PDA

View Full Version : Wide,Normal or Gunsight view.



Dgirth
04-10-2010, 10:00 AM
Hi all

Just wondering on the views you guys use while shooting at the enemy.

Always trying to improve my piloting skills so i though i put this question in here to try and gauge the most effective view.

I would like to discuss the benefits and draw backs of each view.

I have always used Gunsight view, Now im thinking this has far to many draw backs when shooting at a bandit at close range.

Wide view i have only just started to use and find it very effective when engaging large targets.

Please Discuss, Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JtD
04-10-2010, 10:04 AM
I'd say about 60% of the time the gunsight zoom, 35% normal and 5% wide view. I find it helps accuracy if you zoom in, but it's easy to loose a heavily maneuvering target this way.

TinyTim
04-10-2010, 10:18 AM
I only use wide and gunsight view. I have them mapped to my joystick hat (forward - zoom, backward - wide), so I can quickly and frequently switch between the two views without searching for the right buttons on keyboard and without the need to look away from the screen. 95% I fly in wide view, I only switch to gunsight view when aiming and shooting or when I want to take a closer look at an object or area.

major_setback
04-10-2010, 01:55 PM
I always go to gunsight, or closest view for shooting. You can see better, aim better, and hit better that way.

Erkki_M
04-10-2010, 02:13 PM
Almost always wide. Gunsight view(actually even closer, 30 degrees; I use a FOV extender) for IDing further out contacts if they happen to be below the horizon and not in front of clouds, but not much else.

Romanator21
04-10-2010, 02:21 PM
I didn't know fighter pilots carried binoculars in their planes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I personally only use gunsight FOV to resolve hard to see instruments. In every other situation I use normal FOV.

Stiletto-
04-10-2010, 03:14 PM
Fly with second to widest view or custom FOV, shoot enemies that are fairly close with that as well.

Use the gunsight view for ID'ing planes and when sniping a really long shot where the target is flying straight 'n steady and I am at 6 0'clock.

Treetop64
04-10-2010, 03:17 PM
Fly with Normal view 100% of the time, and I center on the gunsight when needed.

mortoma
04-10-2010, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by Treetop64:
Fly with Normal view 100% of the time, and I center on the gunsight when needed. I do exactly the same. In real life fighter pilots of the day only had their natural view through their eyes. They obviously could not zoom in or out, so I just leave the view normal but center with 109s and other planes that need centering.

TinyTim
04-10-2010, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
Fly with Normal view 100% of the time, and I center on the gunsight when needed.
I do exactly the same. In real life fighter pilots of the day only had their natural view through their eyes. They obviously could not zoom in or out,... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is of course true, but the fact remains that a human eye offers you substantionally better "resolution" than any monitor on the market today.

PF_Coastie
04-10-2010, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
Fly with Normal view 100% of the time, and I center on the gunsight when needed.
I do exactly the same. In real life fighter pilots of the day only had their natural view through their eyes. They obviously could not zoom in or out,... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is of course true, but the fact remains that a human eye offers you substantionally better "resolution" than any monitor on the market today. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also, Normal view is the way the game was designed to be seen by the creator(it is like a snapshot of a scene). The problem is that snapshots and this game are only 2D. In real life we see in 3D with depth perception and peripheal vision.

So, wide view had to be added to simulate peripheal vision and gunsight view to add focus and depth.

You can't possibly compare what we see through our monitors to what can actually be seen in real life.

I use wide view 90% of the time. When engaged, I switch to normal view and only use gunsight view to positively ID a plane or to take long range shots at a bandit running straight away from me.

dglasal
04-10-2010, 06:07 PM
Hmm, now this is interesting. I focus (pardon the pun) on widescreen, flying almost entirely that way. As I look at the instrument panel in normal view it just seems like the pilot is leaning forward in his seat too much and I wonder if pilots actually did that. In widescreen view, I get the view I think pilots actually had. I am considering the effects of flight on the pilot that very much pins him to his seat during dogfights. Just my perception - can anyone get me a ride in a real WWII fighter. You know, for my own research.

