Home
News
rFactor 2
rFactor 1
Forums
Contact
Company
Technology
Image Space Inc. YouTube rFactor 2 Twitter Image Space Inc. Google Plus rFactor 2 Facebook
Mediafire
Try or Buy rFactor 2
$43.99/84.99 Windows Only PCDL
Download rFactor 2 Demo Now!

NOTICE Notice: This is an old thread and information may be out of date. The last post was 314 days ago. Please consider making a new thread.
Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 339

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: FOV Calculator

  1. #221
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by VLA View Post
    could you please calculate for me my FOV for rFactor1, I believe this method is different than rF2. Again a special thanks to you, I will tell the millions it's a cool concept. 3x46" sitting at 48" to centre.
    Your FOV is a real world constant since it is hardware based. Unless the game/sim uses horizontal instead of vertical that value should work in rF1 and rF2. What makes you think it is different?

    In rF1 to change the FOV below 35 requires editing of the individual .cam files for each mod. See the instructions in my signature.

  2. #222
    Gearjammer's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @@keirgarth 

    Registered
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL.
    Ummm, what sig ZeosPantera?

  3. #223
    buddhatree's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Dudebro, California
    Quote Originally Posted by Gearjammer View Post
    Ummm, what sig ZeosPantera?
    You must have signatures turned off in your forum settings.

  4. #224
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Gearjammer View Post
    Ummm, what sig ZeosPantera?
    Yeah you must have signatures turned off. http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.ph...r-FOV-Tutorial

  5. #225
    Spinelli's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Not Validated PC Specification YouTube Channel 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cosmos
    Quote Originally Posted by MaXyM View Post
    No I'm not 12 yo and yes I am sarcastic also irl. Sometimes it's the best way to show flaws in someones way of thinking.
    Including your own

  6. #226
    Spinelli's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Not Validated PC Specification YouTube Channel 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cosmos
    Quote Originally Posted by Tuttle View Post
    @Spinelli

    You're annoying a bit man. We all know you're a REAL RACING DRIVER (applause), but you can't insult other guys every 2 minutes just because they aren't. Jeeeezuz...
    I'm not a real racing driver but I have a bit of experience and my aquiantance's life revolved around real life racing until the age of 26 or so from about 6 or 7 years old. That's not even the point here, I just find it hilarious how someone can say going 230 or 240 km/h feels the same as going 70, ridiculous

  7.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #227
    Tuttle's Avatar ISI Staff

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @ISITrackTeam 

    Location
    Italy
    Quote Originally Posted by Spinelli View Post
    I'm not a real racing driver but I have a bit of experience and my aquiantance's life revolved around real life racing until the age of 26 or so from about 6 or 7 years old. That's not even the point here, I just find it hilarious how someone can say going 230 or 240 km/h feels the same as going 70, ridiculous
    Yeah, it is (ridiculous)...but nobody said a BS like that.

    I said the sense of speed is not just connected to the vehicle speed, but with other elements, like FORCES. When you get the maximum speed in a straight the car is balanced....so the sense of speed is just from lateral blurring or other external references you're passing, nothing more...but when you're driving in a sequence of turns at mid speed, FORCES and drive feelings are far strong.. This is what I said.

    This is one of the motives why F1 drivers hates those awful new tracks. Because those aren't racing track, are flat highways with some fake turn around the circuit.

  8. #228
    Gearjammer's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @@keirgarth 

    Registered
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL.
    Thanks guys, never even gave it a thought that I might have sigs as well as avatars turned off, lol
    For some reason I was thinking that those were not options from ISI forum staff, oh well fixed now.

  9. #229
    Spinelli's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Not Validated PC Specification YouTube Channel 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cosmos
    Quote Originally Posted by Tuttle View Post
    Yeah, it is (ridiculous)...but nobody said a BS like that.

    I said the sense of speed is not just connected to the vehicle speed, but with other elements, like FORCES. When you get the maximum speed in a straight the car is balanced....so the sense of speed is just from lateral blurring or other external references you're passing, nothing more...but when you're driving in a sequence of turns at mid speed, FORCES and drive feelings are far strong.. This is what I said.

    This is one of the motives why F1 drivers hates those awful new tracks. Because those aren't racing track, are flat highways with some fake turn around the circuit.
    Well you said driving 230 or 240 km/h on a straight is the same in sense of speed as driving 70 km/h through turns, well ya maybe if you are driving 70 through your living room, and 240 on the widest longest airplane runway. You also said when you drive 250 km/h in a straight line the sense of speed is awful. Come on man, I know, and understand, what you are trying to say, a wide straight smooth road will have a slower sense of speed because the reference points flying past you are farther away, I understand your point and agree with you, but your way over exaggerating in my opinion, especially when you say that 250 km/h in a straight line feels awfull, common brotha...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuttle View Post
    I driven a car above the 230/240 Kmh, and most of the time the sense of speed is lowest than driving at 70 in a sequence of turns...so it's not 100% true that more you go fast more you get sense of speed.

    When you drive at 250Kmh in a streight the sense of speed is awful...unless you're driving a very old car that is near to implode due the speed and vibrations ...

