…not sure any of his points were right. The bright light will stain, but that doesn’t mean that the recovery times are different. Being finite is enough (and we know they are since flashing images over 60 hz or so start to become “smooth”).

By: night7day

night7day — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:14:55 +0000

Don’t forget eye burnout. If you stare at the sun for a few seconds or even a 90W+ light bulb, you’ll see what i mean.

Thing is, it takes a lot longer for the eyes to recover than the duration of the flash. So the eyes will either get used to the flash brightness level, or accumulate burnout, time after time…or most likely both. I’ll have to check that. But what the burnout does, is it’ll “stain” the projected image with a different shape+color. What you are better off doing is passing an upsidedown projection image thru a tiny lens that’ll invert it for the eye…then you can save money on the LCD film material, heh he… or better yet a solenoid type shutter with magnetized film circle (BMW logo shape) and a tiny electromagnet…. but the lens thing, that’s like victorian era technology… like opera binoculars if you know what i mean….

Well, magnets are slow, and induction loops take time to discharge, so nevermind…maybe better luck with motor and gears that are at a much higher speed than the motor’s base RPM…and then use voltage to tune motor speed.

-n7

By: admin

admin — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:28:54 +0000

It would be faster than POV, so the strobing speed would be faster than how fast your monitor blinks. Synchronization isn’t that hard, all the current shutter glasses work fine.

By: thefluffball

thefluffball — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:04:14 +0000

I have a headache even thinking about it. Firstly, the glasses would have to be flickering in exact synchronisation at the exact same fps in order to work, and secondly, having fast strobing lights in your eyes is gonna hurt like hell!