Aviar
04-10-2010, 06:09 PM
Oleg himself has stated that the zoomed-in view (in-game 'Gunsight View') is the most realistic perspective view compared to what a pilot would see in real life.

Aviar

M2morris
04-10-2010, 06:53 PM
I only use gunsight view when I am trying to ID an aircraft or an object on the ground or looking at the instrument panel. I use wide view more than normal view. Wide view is good for fast hit and runs on bombers but I also find I can spot aircraft at a distance better with wide view. On occasion when I'm in trouble and get into a scissors with an enemy in a dog fight wide view is used.
I'd say I use wide view more than any other.

R_Target
04-10-2010, 07:50 PM
I use TIR 6DOF mod. Before that I had FOV mapped to the stick for scrolling.

WTE_Galway
04-10-2010, 09:17 PM
yeah i just have increase/decrease FOV mapped to up and down on my hat

M_Gunz
04-11-2010, 01:15 AM
I need the zoom to find the grass airfields, not for shooting. Those aren't sniper rifles on my plane.

Stiletto-
04-12-2010, 02:05 AM
Some of you people need to realize that the most realistic view or true to life view is not fixed and depends on your monitors size, this game was made back when a decent size monitor was a 17" CRT. The gunsight view would give you a true to life gunsight on a monitor like that, but I can tell you that when you put your 52" television on your desk the widest view available by default in IL2 is bigger than that.

The larger your monitor is, the wider FOV you have to run to have a realistic view. If you have a typical widescreen LCD in the mid 20 inches range and fly with the normal view, you aren't using a realistic view.

There is a geometry algorithm you can use to figure out how many degrees your FOV should be to have a 1:1 scale, where looking at your monitor is like looking through a window. It's based on the width of your monitor and how far away you sit. Anything else is magnifying or distorting your view in some way.

It's unfortunate that many games today do not take these things into account and it really can make alot of software unplayable.

BillSwagger
04-12-2010, 06:30 AM
Its nice to hear what other people use to kind of get an idea of what works, but it really does come down to monitor size and resolution.

My settings are wide, 60, and full zoom, and it's set up so i can toggle between 60 and wide using the same key and then i have a combo button that makes it full zoom. I normally toggle from wide to full, and use 60 for chases when looking over the nose.

Interestingly, the 60 view seemed to be to scale as what i'd be looking at through my monitor and offline i try to do entire missions that way. It makes it a bit more challenging and immersible, but also its helped me get more coordinated using the mouse to pan and improved my SA.



Bill

crucislancer
04-12-2010, 02:05 PM
I have the “Toggle FoV” bound to the pinky switch on my X52. I use the wide view for everything except looking at instruments or shooting, in which case I switch to the gunsight view. Sometimes I will switch to wide view if the target is really close.

T_O_A_D
04-12-2010, 02:21 PM
I vary all of them, I'd stay in wide view all the time for the added perifial if I had a 40 inch monitor. I only use the others to compensate for my eyesight, and the failings of Virtual world in comparison to the real one.

thefruitbat
04-12-2010, 02:24 PM
I fly wide 95% of the time, only going in futher when trying to pick something out in the distance, or when i'm shooting at a target, 99% of the time when i shooting i'm in either normal, or most likely gunsight, save for headons or the occasional snapshot.

I use 6dof, so zoom in with my head, but before had keys mapped on my hat switch for normal and gunsight views, to do the same thing.

MikkOwl
04-14-2010, 02:17 PM
24" Monitor, 1920x1200, about 50cm view distance. Real scale 1:1 FOV is about 55. There is obvious pixellation, I think I would need something like 7000x4000 to approach real world resolution.

I use head tracking.

Tried those multi-button ways of changing FOV and smooth head tracking mode (necessary for lower FOVs) but I settled on a single button solution. Clicking the thumb stick button (on the left middle part of the stick) switches between FOV 90 (wide) and FOV 55 (real). Holding it pressed for 0.25 seconds makes it go to FOV 30 (gunsight), and also switches on the head tracking smoothing mode. Pressing it again makes it go to wide and disable smooth tracking.