  10. #230
    Gearjammer's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @@keirgarth 

    Registered
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL.
    Played around a bit more, and I am seeing that different games definitely do things differently. With rF2, my vFOV is set to 21 as I have moved my monitors closer to me to allow for the larger view. Using the Formula Renault 3.5 as my base for comparison, the cockpit sides look like I am sitting rather snug as I should be in the cockpit. With Race on the other hand, I calculated both vFOV as well as hFOV and tried both settings. In game there, I was limited to a minimum FOV angle in the settings of 40, but with that setting the cockpit felt like it was 6 feet wide in the IFM cars. I would presume that the open wheel cars are typically narrow and none should appear wide enough to be a 2 seater, hehehe. I then set the FOV in Race to my calculated hFOV which is 96 and the car in general looked very narrow as did the cockpit. Just about all of the car fit on my center monitor. This felt like sitting in a top fuel dragster.

    From those tests I can't tell where Race get's it's FOV value from unless there is just so much distortion sent to the outside monitors due to not having the multi-view option that things don't look right. I guess for realism I am going to be sticking with rF2
    I don't know what I don't know, but I know EVERYTHING else!
    PC System Designer|Student of Graphic Design

  11. #231
    MrPix's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    up t'north
    Quote Originally Posted by Gearjammer View Post
    From those tests I can't tell where Race get's it's FOV value from unless there is just so much distortion sent to the outside monitors due to not having the multi-view option that things don't look right. I guess for realism I am going to be sticking with rF2
    I'm waiting for a response from SimBin currently on this precise topic. I think it works on a percentage system, but percentage of what I'm uncertain, probably their default vehicle seat base origin data.... what ever that is.

    I don't know if you realise but if you sit in a car in the SimBin sims/games/simcades (delete as appropriate) you can hold Shift key and move your mouse forward and backward to change the FOV until it looks and feels right.... then just adjust your seat position to suit...

    40 in the options is most definitely not (IMHO) 40 degrees!
    Last edited by MrPix; 07-26-12 at 05:52 PM.

  12. #232
    Gearjammer's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @@keirgarth 

    Registered
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL.
    Near as I can tell you are probably right about that 40 being degrees, and from the looks of how it appears, it could well even be vertical FOV, but the fact that the cockpit gets so stretched out when you set it to that value is a joke Even then you are still not close to the correct FOV if you are going for realism, so I guess I will be spending most of my time in rF2 heheh.
    I don't know what I don't know, but I know EVERYTHING else!
    PC System Designer|Student of Graphic Design

  13. #233
    privatebrian's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Nottinghamshire,UK
    I would like to thank you guys for giving such great insight to FOV,with out it i could not have progressed
    any further thankyou.

  14. #234
    jubuttib's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Dec 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    Yeah I messed it up somewhere.. Your math is right.. Which means the calculator is correct. Aren't you glad I had you test it by messing up? My methods are cruel but fair.
    It's not the first time you've miscalculated. =)

    But yeah, the FOV calculator is great, especially if you guys will add a horizontal FOV mode.

    Incidentally, why do people keep their monitor so far away when racing? When racing the monitor is always as close as I can get it (meaning the base is touching the back of the wheel), ends up being 24" away, and at that distance even a 23" 16:9 monitor gives me a 26 degree vertical FOV, which is quite enough for most purposes, especially when the pitch is properly adjusted. Even a smaller monitor can get a useful FOV like that. Though I once tried racing with my 40" HDTV (too much input lag for continual use) and set it up just as close, giving an immense FOV. =)

  15. #235
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by jubuttib View Post
    why do people keep their monitor so far away when racing?
    I don't know. I have studied many sim cockpits. And they almost always involve at least a foot (30.48CM) of "extra" space.

    Then again sometimes there is no helping.


  16. #236
    jubuttib's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Dec 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    I don't know. I have studied many sim cockpits. And they almost always involve at least a foot (30.48CM) of "extra" space.

    Then again sometimes there is no helping.

    That picture is insane! You can clearly see where the real mirrors and front wheels are in the real (?) car, yet they put in a FOV that pushes everything to fit into the width of the nose cone of the car... Some one needs to beat some sense into those idiots, ASAP. AND BRING THOSE DAMN MONITORS CLOSER!

  17. #237
    Addict's Avatar
     

    Registered
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Barcelona
    Another problem is that when you move the seat changes the fov...

  18. #238
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Addict View Post
    Another problem is that when you move the seat changes the fov...
    Well yes and no. In-game when you move the seat it just moves the camera. In real life when you move the seat you would need to re-calculate the FOV. Soooo..

  19. #239
    Gearjammer's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification @@keirgarth 

    Registered
    Jun 2012
    Location
    FL.
    I can't believe they are using such small monitors on that F1 rig. come on guys, you spend that much money on the chassis and you don't spend more than $250 on the monitors? What's up with that???

    Seriously though, yes, they do need to move the monitors closer as well as change the FOV so that it is more correct, but I guess they want everyone to see the car they are driving and notice that the paint job is the same as what they are sitting in.
    I don't know what I don't know, but I know EVERYTHING else!
    PC System Designer|Student of Graphic Design

  20. #240
    jubuttib's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Dec 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by Addict View Post
    Another problem is that when you move the seat changes the fov...
    Like Zeo said, you only need to adjust FOV if you move the seat you're sitting on in real life. If you move the in-game seat it doesn't affect the FOV one iota.

Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •