Since 1830, 3D stereoscopic installations have arisen. However, these kinds of installation were un-naked-eye and needed wearing additional glasses to get the stereoscopic effect. At present, the inconveniences of un-naked-eye displays have been solved by the research which continued along with the technology breakthrough. The naked-eye types have been developed. However, using the present 3D stereoscopic display types for a long time, the users may feel insufficient visual angle, eye strain, dizziness, etc. Therefore, this research investigated the effects of different stereoscopic display types (barrier, lenticular and 2D-plus-depth) based on different viewing angles (0˚, 15˚, 30˚) for multi-users. Subjective evaluations (comfort, stereo, crosstalk) and objective measures (accommodation time, CFF, visual acuity) of human factors assessment were applied.
We employed systematic experiments and statistical analyses in this study. The experimental results indicated that 2D-plus-depth type was the best one, no matter in subjective evaluations or objective measures. The 2D-plus-depth type resulted in the highest comfort and stereo effect, and the lowest in visual fatigue and crosstalk. For viewing angle factor, stereo at 0˚ viewing angle was not different from that at 15˚ viewing angle but was apparently higher than that at 30˚ viewing angle. The main outcome of this research was to propose the most appropriate type of stereoscopic displays for design and users. Moreover, applying the factor of viewing angle could find out the conditions and limitations of stereoscopic display for multi-users by human factors assessment.

References
Borner, R. (1999). Four autostereoscopic monitors on the level of industrial prototypes. Displays 20(2): 57-64.
Chang, K. H. (2007). A study on the economic polarized light stereoscopic projection system. Executive Master of Optics and Photonics, National Central University.
Collewijn, H., Steinman, R. M., Erkelens, C. F., Regan, David. (1991). Binocular Fusion, Stereopsis and Stereoacuity with Moving Head. Vision and Visual Dysfunction- Binocular Vision. Regan, D., eds.
Cooper, R., (2005). Magic Eye How to See 3D, Retrived March 16, 2008, from http://www.vision3d.com/frame.html .
Emoto, M., Nojiri, Y., Okano, Fumio. (2004). Changes in fusional vergence limit and its hysteresis after viewing stereoscopic TV. Displays 25(2-3):67-76.
Halle, M. (1997). Autostereoscopic displays and computer graphics. Computer Graphics, ACM SIGGRAPH 31(2): 58-62
Heuer, H., Hollendiek, G., Kroger, H., Romer, T., 1989. Die Ruhelage der Augen und ihr EinfluB auf Beobachtungsabatand und visuelle Ermudung bei Bildschirmarbeit. Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie 36:538-566
Holliman, N. (2005). 3D display systems. Department of Computer Science, University of Durham, England.
Hsu, W. L. (2007), 3D display technology state and analysis introduction. Report presented at the proceedings of New Generation of 3D Display Technology Development Approach. Taiwan, R.O.C.
Huang, W. C., Tsai, C. H. (2002). 3D displays market and technology research, ITRI, Taiwan, R.O.C.
IJsselsteijn, W., Ridder, H., Hamberg, R., Bouwhuis, D., Freeman, J.(1998). Perceived depth and the feeling of presence in 3DTV. Displays 18(4): 207-214
Kawai, T. (2002). 3D displays and applications. Displays 23(1-2): 49-56.
Klein, A. (1998). Stereoscopy.com - The World of 3D-Imaging. Retrived March 16, 2008, from http://www.stereoscopy.com/ .
Kooi, F. L., Toet, A. (2004). Visual comfort of binocular and 3D displays. Displays 25(2-3): 99-108.
Lambooij, M. T. M., IJsselsteijn, W. A., Heynderickx, I. (2007). Visual Discomfort in Stereoscopic Display: A Review. Paper presented at the Proceedings of SPIE,6490, 64900I,1-13.
McAllister, D. F. (2002). Display Technology: Stereo & 3D Display Technologies. Wiley Encyclopedia on Imaging: 1327-1344.
Patterson, R. (1997). Visual processing of depth information in stereoscopic displays. Displays 17(2): 69-74.
Peli, E., Hedges, R., Tang, J., Landmann, D. (2001). A binocular stereoscopic display system with coupled convergence and accommodation demands. SID.
Philips (2007).WOWvx-The 3D experience- See the world as it really is, Retrieved October 3, 2007, from web site at http://www.wowvx.com/Index.html.
Pommeray, M., Kastelik, J. C., Gazalet, M. G. (2003). Image crosstalk reduction in stereoscopic laser-based display systems. Journal of Electronic Imaging 12(4): 689-696.
Seuntiëns, P. J. H., Meesters, L. M. J., IJsselsteijn, W.A.. (2005). Perceptual attributes of crosstalk in 3D images. Displays 26(4-5): 177-183.
Shibata, T., Kawai, T. Ohta, K., Otsuki, M., Miyake, N., Yoshihara, Y., Iwasaki, T. (2005). Stereoscopic 3-D display with optical correction for the reduction of the discrepancy between accommodation and convergence. Journal of the SID 13(8): 665-671.
Suyama, S., Ishiguren, Y., Takada, H., Nakazawa, K., Hosohata, J., Takao, Y., Fujikado. T. (2005). Evaluation of visual fatigue in viewing a depth-fused 3-D display in comparison with a 2-D display. NTT Technical Review, 82-88.
Wickens, C. D., Hollands, J. G. (2002). Spatial Displays. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, Pearson Education Taiwan Ltd.
Woodgate, G. J., Harrold, J. (2006). Key design issues for autostereoscopic 2-D/3-D displays. Journal of the SID 14(5): 421-426.
Yano, S., Emoto, M., Mitsuhashi, T. (2004). Two factors in visual fatigue caused by stereoscopic HDTV images. Displays 25(4):141-150.
Yano, S., Ide, S., Mitsuhashi, T., Thwaites, H. (2002). A study of visual fatigue and visual comfort for 3D HDTV/HDTV images. Displays 23(4): 191-201.