It also changes FOV smoothly instead of insta-switching. Takes a fraction of a second, but helps to orient oneself when switching, especially when gunsight FOV is involved. I had problems trying to look at something, switching to gunsight FOV and found that I zoomed in on the wrong part of the sky slightly. Don't have those problems now.


NORMAL FLIGHT:

I spend most time in wide (90 degrees) FOV. Peripheral vision even at 90 is crappy compared to reality. Tunnel vision (situational awareness thus), difficulty gauging the aircraft position compared to ground is too severe to use anything less. Larger instrument panels are barely readable.

True scale FOV 55 - (I think 'normal' is 65? 70?) is used for reading instruments, as all of them are easily readable, without getting lost by zooming in too closely. It is also used for scanning for enemies that may be further out.

Gunsight FOV (30) - used for trying to see past the grainy, unrealistic, pixellated mush. I.e. looking at things where being able to see clearly matters. Identifying planes, runways, ground targets. Also for having a close look at something that caught the attention when scanning skies.


GUNNERY

Wide used when target is able to move around a lot quickly, and when at close range. Trading peripheral vision for details is useless if one cannot track the target or maneuver properly to make use of it.

Real (55) for targets that do not maneuver so much, and/or if the range is further than too close.

Gunsight for non maneuvering targets and mid/longer range shooting. Almost impossible to see trails/tracers relative to the target without this due to the low resolution.


Originally posted by Romanator21:
I didn't know fighter pilots carried binoculars in their planes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I personally only use gunsight FOV to resolve hard to see instruments. In every other situation I use normal FOV.

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I need the zoom to find the grass airfields, not for shooting. Those aren't sniper rifles on my plane.
If you have high resolution, large displays that you sit close to, then it would be a bit like having a set of stable binoculars/scope. If you don't, though, then chances are that vision is worse than it would have been in reality, due to low resolution. Zooming in so that objects appear larger than reality does not help the vision if they have worse resolution than reality. Scaling them up does give them more pixels, and as such, raises their resolution a bit, at the price of tunnel vision and distorted scale.


Originally posted by mortoma:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
Fly with Normal view 100% of the time, and I center on the gunsight when needed. I do exactly the same. In real life fighter pilots of the day only had their natural view through their eyes. They obviously could not zoom in or out, so I just leave the view normal but center with 109s and other planes that need centering. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Problem: Real eyes have approaching 180 degree sideway vision, and at the same time render objects in much higher resolution (i.e. can see the details, make out shapes) than what we can get sitting near any mainstream display.

Try to get the peripheral vision fit into a screen that does not actually fill 180 degrees of your actual eyes and it will be have to be severly distorted (fish eye lens effect). Everything will look really far away and scale is totally off. Pixellation makes everything impossible to make out.

Try to get real scale (monitor as a window) and peripheral vision is cut out severely, probably only at 1/3 to 1/5 of what it should be. Pixellation makes the experience similar to flying with less than good eyesight, details that one should see clouded by the lacking resolution.

Try to get real detail (resolution), meaning something probably even more zoomed in than gunsight fov (30) for most people's setup and there's extreme lack of peripheral vision (tunnel vision results) as well as very overly sensitive head movement.

The only reasonable solutions are either to get a display similar to an IMAX theater (VR glasses are the future!) with a much higher resolution than we have today at home to go with it, or to switch between the different FOVs depending on what trait of our eyes we require the most at that moment.


It's unfortunate that many games today do not take these things into account and it really can make alot of software unplayable.
I have noticed this as well. "Red Orchestra" is a great example, where one is stuck in 80 or 90 all the time. Even the lead developer posted in that topic trying to explain why this is the most realistic, but he only showed that he did not understand at all. He thought 90 FOV was where objects are undistorted like real life (for all screens, view distances etc) and so that is the only option. A problem that the game has is that just having a bigger screen with higher resolution is a must for being able to claw back some of the massive pixel blur, as fov changing is not allowed. Trying to spot or aim at something not up close is referred to as "pixel hunting" - because enemies tend to be one or a few pixels!

From my own experience, and reading forum posters, I think only a small minority have a true understanding. Many are aware of the lack of peripheral vision that a screen brings. Very few are aware of scale distortion (1:1 scale) and the same with limited resolution awareness. Thus comments about how 'my eyes can't zoom in, so having less than FOV 70-100 on a modest display is an unrealistic zoom advantage).

BillSwagger
04-14-2010, 04:54 PM
Not sure how realistic or if its an advantage or not but the default open pit target w/ a pipit ends up being about 3 inches fully zoomed, and the larger one with out a pipit is about 4 inches, fully zoomed on my 17" monitor.

Bill

ROXunreal
04-14-2010, 07:03 PM
I almost never use wide view both because it makes my head hurt and because I've had it mapped to print screen for ages and now with Ultrapack the game freezes on me when I press that button (and remapping it is TOO much work http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).

For shooting, I use zoom view to determine the direction in which my target is going, I will swich between normal and gunsight view many times until I get in shooting range, gunsight view for observing the enemy's direction and E state, and normal view for overall awareness. Once I get under 400m of my target, if any kind of deflection is required I will NOT use the gunsight view. That being said, 90% of my actual shooting is done in normal view. It makes me hard to judge distance and deflection with gunsight view, let alone pull off high deflection shots

Romanator21
04-14-2010, 09:16 PM
Problem: Real eyes have approaching 180 degree sideway vision, and at the same time render objects in much higher resolution (i.e. can see the details, make out shapes) than what we can get sitting near any mainstream display.

You must have good eyes. For me, if something is to my side, I can see it, and I know it is there, but I wouldn't be able to draw a picture of it or describe the exact shape.

Simulating peripheral vision is impossible. Currently, if I sit in my chair without moving my body, I can only see what is directly behind me through peripheral vision which again, doesn't give perfect clarity. In normal view, the camera pans so that the edge is about dead six. However, since I am looking at a screen in front of me peripheral vision does not come into play, and I resolve things perfectly clearly. In wide view it's even worse, I can practically see things as an owl does http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

While gunsight view will help resolve details that are not available through normal view, ie. spotting tanks whose LODs don't appear at certain distances, I don't think it's necessary for lining up shots during a dogfight. From the "pixelated mess" I can still reasonably figure distance, direction, and relative velocities and make the kill. I don't need to see the stitches in the pilot's helmet.

MikkOwl
04-15-2010, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
You must have good eyes. For me, if something is to my side, I can see it, and I know it is there, but I wouldn't be able to draw a picture of it or describe the exact shape. Simulating peripheral vision is impossible. Currently, if I sit in my chair without moving my body, I can only see what is directly behind me through peripheral vision which again, doesn't give perfect clarity. In normal view, the camera pans so that the edge is about dead six. However, since I am looking at a screen in front of me peripheral vision does not come into play, and I resolve things perfectly clearly. In wide view it's even worse, I can practically see things as an owl does http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
Right, the edges of the peripheral vision has no color at all and lack detail. Motion, light and dark etc, is seen easily. Details fade worse the further from center we get. However, our eyes can change direction (that sounds creepy) further, as soon as something is seen in the periphery. The issue of too much detail when looking over the shoulder is an issue of how far the head should be allowed to turn, I think. Already the angle does not go straight back, and if one tries to use anything but the widest FOV, it centers in on an area offset from rear. This leaves us with the lowest resolution rendering of what's behind - the least detail. What one would expect from not being able to look back completely straight with the eyes in reality, instead seeing the object with lower detail. Maybe it was unintentional, I don't know, but the effect is very fortunate. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

On your example of how far you can see back without moving the shoulders, this may be true for fighter pilots as well. I don't really know how they set up their harnesses. I saw a discussion about it before, and while I recall no details, I remember something about loosening the shoulder straps just enough to be able to give enough play to look over the shoulders efficiently. Considering how important clear view canopies were for rearward vision, I imagine the pilots could at least for brief moments look into their rear six with decent detail.

Simulating it impossible? I don't believe that. At least one can get close http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ArmA has a system where little dots are shown near the edges of the monitor to indicate movement. Didn't feel very natural though. In a flight sim, reducing the maximum rear angle one can see is a good idea (already have that in IL-2), and when really stretching the neck and eyes around, could add a bit of blur and reduce saturation, if our monitors are so high resolutioned. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In IL-2, it doesn't matter much except maybe when looking behind. Max FOV in IL-2 is 90 which well within how we can turn the eyes to look straight at an object. And we have to pay a scale & detail & distortion penalty to have even that in most cases.


While gunsight view will help resolve details that are not available through normal view, ie. spotting tanks whose LODs don't appear at certain distances, I don't think it's necessary for lining up shots during a dogfight. From the "pixelated mess" I can still reasonably figure distance, direction, and relative velocities and make the kill. I don't need to see the stitches in the pilot's helmet.
Necessary? Nah. Depends on the pilot I suppose. Also depends on their real eyes, monitor resolution and distance from monitor. I definitely cannot see what some aircraft are doing or how they are faced at times even when they are not at far distances. A quick check with gunsight FOV and I see if they are turning left/right/upside down at least. As for seeing stitches on the pilot's helmet, I think that would only happen if you're about to ram them! (Some naughty Spitfire pilot rammed and took off the rear tail of a Bf 110 over London by clipping it off with his wing. It was caught on film, I saw it. The pilot himself told about it in the BBC documentary/reality show "Spitfire Ace". Unrelated, I know. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif )

BillSwagger
04-15-2010, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by Romanator21:

You must have good eyes.

A lot of it is also learned behavior. A lot of what i see and react to is still a dot on my screen but its the trajectory and path that tells me what the plane is doing. Its also not so much about keeping a constant eye on your foe, but predicting where he will be during certain maneuvers. Some situations are more of a crap shoot than others, but the end result is relying on your internal senses that give you a general sense of what is going on around you. (SA)

For example, in a counter move you might use a maneuver that requires your opponent to leave your field of view, but orient your view in the direction of where you expect to see him again.

Learned behavior also compensates for what a pilot is able to see out of the rear of his plane. He looks in generally areas with out straining and can maximize the proficiency of what he's able to see out of the corner of his eye by experience. The game works the same way, except our eye movements aren't modeled, only the head.


Then there are mirrors, which i can't use for performance reasons, but it also doesn't yield much detail.

Idea: what would be great is a mirror view that we could switch to, which holds the head in a fixed view as if it were a reflection over the canopy over the tail. It could also have portions of the view blacked out, so it ends up showing a wide field of view from a smaller square, a portion of the screen size.

http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww99/billswagger/mirroview.jpg


might be better with a tighter FOV.
http://i709.photobucket.com/albums/ww99/billswagger/mirroview2c.jpg

Probably would need a vibration for effect, too.

Bill

Beirut
04-15-2010, 03:34 PM
Normal view most of the time. Gun view for graphical fun and target ID. Wide view never.

Tully__
04-16-2010, 07:34 AM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
I didn't know fighter pilots carried binoculars in their planes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I personally only use gunsight FOV to resolve hard to see instruments. In every other situation I use normal FOV.

Nor do pilots in this game... the FOV presented in a monitor in Zoom or Gunsight view is about what you'd see through a monitor sized window in real life. The wider views are there to compensate for the lack of peripheral vision that would result if realistic zoom were the only zoom level available.

CloCloZ
04-16-2010, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
I only use wide and gunsight view.

Me too.
Wide when flying and before throwing myself into the fray, zoom when aiming at the target.
If I lose eye contact with the EA, I change to Wide.
I mapped Zoom on "." button on my numeric keypad and Wide on the nearby and double-sized "0" key, I just need a quick look to push the right key.

mortoma
04-18-2010, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by M2morris:
I only use gunsight view when I am trying to ID an aircraft or an object on the ground or looking at the instrument panel. I use wide view more than normal view. Wide view is good for fast hit and runs on bombers but I also find I can spot aircraft at a distance better with wide view. On occasion when I'm in trouble and get into a scissors with an enemy in a dog fight wide view is used.
I'd say I use wide view more than any other. Only problem with the wide view is that things outside the cockpit are de-magnified and therefore smaller than they should appear. You do get a nice view of the instruments in front of you but it comes at a cost. I always thought they should have a wide view that only works for the interior of the aircraft and leaves the outside view unaffected. That would be ideal.

Lurch1962
05-01-2010, 01:16 AM
Having different image scales for the inside cockpit and external world would be unnatural in the extreme. This game correctly handles image scale for all elements because it's true 3-D. Imagine how odd it would be to, say, always keep the interior at the same wide setting, while allowing the outside view to have its zoom setting vary. I shudder at the prospect!

About 'correct', real-world image scale on screen. I've posted on this matter at least a few times in the past. Here I go again...

HOW TO DETERMINE THE CORRECT DISTANCE FROM WHICH TO VIEW THE SCREEN IN ORDER TO SEE A 1:1 REAL-WORLD IMAGE SCALE.

view dist. = (scrn width/2) / TAN(FOV/2)

Example:
Screen width = 22" (the measured horizontal display size)
FOV = 55 deg.

view dist. = (22"/2) / TAN(55/2)
view dist. = 11 / TAN(27.5)
view dist. = 11 / 0.521
view dist. = 21.1"

For an FOV of 90 deg. the view distance always equals 1/2 the dsplay width; so for a 22" wide screen, one would need to have his eyes only 11" from the screen.

For an FOV of 30 degrees (same as the gunsight view angle), for the same 22" wide screen a 1:1 view scale would require the player to be 41" from the screen.


I have my 19" CRT running at 1600x1200. It's set up on a stand so that screen center is exactly at eye height. I sit within 11-12" from the screen, and use 3.5 diopter (focal length 11") glasses to focus comfortably without eye strain. This is so that at the 90 deg. FOV (in which I spend 95+% of the time) I see my screen as subtending the same ~90 deg. angular width.

This is excellent for SA! I feel like I'm really in the cockpit. I use head tracking, and by having an angularly large display means I can set up the tracker's sensitivity so that I can move my head over a larger range for better sensitivity and at the same time NOT HAVE TO SWIVEL MY EYES IN THEIR SOCKETS. In other words, as I track a wildly maneuvering bandit in a dogfight, my face is always directed at it, no matter where on the screen it is, including near the edges/corners. To put it another way, I'm not rotating my head to the left while at the same time having to swivel my eyes to the right.

By the way, my tracking setup has the camera mounted to the top of my headset strap, pointed backwards at a mounted light ~8 feet behind me. This was necessary due to the extremely close distance of the screen. It works marvelously well!

And care to know another *very* beneficial aspect of a 'proper' view distance? Distortions introduced by the gnomonic projection (as used by all 3-D games) are largely eliminated!

You're all familiar with the appearance of the circular gunsight as it gets near the screen edge or, worse yet, the corners. It stretches into a quite pronounced ellipse (all objects are distorted similarly, of course.) Well, when viewing from the 'correct' distance and from on-axis, your nearer viewpoint renders that gunsight as very nearly the normal circle it should be. Try it!

How is this possible? Because a gnomonic projection is a tangential projection which maps the spherical image of the world onto a plane (the screen in this case). The image scale is only correct at the center, and radial stretching increases off axis. This stretching is seen if viewed from a distance greater than one radian. That one radian distance depends on the image scale and the field of view (FOV) on the display, and is calculated with the formula I've supplied above.

mortoma
05-01-2010, 08:30 PM
The only problem with wide view is that everything outside the cockpit is smaller too, all the planes, ground objects and scenery in general. What I always thought they should have done is make a wide view but only have the environment inside the cockpit in wide view, but everything outside of it normal size. I don't see how any of you could use wide view when trying to attack ground objects like vehicles and such. They are hard enough to see as it is. Wide view is like looking through a pair of binoculars backwards!! Or kind of like the passenger side mirror in most cars, which makes things look smaller than they really are.

Stiletto-
05-01-2010, 08:45 PM
What Lurch said is 100% correect.

I suggest trying the formula he posted to figure out your "real" fov, and try it in game.

Jumoschwanz
05-03-2010, 11:24 AM
I usually fly around and fight in wide-view.

I feel it gives you the best situational awareness.

Sometimes I will use Normal view because the sight on some aircraft seem more accurate for me that way.

Don't forget that in combination with Shift+F1, you have more like six different settings you can use!

Now and then I will use gunsight view to zoom in on an aircraft if I want to see it's attitude, or I will use it to look at the ground to find an airfield or ground target.

Sometimes I will try to shoot with gunsight view, but it is usually a long shot where the opponent is running away. Gunsight is useless for most everything else.

I am around fifty years old now and my eyes are getting worse and they were never that good at all, so I may be using it more and more......

TheGrunch
05-03-2010, 12:46 PM
I like to toggle Shift+F1 to either see around canopy frames or get a better rear view, it's a useful command. Normally I fly in wide view and switch to gunsight mode for medium range dead six shooting, I rarely ever use normal view just because I don't have enough buttons on my stick to bind it there any more now that my X-45 died. I'd like to use a similar setup to MikkOwl's where he uses the G940's dual stage trigger to zoom when he passes the first detent on the trigger axis, but reversed so that it fires on the first detent and zooms if I hit the second detent, but I've decided to leave modding my trigger until I can afford to buy another stick if I break my current one. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

crucislancer
05-03-2010, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by TheGrunch:
I like to toggle Shift+F1 to either see around canopy frames or get a better rear view, it's a useful command. Normally I fly in wide view and switch to gunsight mode for medium range dead six shooting, I rarely ever use normal view just because I don't have enough buttons on my stick to bind it there any more now that my X-45 died. I'd like to use a similar setup to MikkOwl's where he uses the G940's dual stage trigger to zoom when he passes the first detent on the trigger axis, but reversed so that it fires on the first detent and zooms if I hit the second detent, but I've decided to leave modding my trigger until I can afford to buy another stick if I break my current one. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I have shift+F1 bound to a joystick button just for that purpose.

There is a binding that lets you cycle through the 3 main views so you can bind it to one button. I use that exclusively. Sure, I have to press the button more then once to get where I'm going, but it saves other buttons for other things I need.

TheGrunch
05-03-2010, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by crucislancer:
There is a binding that lets you cycle through the 3 main views so you can bind it to one button. I use that exclusively. Sure, I have to press the button more then once to get where I'm going, but it saves other buttons for other things I need.
I should probably try that out...Toggle FOV, is it?

crucislancer
05-03-2010, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by TheGrunch:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crucislancer:
There is a binding that lets you cycle through the 3 main views so you can bind it to one button. I use that exclusively. Sure, I have to press the button more then once to get where I'm going, but it saves other buttons for other things I need.
I should probably try that out...Toggle FOV, is it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, that's the one.

TheGrunch
05-03-2010, 01:48 PM
Thanks crucislancer...off to test it under pressure now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

joetraff
05-07-2010, 05:56 AM
I would prefer the suggestions given by coastie.
I checked it out and it works fine for me.
Thanks for the help . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

TheFamilyMan
05-07-2010, 02:17 PM
Since I use Sans FOV I've had to set wide screen appropriate FOVs for the three zoom modes and each has its own hat position. I used to use 'toggle fov' to cycle through the FOV modes; I miss that single button simplicity.

na85
05-07-2010, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Lurch1962:
Having different image scales for the inside cockpit and external world would be unnatural in the extreme. This game correctly handles image scale for all elements because it's true 3-D. Imagine how odd it would be to, say, always keep the interior at the same wide setting, while allowing the outside view to have its zoom setting vary. I shudder at the prospect!

About 'correct', real-world image scale on screen. I've posted on this matter at least a few times in the past. Here I go again...

HOW TO DETERMINE THE CORRECT DISTANCE FROM WHICH TO VIEW THE SCREEN IN ORDER TO SEE A 1:1 REAL-WORLD IMAGE SCALE.

view dist. = (scrn width/2) / TAN(FOV/2)

Example:
Screen width = 22" (the measured horizontal display size)
FOV = 55 deg.

view dist. = (22"/2) / TAN(55/2)
view dist. = 11 / TAN(27.5)
view dist. = 11 / 0.521
view dist. = 21.1"

For an FOV of 90 deg. the view distance always equals 1/2 the dsplay width; so for a 22" wide screen, one would need to have his eyes only 11" from the screen.

For an FOV of 30 degrees (same as the gunsight view angle), for the same 22" wide screen a 1:1 view scale would require the player to be 41" from the screen.


I have my 19" CRT running at 1600x1200. It's set up on a stand so that screen center is exactly at eye height. I sit within 11-12" from the screen, and use 3.5 diopter (focal length 11") glasses to focus comfortably without eye strain. This is so that at the 90 deg. FOV (in which I spend 95+% of the time) I see my screen as subtending the same ~90 deg. angular width.

This is excellent for SA! I feel like I'm really in the cockpit. I use head tracking, and by having an angularly large display means I can set up the tracker's sensitivity so that I can move my head over a larger range for better sensitivity and at the same time NOT HAVE TO SWIVEL MY EYES IN THEIR SOCKETS. In other words, as I track a wildly maneuvering bandit in a dogfight, my face is always directed at it, no matter where on the screen it is, including near the edges/corners. To put it another way, I'm not rotating my head to the left while at the same time having to swivel my eyes to the right.

By the way, my tracking setup has the camera mounted to the top of my headset strap, pointed backwards at a mounted light ~8 feet behind me. This was necessary due to the extremely close distance of the screen. It works marvelously well!

And care to know another *very* beneficial aspect of a 'proper' view distance? Distortions introduced by the gnomonic projection (as used by all 3-D games) are largely eliminated!

You're all familiar with the appearance of the circular gunsight as it gets near the screen edge or, worse yet, the corners. It stretches into a quite pronounced ellipse (all objects are distorted similarly, of course.) Well, when viewing from the 'correct' distance and from on-axis, your nearer viewpoint renders that gunsight as very nearly the normal circle it should be. Try it!

How is this possible? Because a gnomonic projection is a tangential projection which maps the spherical image of the world onto a plane (the screen in this case). The image scale is only correct at the center, and radial stretching increases off axis. This stretching is seen if viewed from a distance greater than one radian. That one radian distance depends on the image scale and the field of view (FOV) on the display, and is calculated with the formula I've supplied above.

Careful. When someone says "22-inch monitor" that is not the horizontal width, but actually the diagonal length from a bottom corner to the opposite top corner.

http://www.pcityourself.com/images/content/choosing/monitorSizeDiagram.jpg

Stiletto-
05-07-2010, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by na85:

Careful. When someone says "22-inch monitor" that is not the horizontal width, but actually the diagonal length from a bottom corner to the opposite top corner.


Yes, you have to physically measure the width of your monitor from bezel to bezel and divide by 2.

Lurch1962
05-07-2010, 04:58 PM
na85,
Instead of such a common figure as "22", I should have used an odd number in my example, such as 21.6" or some such, so as to minimize the chance of giving the false impression that the 'stated' size of the monitor is to be used. At any rate, in the looong epistle I posted, I did explicitly say to measure the *actual horizontal width* of the visible screen.

Stiletto,
Good to see at least one simmer in 'IL-2 land' who has a grasp on the situation!