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NOTICE Notice: This is an old thread and information may be out of date.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 82 days ago. Please consider making a new thread.
Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 279

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Setting up your rFactor FOV - Tutorial

  1. #121
    Pandamasque's Avatar

     PC Specification @Pandamasque 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    Building a huge multi-monitor setup may be expensive but moving your current, single monitor closer to you costs nothing. I have seen many setups where 22" monitors sit over three feet away. If you can comfortably move the monitor to say 24-26 inches away using proper FOV is much more manageable.
    Of course. My 32" TV is as close as technically possible in my room although I'd like it closer still. Yet I'd probably have to put it in direct contact with my nose (and I'm not a Kubica look alike) to fill my field of view and thus be able to use realistic FOV and have the same view as I'd have in a real car (albeit keeping my head in a fixed position).
    My point was that one shoud try to get the most realist out of the tools is available, yet not sacrifice somewhat realistic level of awareness for close racing. By the way that's another reason why hood and bumper cameras are a bad choice.
    Last edited by Pandamasque; 06-02-11 at 03:59 PM.

  2. #122
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Pandamasque View Post
    My 32" TV is as close as technically possible in my room although I'd like it closer still. Yet I'd probably have to put it in direct contact with my nose (and I'm not a Kubica look alike) to fill my field of view and thus be able to use realistic FOV and have the same view as I'd have in a real car (albeit keeping my head in a fixed position).
    Can I ask what v-FOV you run at?

    As you say, it's not practical to use a single (flat) screen and fill your vision in a realistic way. You can get most of the way there with 3 fairly large screens, horizontally at least (in a sedan your vertical view is limited by the dash/bonnet(/hood ) and roof, and you can never choose to drive any higher or lower than the ground anyway [apart from jumps], so for the purposes of being able to race with others I don't think vertical vision is crucial).

    The question is, if you're looking to get close to true perspective but want to maintain a practical (for racing) field of view, what should you be aiming for?

    If we start with rFactor defaults as a base, it wouldn't have been too uncommon to have a 1280x1024 screen in the early days, and on a 'normal' rFactor v-FOV setting (let's say 75) that would give you 87.6 H-FOV. [note that the FOV ratio isn't linear with the screen ratio; see below**] You could probably use that as a bare minimum setting, any less than that and you can't really see enough around you to be able to race with a good idea of what's going on.

    On a more normal ratio of 4/3 (800x600, 1024x768), that 75 vertical gives 91.3 horizontal, so a bit more there.

    I'll throw in my settings and screen as a third example, I run 60 v-FOV on 16/9 (1920x1080), which gives h-FOV at 91.5. I must admit I've never calculated this before, and from pretty early on in rFactor I set my v-FOV to 60 (while using 5/4, 4/3, and 16/10 screens) so while I tend to feel I now have pretty good peripheral vision it's obviously not much better than default

    **(FYI [and you may choose to skip this bit] my calculated h-FOV figures might seem a bit confusing; the farther away a screen is the more its h-FOV : v-FOV ratio will start to resemble its actual pixel ratio, but when a screen is actually occupying 75 vertically its edges are receding at a fair rate due to perspective - so the horizontal increase is greatly reduced. It's actually easier to calculate this directly using simple trigonometry than the triangle calculator in the first post, since you need to work out the hypotenuse to use it)

    Now, obviously in this case more is better - having apparently severely limited myself with a 5/4 screen I'm much happier with my current setup (for seeing cars around me) and no doubt I'd be happier still if I had 100 or 110 or 120+... but given the figures above let's assume 91.5 is a fair minimum h-FOV for racing. Since this matches my setup we already know what v-FOV we need for a 16/9 screen: 60.

    So, how close do different size 16/9 screens need to be to achieve 60 v-FOV?

    22": 9.3" (23.7cm)
    24": 10.2" (25.9cm)
    32": 13.6" (34.5cm)
    42": 17.8" (45.3cm)

    Feasible? Not really. (to avoid ambiguity I probably should just say, "No." )

    Go for 3 screens, on the other hand, and suddenly you only need 17.4 v-FOV to achieve the minimum 'practical' h-FOV in total (91.5, so 30.5 per screen). Distances:

    22": 35.2" (89.5cm)
    24": 38.4" (97.6cm)
    32": 51.2" (130.1cm)
    42": 67.2" (170.8cm)

    Not only is this feasible, only on the smallest screens is the viewing distance actually a realistic figure - on the larger screens (and probably even the 24") you would want the screens closer, giving you higher v-FOV and improving your peripheral vision above our stated minimum. And let's be honest, 17.4 isn't a lot, even for the relatively unimportant vertical orientation. (tight oval racing could be difficult, I imagine)

    -

    Sorry to throw all these figures in here, but I think ZeosPantera has (quite ironically, given he uses a single screen) clarified an issue triple-screen users should be aware of; namely, they have the opportunity to achieve proper perspective without cutting down their awareness too much, and I think some actual examples help highlight that. (and, I think a lot of 3-screen users blame rFactor for 'warping' on their outside screens because they don't realise how low their FOV needs to be for things to be correct - rFactor's fairly high default FOV doesn't help)

    Also, the first set of figures above perhaps illustrates why a lot of single-screen users aren't willing to implement proper perspective given that it cuts down so much on their in-game vision (or requires an extremely close screen). ZeosPantera is happy to cut down his FOV to get realistic perspective, but I'd suggest most people are not.

    PS Hoping I have no maths errors in all this, tried to double-check everything

  3. #123
    Tony H's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    geez laz, your wife must get lonely....
    rofl, hey wheres the graph\pie chart, pmsl.

  4. #124
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazza View Post
    let's assume 91.5 is a fair minimum h-FOV for racing.
    A quick graphic showing how little actual peripheral vision is gained between 90-60-40 horizontal.



    The car on the left would show @ 90 but doesn't show @ 60 or 40 which is a common H-fov for single monitor users. But even at 90 Horizontal the car passing on the right does not appear on screen at all.

    Point being.. Track IR or Look Left-right keys are needed regardless of your FOV. You just can't see what is directly beside you (period)
    Last edited by ZeosPantera; 06-06-11 at 05:26 AM.

  5. #125
    Pandamasque's Avatar

     PC Specification @Pandamasque 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    @Lazza
    My 16/9 1920x1080 "32 TV is about 85cm in front of my eyes, I wish I could push the cockpit further under the table where the TV stands, but it doesn't fit. I try to set FOV so that I can see about 2/3-3/4 of the dashboard without distorting the perspective too much, it's mod dependant but is mostly in the 40-60 range. Most of the time I use Endurance Series mod where I set FOV to 50.
    As you mentioned vertical visibility is not that important in circuit racing once you take your time to learn the track and have your markers within what's visible from the cockpit. It's the horizontal angle that matters.

    @ZeosPantera
    Judging by your videos you can't see what is almost directly in front of you (period).

    I don't have trackIR, and don't use look left/right keys. Fixed cockpit camera helps to feel what the car is doing, kind of compensates to lack of G-forces to me. Besides pressing buttons while driving a car with a stick in the middle of an overtake is a bit of a one-man-band situation.

  6. #126
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Pandamasque View Post
    @ZeosPantera
    Judging by your videos you can't see what is almost directly in front of you (period).
    All I see is the road in front of me, but I can still hear if someone is to the side/behind me. Going into a turn if I am on the racing line, there are only so many places for other cars to be. Seeing the glimpse of a bumper or hearing the growl of an engine dictate the same response. Stay on your line and if they hit you there is nothing in the world a 200 degree fov would have helped anyway.

    My advice is stop concerning yourself so much with other people on the track. They are there, and will always be there, but their presence shouldn't force you to drive differently. The first thing you should learn is stay on your driving line and be predictable to stay out of accidents. If your passing someone else you have to use your own discretion and most likely can't see your rear quarter panel regardless of this being sim or racing in real life.

    Still my defacto video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWV0_u0r-Hk&hd=1
    Last edited by ZeosPantera; 06-06-11 at 02:16 PM.

  7. #127
    MystaMagoo's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    I've just swapped to a 32" 1024x768.
    Calculator said I need 25.
    Edited car to reflect this.

    Car was very very twitchy when turning.

  8. #128
    LesiU's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification Where I race Modding Group: SimRacingPL 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Physics won't change with different FOV. It's you, who started to drive in a different way with new FOV

  9. #129
    MystaMagoo's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by LesiU View Post
    Physics won't change with different FOV. It's you, who started to drive in a different way with new FOV
    Nope not me.
    Screen was twitchy,like it was moving from left to right or right to left too quickly.

  10. #130
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by MystaMagoo View Post
    Nope not me.
    Screen was twitchy,like it was moving from left to right or right to left too quickly.
    I imagine the head movement (such as look-ahead) would still be the same angle. That would make it more pronounced when you lower your FOV. Try reducing your head movement options and see if that helps. It would obviously be easier to adjust if you had your head movement off (before and after the FOV change), but a bit of tweaking should get you there.

    The reason LesiU said it was you is that you said the car was very twitchy - when you obviously meant screen movement.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    The car on the left would show @ 90 but doesn't show @ 60 or 40 which is a common H-fov for single monitor users. But even at 90 Horizontal the car passing on the right does not appear on screen at all.

    Point being.. Track IR or Look Left-right keys are needed regardless of your FOV. You just can't see what is directly beside you (period)
    Well I was going to respond to this, but you did it for me:

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    ... but I can still hear if someone is to the side/behind me. Going into a turn if I am on the racing line, there are only so many places for other cars to be. Seeing the glimpse of a bumper or hearing the growl of an engine dictate the same response. Stay on your line and if they hit you there is nothing in the world a 200 degree fov would have helped anyway.

    My advice is stop concerning yourself so much with other people on the track. They are there, and will always be there, but their presence shouldn't force you to drive differently. The first thing you should learn is stay on your driving line and be predictable to stay out of accidents. If your passing someone else you have to use your own discretion and most likely can't see your rear quarter panel regardless of this being sim or racing in real life.
    Anyway, I did say minimum, and considering that's equivalent to what most people will have out of the box I'd still stand by it. Even the diagram you posted shows that a car close enough to run into will be visible nearly as soon as it moves ahead, and I find that useful when negotiating slow turns at close quarters. Since I've kept 60 FOV from a 5/4 screen to a 16/9, I have experienced the difference and do find it worthwhile. And I'm sure I would appreciate having more if I had the screens to do it, despite the fact I can already race pretty cleanly.

    Not too sure where you get 60 and 40 h-FOV from though, considering most people probably only go that low after reading your FOV thread. As I said, default even on nearly square screens is above 85.

  11. #131
    Pandamasque's Avatar

     PC Specification @Pandamasque 

    Registered
    Oct 2010

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    My advice is stop concerning yourself so much with other people on the track. They are there, and will always be there, but their presence shouldn't force you to drive differently. The first thing you should learn is stay on your driving line and be predictable to stay out of accidents.
    Thanks for advice. So if a car gets side by side before the corner you should take your normal line and force it out of the track?

  12. #132
    TonyRickard's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Not Validated 

    Registered
    Jun 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    My advice is stop concerning yourself so much with other people on the track. They are there, and will always be there, but their presence shouldn't force you to drive differently. The first thing you should learn is stay on your driving line and be predictable to stay out of accidents. If your passing someone else you have to use your own discretion and most likely can't see your rear quarter panel regardless of this being sim or racing in real life.
    Having raced with three old 4:3 CRTs for years when my TH2Go packed up I replaced them with a single wide screen LCD. I felt that the most critical point was where a car is in your blind spot even with three monitors. What I failed to realise is the extra info when passing or being passed by a car in terms of the relative speed between cars. I found myself unsure when I would be past or be passed by missing this relative speed difference in my peripheral view. I could be overtaken and waiting for the car to come into view before turning in and missing the opportunity to get back on the power. Basically it took away a massive amount of the actual racing experience. I took the plunge to Eyefinity and three wide screens. I couldn't possibly go back to a single screen with a low FOV except for a rally sim.

  13. #133
    MaXyM's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification Facebook profile @@MaXyM_SRPL 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Prague / CR
    Quote Originally Posted by Pandamasque View Post
    Thanks for advice. So if a car gets side by side before the corner you should take your normal line and force it out of the track?
    Nope. You should know about another car because of way how situation on the road is changing. Not because you watching surroundings by your eyes. ZeosPantera is right in this point.

  14. #134
    LesiU's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification Where I race Modding Group: SimRacingPL 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Heh, it's amazing how people are trying to find new complex explanations for simple stuff... ;-) MystaMangoo, if that's the case, then actually there is nothing "twichy" about it. It's just a consequence of having low FOV, like you would have in real life, that's all! Do simple test: while you are sitting in front of your monitor, move your head sideways. Now, roll your hands to form a tube and then look through it with one eye (close your second one. If you're a pirate or cylop, then you don't have to ;-) ). Now, when looking through it (so, having very limited FOV), do the same head movement. Interesting, isn't it? Now, still looking through your hand-tube, try to walk to your next room or whatever... just try to walk with such view. That's exactly what you are experiencing with low (but proper!) FOV in sim, with just one screen. Tadaa! ;-)

  15. #135
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyRickard View Post
    I could be overtaken and waiting for the car to come into view before turning in and missing the opportunity to get back on the power.
    Yep, this is why I feel there is a certain 'requirement' for h-FOV. It's not so much about placing your car to avoid getting hit (which you can usually manage with your mirrors) but actually racing wheel to wheel through corners. I used to find it very very difficult but as I've moved to wider screens (with the same v-FOV) I've found it easier, but more would always be better.

    Sure, if you have low-FOV on a single screen you could keep an eye on the car on your inside halfway around a corner by using look-ahead... but if you happen to also be behind (or, especially, behind and slightly inside) a second car, you can't get the power down because you don't know if you're going to hit it - because you can't see it

    So, for racing, I think you need to have a minimum FOV, and the more the merrier.

  16. #136
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Even if you had 180 of horizontal vision there would still be a blind spot between your forward display and the rendered mirrors in-game. It would also be a terrible thing to look at.



    Quote Originally Posted by Lazza View Post
    Not too sure where you get 60 and 40 h-FOV from though, considering most people probably only go that low after reading your FOV thread. As I said, default even on nearly square screens is above 85.
    Going to 120 adds a predictable amount. And 90♣ in a race sim I'd say is the absolute maximum for a single screen, What little peripheral view you are gaining translates to far and away a more dangerous scenario. You have to concern yourself with someone directly to the left or right occasionally, but you are always driving forward. Looking for braking markers and judging the brake distance of cars in-front.

    Last edited by ZeosPantera; 06-07-11 at 12:15 AM.

  17. #137
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    Even if you had 180 of horizontal vision there would still be a blind spot between your forward display and the rendered mirrors in-game. It would also be a terrible thing to look at.
    Uh... if you had 3 big screens covering 180 of your (real) vision, it would be a great thing to look at - apart from any problems with the cockpit not being fully drawn of course

    Your screenshot looks ugly because it doesn't match your real FOV.. same as people watching your videos think they're ugly and don't understand the whole perspective thing because it doesn't match their FOV (either through screen size/placement, or because they watch it in windowed mode). Others just see your low FOV as impractical, and for the reasons discussed earlier and below I'm inclined to agree.

    And 90♣ in a race sim I'd say is the absolute maximum for a single screen, What little peripheral view you are gaining translates to far and away a more dangerous scenario. You have to concern yourself with someone directly to the left or right occasionally, but you are always driving forward. Looking for braking markers and judging the brake distance of cars in-front.
    How can you make a thread all about setting up realistic FOV and then set a maximum? What if someone projects an image to cover their entire wall, filling 140 of their horizontal view? Wouldn't 140 h-FOV look great???

    Going to 120 adds a predictable amount.
    As I said, I've noticed and appreciated the extra view as I've moved to wider screens. Hence I'm pretty sure I'd appreciate an extra 30. Of course you know when a car's inside without being able to see it - but as Tony pointed out, knowing when you can get back on the power and try to get back under them isn't easy if you can't see them. You could remedy this with look-ahead, and lose visibility to the outside (or even in front), use head-tracking so you can see where you want to see, or use a higher FOV to increase your vision. I don't have head-tracking, I don't use/like look-ahead, so higher FOV would suit - if I had the screen space so it doesn't look ugly.

    Yes, your diagram is correct, and it's obviously not adding all that much. But that could mean seeing a car half a metre earlier, getting on the power 10 metres earlier in the corner, and getting into a position to make a pass down the next straight, instead of waiting to find out where they are in case you drive into them.

    I think there's little doubt the best way to race would be to have 270+ displayed, allowing you to turn your head and actually look at where other cars are, just like real life. I see no reason why being halfway there isn't better than one-third.

  18. #138
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    Even if you had 180 of horizontal
    Sorry, forgot to mention.. you might notice your picture doesn't actually cover 180 horizontally. Screen ratio doesn't translate to FOV ratio. I believe you'd only get 134.6 h-FOV with that screen and 112.5 v-FOV - hence the bricks/pavers to the left aren't rotated 90 at the left screen edge.

  19. #139
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazza View Post
    How can you make a thread all about setting up realistic FOV and then set a maximum? What if someone projects an image to cover their entire wall, filling 140 of their horizontal view? Wouldn't 140 h-FOV look great???
    I set this imaginary limit of 90 for a single screen setup out of good will to newbies and some experience with sitting super close to a single screen and adjusting the fov.(My friend thinks 60 H should be a maximum for racing sims on a normal sized monitor). Even a projector broadcasting a 200" screen I would limit it to 90 and force the user to sit further back. It would be a waste of time staring at giant pixels accomplishing more then 90 on a projected image or large screen.

  20. #140
    Lazza's Avatar

     PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeosPantera View Post
    I set this imaginary limit of 90 for a single screen setup out of good will to newbies and some experience with sitting super close to a single screen and adjusting the fov. ... It would be a waste of time staring at giant pixels accomplishing more then 90 on a projected image or large screen.
    Ok, yep, resolution is another issue entirely, fair enough. (not sure what you mean by the newbie comment though)

    Pandamasque said earlier he uses a 32" at normal viewing distance (85cm), I've tried 42" at similar distance and was surprised the pixels weren't as bad as I'd imagined - noticeable, yes, but not large enough to be offputting. If you happened to have a 2560 wide screen you could keep the same apparent size and be up above 70, so maybe between 75 and 80 if you move just a little closer, but I'm guessing 90 and above would be getting a bit too extreme.

    Still, as far as I know there isn't necessarily an upper limit on resolution, so the angle itself need not be a problem. ("single-screen" could also describe multiple projectors/screens working together to produce one flat image, though I'm sure most people would elect to use 3+ in an arc instead)

    While we're on the subject, one thing I find intriguing: MystaMagoo said he uses a 32" screen at 1024x768? Was this a typo? How close is it? Gotta be some chunky pixels on that thing at short range... (ex-TV I suppose)

Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... 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
  •