Lixma 06 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 The previous thread was closed on this cliff hanger.... ....and having only just picked up the Dora I couldn't help but notice the bar is still there. Was there ever any official decision about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msalama Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 Ohhh, the infamous Fw bar, known from the sims of old. Seriously, please hit the bloody bar and order a stiff one. And while you're downing it, let this stupid whine finally die. /THREAD The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Yo-Yo Posted January 19, 2019 ED Team Share Posted January 19, 2019 Oh show me the way to the next FW bar... :D Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles. Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronJockel Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 Ohhh, the infamous Fw bar, known from the sims of old. Seriously, please hit the bloody bar and order a stiff one. And while you're downing it, let this stupid whine finally die. /THREAD As long as there is indisputable evidence of its size being too big, I am afraid It won't. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theodore42 Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 They're just modeling the cockpit as accurately as possible. Probably most Germans in it were taller than the DCS default head position so it didn't matter. You can always lean forward a few inches with TrackIR to see over it. After picking up the Dora9 I consider it a non-issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAD-MM Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 (edited) They're just modeling the cockpit as accurately as possible. Probably most Germans in it were taller than the DCS default head position so it didn't matter. You can always lean forward a few inches with TrackIR to see over it. After picking up the Dora9 I consider it a non-issue. Was probably long before you joined the Forum, was thread where is proved the Current "BAR" is inaccurate, when your half Revi is sitting in the blind Spot with slightes amount of G in Turns, wouldn't call it not a Issue. Mainly a Problem with the Refraction of the Glas, its hard to simulate this, but running around and saying all good there is no Problem is also not that way it should be. Edited February 26, 2019 by MAD-MM Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 9./JG27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weta43 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 (edited) My understanding is (& I posted some photos I'd made to demonstrate it is so in an earlier thread) that the refraction should shift the image down to the bottom of what is currently the bar, but that (because there's no magic involved) you don't somehow get to magically see over the nose for the shot you're after. If the sight is leading correctly, and it's below the bar as currently modelled, well even if the refraction were modelled, the sight would now be out the bottom of your view. Like so: where the left view is the real world, the middle view is where the refraction displaces the image, and the right is how ED have treated it (with the green being the 'bar'). In all cases, your field of view, and the point at which the sight passes out the image are the same... Edited February 28, 2019 by Weta43 Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ams999 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 (edited) That's not my understanding of refraction. In this video, you see that the horizon stays the same and is not shifted down like in your example but you can see lower (eg from 03:43 where he shifts sideways). Edited February 28, 2019 by ams999 "[...] because, basically, in this day and age, if you get to the merge and no one's died - it's not good for anybody." - Keith 'Okie' Nance "Nun siegt mal schön!" - Theodor Heuss, September 1958 "Nobody has any intention of building a wall." - Walter Ulbricht, June 1961 "Russia has no plans to invade either Ukraine or any other country." - Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's ambassador to the EU, January 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD_Fenrir Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Be nice if the refraction could be modelled. But what's good for the goose is good for the gander. This effect would also need to applied to Spitfire IX, P-51D Mustang and forthcoming modules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VO101_MMaister Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 From the video it is obvious that the refraction will shift the position of the objects. Just look at the white bar at around 4:34. My question is, how it would compromise the aiming? The revi is on the inside of the glass, and you aim on a shifted picture presented though the refraction. It sounds like your aiming will be way off. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] KG13 Control Grip Building Control Stick and Rudder Design i7 8700K, Asus Z370-E, 1080 Ti, 32Gb RAM, EVO960 500Gb, Oculus CV1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ams999 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 From the video it is obvious that the refraction will shift the position of the objects. Just look at the white bar at around 4:34. My question is, how it would compromise the aiming? The revi is on the inside of the glass, and you aim on a shifted picture presented though the refraction. It sounds like your aiming will be way off. Watch the video again. You'll see that the shift depends on the distance of the objects to the viewer. Let's say the shift is 5 cm, then objects very close will vanish (the bar), objects a bit further will be noticably shifted down (the white railing or the cowling) while you already hardly see any noticeable shift at the house across the street let alone the horizon. So at those distances the shift doesn't factor in anymore and aiming is not impaired (unless you try and shoot a fly on the windscreen). "[...] because, basically, in this day and age, if you get to the merge and no one's died - it's not good for anybody." - Keith 'Okie' Nance "Nun siegt mal schön!" - Theodor Heuss, September 1958 "Nobody has any intention of building a wall." - Walter Ulbricht, June 1961 "Russia has no plans to invade either Ukraine or any other country." - Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's ambassador to the EU, January 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Yo-Yo Posted April 12, 2019 ED Team Share Posted April 12, 2019 My understanding is (& I posted some photos I'd made to demonstrate it is so in an earlier thread) that the refraction should shift the image down to the bottom of what is currently the bar, but that (because there's no magic involved) you don't somehow get to magically see over the nose for the shot you're after. If the sight is leading correctly, and it's below the bar as currently modelled, well even if the refraction were modelled, the sight would now be out the bottom of your view. Like so: where the left view is the real world, the middle view is where the refraction displaces the image, and the right is how ED have treated it (with the green being the 'bar'). In all cases, your field of view, and the point at which the sight passes out the image are the same... No, it's not right. As you shift rays PARALLEL for, say, 50 mm, you will get this 50 mm shift throughout the whole range. It means, that you will see noticably shifted engine cowl and almost nothing shifted at 10m and absolutely nothing at 1000 m. It is the same story as for well known parallax effect in old cameras having a separate viewfinder with a frame adjusted parallel to the main lens axis. It gives exact frame positioning at few meters and farther, but for short range portrait it required noticable correction. Sometimes it were special corners along the main frame rectangle, sometimes this rectangle mask was mechanically couplied with the focus ring to compensate parallax . And the cheapest cameras just informed users about this effect in their manuals. Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles. Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 So are you going to model this effect? :D PC Specs / Hardware: MSI z370 Gaming Plus Mainboard, Intel 8700k @ 5GHz, MSI Sea Hawk 2080 Ti @ 2100MHz, 32GB 3200 MHz DDR4 RAM Displays: Philips BDM4065UC 60Hz 4K UHD Screen, Pimax 8KX Controllers / Peripherals: VPC MongoosT-50, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, modded MS FFB2/CH Combatstick, MFG Crosswind Pedals, Gametrix JetSeat OS: Windows 10 Home Creator's Update Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Yo-Yo Posted April 12, 2019 ED Team Share Posted April 12, 2019 So are you going to model this effect? :D If you ready to meet low performance because it requires double rendering with two cameras. Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles. Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curly Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 (edited) If you ready to meet low performance because it requires double rendering with two cameras. There is no need for that approach in a modern graphics engines.The effect can be baked in to the the materials in the model and rendered in the same pass. There still is a performance cost, Though it’s less of a performance hit than a than a window with in a window approach. https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-us/Engine/Rendering/Materials/HowTo/Refraction Also advances in real-time ray tracing are making real time refraction the of even less of a performance hit. Though proprietary software and hardware is required, like nvidia’s rtx. I think it’s something that should be looked at as an optional toggle. Utilizing current techniques you would just have to load a different model with the effect baked into the canopy materials. Let the user decide if it’s to much of a hit. Then when engine moves to Vulcan the performance hit could be lowered even further. Given the computing power of the current gen of graphics cards, I think most people could live with the performance of a well optimized implementation of refractionrefraction. Edited April 13, 2019 by Curly Spelling and grammar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogonaut Posted April 13, 2019 Share Posted April 13, 2019 If you ready to meet low performance because it requires double rendering with two cameras. ready :pirate: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts