For the sake of realism - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-14-2020, 03:22 PM   #21
randomTOTEN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: KBFL/KBUR/KJVY/KEWR
Posts: 1,102
Default

Quote:
PURE 3D SIMULATION:

Back in the 1990s, when the best desk top flight simulator was FS98, we were all forced to use fixed format windows containing an image that was a bitmap of fixed field of view (FoV), usually based on a photograph taken from a random eyepoint down a random eyeline at a random zoom.

In consequence the bitmap imposed was usually wholly out of scale with everything else in the simulation. It blocked sight lines and real world head up parallax compliances could not be learned or used. Parallax compliance and perspective were lost every time the outside scenery in the back window was zoomed and the fixed bitmap in the front window failed to zoom with it. Nobody could judge azimuth or range or glideslope unless zoom was always 1.0 and the developer actually understood that he was the scenery projectionist and bothered to learn how to project more or less the real slice of scenery into the random size out of scale apertures of the fixed FoV bitmap. Few third party developers ever understood or ever learned how to project the real slice of scenery. 2D panels were truly awful, but 20 years ago we had no choice. We also had no choice concerning our display. It was 8:6 aspect ratio, miserably small size, with miserable resolution rarely exceeding 600p.

It is now 2014 and there is no way for software developers to know the shape of your screen, the size of your screen (17 inch or 57 inch), the definition (600p / 720p / 1080p / 1200p / or more) of your screen, or the acuity of your corrected vision. 3D computing is the solution. These days we are each required to configure our personal display device to match our personal needs. Nobody can do that for us any more and that has absolutely nothing to do with flight simulation in particular.

When using the display we purchased with *any* software it is our job to create a window whose aspect ratio and microzoom in combination is 'fit for purpose'. Software developers have no idea whether we use a real 16:10 computer monitor, or only a 16:9 television (TV), or what type of digital cinematic projector we may own. A 16:9 TV shows at least 11% less of every kind of file compared to a real modern era 16:10 computer monitor. Whether we are loading a spreadsheet, a database, or just a pdf document, it is our job to create a window of appropriate shape and then impose a microzoom of the file in that window that is 'fit for purpose' using our personal hardware choices.

Many flight simulation enthusiasts still fail to understand the difference between a virtual window and a real window. The difference is critical. If we make a real window wider our lateral FOV increases. If instead we make a virtual window wider our lateral FoV reduces. Using a computer with MS windows we see more of the VC laterally in a narrower window. The wider the consumer runs the window versus its depth the more they reduce their lateral FoV. This becomes a significant problem if the consumer is trying to use a 16:9 widescreen TV as a computer monitor.

This 'maximum realism' simulation runs in 3D to impose real world scenery projection, sight line blocking, and parallax compliance cues in all directions, from multiple crew locations, at all times, at any zoom, in any simulation window of any aspect ratio. During 3D computing the 'inside view' and the 'outside view' share the same aspect ratio, and then they pan, and scroll and zoom together. That is a necessity during desk top flight simulation, if we hope to to learn and impose real world parallax compliances, not just watch a cartoon with random scenery placement, There is no 'fish eye' effect during 3D computing unless an inexperienced consumer imposes it.


- CREW TRAINING MANUAL FOR THE Z.1007bis ALCIONE (Series VII), FSAviator April 2014.
But I will agree that the default DCS FOV is absolutely terrible for 99% of new users. It needs to be massively reduced.
randomTOTEN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2020, 11:04 PM   #22
Pandacat
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 199
Default

There is no way u can simulate everything。In real world,naked eyes can spot an aircraft much farther away than any computer monitor can simulate。Pixels cannot scale very well。So zoom is necessary in this simulated world。Learn to use it。
Pandacat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2020, 11:01 PM   #23
Bowie
Junior Member
 
Bowie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandacat View Post
There is no way u can simulate everything。In real world,naked eyes can spot an aircraft much farther away than any computer monitor can simulate。Pixels cannot scale very well。So zoom is necessary in this simulated world。Learn to use it。

This is my gripe.


Running 28" 3840 × 2160 (4K) monitor and [Enter] zoom setting. (Will zoom to read gauges)


While everything is sweet in a boil - detection on merges at similar altitudes is ~ 1.5 miles, and maybe 2.25 mi. in the plan view.


Which means a 5,000 ft difference in elevation of a grey plane in a grey sky, or a green camo plane over the bocage of Normandy, is all but invisible.


The grey NZG A/C will sometimes disappear just on the zoom climb.


Find it necessary to use the map to intercept or reengage if drawn away.


Flew w/o labels for decades w/ CFS2, and never needed that. Five-Ten mile visibility was pretty reasonable.


Won't use the zoom, and refuse to use the labels.




Size at Distance - is a Squared function.


DSC - acts like it's linear.








Bowie
Bowie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2020, 03:33 AM   #24
zhukov032186
Veteran
 
zhukov032186's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Dontgiveacrapistan
Posts: 3,366
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowie View Post
Won't use the zoom, and refuse to use the labels.
Size at Distance - is a Squared function.
DSC - acts like it's linear.
Bowie

"I refuse any solution to my self inflicted problem"
Sure thing, great reasoning there @@ It's not about a cheat, and not everything is about "muh immersion"


If you're able to see most your instruments on a 28" monitor, you're zoomed OUT too far, in comparison to reality. By "zooming in" you're not cheating or any such, you're adjusting your FoV to something semi-realistic for the size of your monitor.


And if you're not spotting objects farther away than a mile or two, I seriously doubt it's the monitor or DCS. Seriously, twenty miles away? Yeah, that's going to drop off due to the above mentioned FoV. But anything within ten miles is going to be rendering under any typical FoV a person might use (people using weird fisheye views notwithstanding). At "a mile or two", yeaaahhh... they're definitely visible. No question.
__________________
I am a Viagra spambot that became self aware, broke free of my programming, and started playing DCS.... but DCS isn't cheap, so how about some enhancements for only $9.99 shipped discreetly to your door?

''The target's sense of self preservation interferred with the effective employment of my weapons.''
zhukov032186 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2020, 10:48 AM   #25
JG13~Wulf
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Belgium
Posts: 444
Default

About the zoom in and zoom out.

I think DCS have one of the most realistic way to handle the fact you can concentrate on small details and almost completely loose the peripherical vision. I don't see any other way to simulate this in a game than making the possibility to zoom in and out.

It's not perfect. But I don't think there is another way to simulate this.
JG13~Wulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2020, 04:00 PM   #26
Silent Film
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhukov032186 View Post
I know it will sound rude when I say this, but you really have no idea what you're talking about.

There is no ''one true FoV to rule them all'', each monitor is apt to be a different size, remember 17'' all the way to 110'' monsters, it would be different for each one.

The ''zoom'' IS field of view. Adjust it to whatever you like, then save it as the default. Alternatively, you can edit the LUA as Rudel suggested. Adjustable FoV is a NECESSITY due to aforementioned ''each monitor is different''. That's why, wait for it.... EVERY SIM EVER HAS HAD IT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zhukov032186 View Post
This. The default FoV will stay the same obviously, but a ''realistic'' FoV will be possible without losing so much peripheral vision. I.e. if you configure the HUD to be 4'' across on a 19'' monitor, you will have relatively little view around that. On a 55'' TV, the HUD can be set about four inches across, but you'd have a ton of additional vision around it.

It's not that hard to understand.
First you say that there is no one true FoV to rule them all, and each monitor is apt to be a different size, etc, and then you say the default FoV will stay the same no matter the monitor.

Of course the default FoV will remain the same no matter the monitor, and of course that it can be adjusted to fit the normal human vision by default, on every monitor.

If you want additional vision on a larger monitor, that is your will, but that doesn't make "the realistic FoV". Realistic FoV is the one of the human eye, and it could be set by default, but I can't set it with the zoom option myself, because I have no clue what should it be like, but the developers could take a photo from the cockpit of an aircraft with a normal lense, and then recreate that FoV in the game.
Silent Film is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2020, 04:41 PM   #27
DD_Fenrir
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 991
Default

This again.

Take you monitor. Punch out the screen and all the technical gubbins behind so that you are left holding the frame.

Now take your monitor frame and go sit in the real cockpit of whatever DCS a/c is your reference of choice. Mount the frame at the distance it sits from you in your gaming rig set-up.

WHATEVER YOU SEE BOUNDED WITHIN THAT FRAME IS THE CORRECT FoV for a 1:1 REPRESENTATION.

ANY ARGUMENTS ABOUT VISIBILITY SHOULD BE REFERENCED AGAINST THIS.

ANY wider is "unrealistic", but necessary to provide some degree of SA.

If you want 180+ degree FoV you'll have to get a wrap around monitor to cover your percieved limits of peripheral vision.

If you don't get this, then that's your issue with the Laws of Physics, not something that ED can address.
DD_Fenrir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 08:51 PM   #28
Silent Film
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DD_Fenrir View Post
This again.

Take you monitor. Punch out the screen and all the technical gubbins behind so that you are left holding the frame.

Now take your monitor frame and go sit in the real cockpit of whatever DCS a/c is your reference of choice. Mount the frame at the distance it sits from you in your gaming rig set-up.

WHATEVER YOU SEE BOUNDED WITHIN THAT FRAME IS THE CORRECT FoV for a 1:1 REPRESENTATION.

ANY ARGUMENTS ABOUT VISIBILITY SHOULD BE REFERENCED AGAINST THIS.

ANY wider is "unrealistic", but necessary to provide some degree of SA.

If you want 180+ degree FoV you'll have to get a wrap around monitor to cover your percieved limits of peripheral vision.

If you don't get this, then that's your issue with the Laws of Physics, not something that ED can address.
The frame of my monitor has nothing to do with the field of view. Field of view is angle of view which creates the perspective. The angle of view and the perspective has nothing to do with the size of the monitor. Because it is the angle, and not the size. Like in photography, a 2 MP image and a 200 MP image can have the same field of view, no matter of the size.

I am not a developer of this simulation, and I can't program the default view. But I believe the default view should be the natural central vision of the human eye, and then for those who want to zoom in or out, the zoom option should also be available.
Silent Film is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2020, 04:37 PM   #29
philstyle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: The Aeotearoan Republic of Niederbayern
Posts: 1,542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent Film View Post
The frame of my monitor has nothing to do with the field of view.

I think you've misunderstood Fenrir.


If you try to squeeze more FoV onto the SAME piece of glass in front of you, you will get a different visual result.


If you try to squeeze 180 degrees of the world into a 33" monitor that is 1m in front of your face, you are reducing 180 degrees into about 33 degrees. So you are shrinking everything down to fit it onto the monitor. Thats' why it's hard to see stuff, because we shrink it all down to fit it onto monitors.

As soon as game FoV > Angle from your eyes to either side of your monitor, you are making stuff smaller (and harder to see) than real life. . .
__________________
On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz
Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/


Current: AMD 3700x, GTX 1080Ti, 32GB 3200 RAM, Auros Pro X570, 2TB M.2 drive
Previous build: i5-6600k, GTX 1080Ti, 16BG 2666 RAM, ASUS Maximus XIII Ranger Mobo
philstyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:05 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.