Folks are often confused with the differences between 2D, 3D, and VR. I ran into this visual interpretation on LinkedIn, which I am reproducing here, for all to see. I thought it might help a few folks.
Still, this graphic has at least three problems:
- It represents 3D glasses as anaglyph only, which is anachronistic. It ignores passive and active 3D glasses and may therefore confuse novices.
- It does not represent auto-stereoscopic 3D at all in its limited taxonomy. Glasses-free 3D only requires a screen—no glasses.
- The graphic does not provide an accurate representation of most VR glasses
Can you identify any other problems with this chart?