how do you like your Yolk?

[Oracle427]

For reference, this is my view and it represents what I consider to be my "field of focus" when I am flying VFR. I'll shift the view to focus on the 6 pack (A key) if I am flying IFR.

.85 zoom, eyepoint adjusted in the .cfg file to represent what I see over the nose (no cowling) unless I crane my neck. I use a 27" monitor with widescreen enabled in the sim and I sit at arms length from the monitor. I can just touch it with my fingertips if I sit upright.

I take quick glances down at the instruments from time to time to check performance using TrrackIR, but for the most part they are not in my primary field of view.

[Nick - A2A]

"Field of focus" is a good term Oracle. It seems that, like me, you go for a slightly more "zoomed-in" compromise than many simmers (based on YouTube vids), such that the angular size/spacing of objects is prioritised over total field of view. In the A2A 172, I've also lowered my seating position and I slid the seat forward a bit too!

Nick

[dvm]

I don't think anyone though you were being critical Vince, it's just that "pushing the scenery in or out" (of our onscreen view of the virtual world) is what we do when we decide on our preferred zoom setting in the sim. As discussed, it's simply not possible to say there's one particular zoom setting which is 'correct'. When you say as you keep your view "as close to what you would see in the real world" how do you define what that is? Preserving the angular diameter and spacing of objects as they'd appear in real life, or representing on the screen your rough field of view when sat in the cockpit? The problem is that depending on monitor size and distance these two things can be very different, more so with smaller screens of course.

One thing I think we should avoid doing is using different zoom levels for different views and/or aircraft. I'd say pick a zoom setting and stick with it!

Cheers,
Nick

P.S. No I don't use TrackIR though I have experimented with ED tracker a bit.

I generally use the default zoom as far as the outside view is concerned. I think that is close enough to what you would see in the real world (angle of view). That is why I don't like to use zoom and would rather change my eye point which only changes the view of the panel/cockpit. I do cheat now and again by momentarily zooming in to see an airport in the distance. You are correct in my opinion that what ever your angle of view outside you should stick with it. As far as normal perspective goes in the real world it is what you can see comfortably ignoring your peripheral vision. Before I had Track IR I had simple single button commands for eye point. With Track IR it is unnecessary as you can change your eye point within limits by moving your head in or out. As I said I sometimes move in or out to change the eye point a little and then press the reset button and that locks the new eye point if that makes sense. The field of view at a particular zoom and eye point should remain the same no matter the size of your monitor I believe. The size of an object will be smaller with a small monitor. One needs to adjust the distance to the monitor depending on its size as the normal angle of view of our eyes is still abound 50 degrees. I am using a 27 inch monitor and My face is around 3 feet from the monitor I have a car seat and it stays put unless you deliberately want to move it . I even have a pair of prescription glasses that are adjusted for that distance as my reading glasses are not right ( getting old ain't for pussies). I am sure you have read many times my high opinion of TrackIR. Here is an example of how convenient it is: You are flying the downwind and are doing all the things one does adjusting speed and altitude etc and waiting to turn base, with track IR all you do is to turn your head a little and you can see where you are in relation to the end of the runway, in just an instant you know exactly where you are and are again looking strait ahead. Using the hat switch is unnatural and slow. I guess I am bloviating again so I will end this and give everyone a break.

Vince

PS Oracle's screenie looks pretty real world to me.

[Alan_A]

Esa -

Thanks for tracking down those earlier threads, those were the ones I had in mind, but I didn't have a chance to find them before I wrote my first post in this thread.

You and Nick also reminded me that I got something backwards in that post - .70 is my setting for WideViewAspect=True. WideViewAspect=False needs .40 to get the same perspective.

Vince -

You're absolutely right about lenses and normal field of view. In 35 mm photography (or "full frame" in today's digital world), it'd be the 35 mm lens that gets you that 55 degree field of view. Photographers get into arguments about it because the 50 mm lens - with about a 40 degree angle of view - was always considered the official "normal" lens. If you bought a 35 mm camera, it usually came with one. 50 mm gets you the view right in front of you - what you'd see if you were concentrating hard - but without that added peripheral vision space. The slight wide angle (35 mm lens, 55 degree FOV) is better for flying - and also for a lot of photography.

I'm currently struggling to get the right viewing distance from a 50-inch monitor, which you'd think would be "life-sized," but it still takes work to get the right perspective on it. Still keeping my zoom, though - distance is the only variable I'm working with, perspective is fine. Noted for what it's worth.

[RotorWash]

For reference, this is my view and it represents what I consider to be my "field of focus" when I am flying VFR. I'll shift the view to focus on the 6 pack (A key) if I am flying IFR.

.85 zoom, eyepoint adjusted in the .cfg file to represent what I see over the nose (no cowling) unless I crane my neck. I use a 27" monitor with widescreen enabled in the sim and I sit at arms length from the monitor. I can just touch it with my fingertips if I sit upright.

I take quick glances down at the instruments from time to time to check performance using TrrackIR, but for the most part they are not in my primary field of view.

This view is close to mine at 1;1 though you should be able to see the front top side of the cowl The maths in the video is conclusive for widescreen=true, it has nothing to do with what feels wright, but all to do with what is correct ? You guys need to buy yourself a camera suit and move on

My real life instructor allways said, adjust your seat to the cowl, look left, look forward, look up, look right, scan your instruments but dont get fixated on them, and repeat. Use a fist on the dash board to estimate your attitude to the horizon. He also told me that sim pilots are some of his most awkward students, though there theory is good, they tend to have an instrument fixation and tend to not look out the window as much as they should, i was one of those students, it took me a few hrs to shake the habit.

[RotorWash]

aaaahhhhhhggggg Nick has sussed me!!

Thanks RotorWash for the You Tube link.

All of this has got me thinking and learning; very enjoyable!

Rod

Your welcome Rod. I'm a bit disappointed the guys at A2a havn't stepped up to endorse the mathematics, as PMDG and Majestic have ?

[jeepinforfun]

I find A2A's default view just fine for takeoff and landing, for everything else I am constantly changing not only my zoom but my seat elevation throughout the flight. I do try to make any view changes coincide with what I feel would be normal for an actual person sitting in the seat. Works for me since I first started and makes up for the lack of human ability within the sim.

I am also not against zooming in(within reason) to the scenery around me as if I was using a pair of binoculars when looking for something particular on the ground.

To each his own I guess.

[RotorWash]

I find A2A's default view just fine for takeoff and landing, for everything else I am constantly changing not only my zoom but my seat elevation throughout the flight. I do try to make any view changes coincide with what I feel would be normal for an actual person sitting in the seat. Works for me since I first started and makes up for the lack of human ability within the sim.

I am also not against zooming in(within reason) to the scenery around me as if I was using a pair of binoculars when looking for something particular on the ground.

To each his own I guess.

Nothing wrong with using zoom as a set of bino's. im pretty sure thats what it was implemented for, and i use it solely for that purpose. perhaps A2a could provide us a virtual pair for the glove box ?. I dont think ive ever been in a small craft without a set of bno's close at hand ?

[AKar]

I don't think anyone though you were being critical Vince, it's just that "pushing the scenery in or out" (of our onscreen view of the virtual world) is what we do when we decide on our preferred zoom setting in the sim. As discussed, it's simply not possible to say there's one particular zoom setting which is 'correct'. When you say as you keep your view "as close to what you would see in the real world" how do you define what that is? Preserving the angular diameter and spacing of objects as they'd appear in real life, or representing on the screen your rough field of view when sat in the cockpit? The problem is that depending on monitor size and distance these two things can be very different, more so with smaller screens of course.

Yes, precisely. While it is not that much about the topic, but perhaps more of technical yap related to it, I find the point worth pushing a bit because it is confusing, and often misquoted. I am not to criticize anyone's preferences, but to hunt down the "everyone set the zoom to 1.0" (or some other specific setting) fallacy! It has been correctly noted, that the focal length alone for instance does not determine a normal lens or perspective. This is because cropping (or sensor/film size) has exactly the same effect that changing the focal length has. Also the print/display size matters.

The point is this: If I take a wide angle image and print it into a two meters wide poster...and if I now take a telephoto shot of the same scene, I can insert a smaller print of that into the wide angle picture, and it fits perfectly. Assuming good lenses, there is no change in perspective (difference in proportions of objects at different distances) between the two.

This is a composite of two screenshots, the only difference in between which is the zoom setting (click for larger). There is no perspective distortion whatsoever, only the field of view changes.



In the simulator, your framing is fixed, and thereby the image size, determined by your monitor. If we locked the viewing distance, and plugged in a very small monitor, the zoom setting of the insert screenshot would provide the same angular view into the virtual world than the wider does for a very much larger monitor! Only that it is through a smaller "window". Do your triangles, and one easily finds what is the realistic angular field of view through one's specific display plus viewing distance combination. For every display+viewing distance combination, there is exactly one zoom setting that results in natural view angle, but it is not tied to 1.0, 0.75 or any other single number but depends on one's setup.

Let me bring this up once again:



The only way to set the zoom setting for any number that has any absolute meaning whatsoever is to set it to represent the natural angle you have over the width of your monitor. And it does not have any single correct zoom setting that applies to every user but varies strongly with the physical setup. This unfortunately results in a tunnel vision effect on most setups having relatively small screen sizes in comparison to the viewing distance. How to combat that tunnel vision effect is entirely up to one's taste, because it always gives up some realism in proper angular sizes of objects.


Edit: A thin approximate border of the insert added to the thumbnail for clarity.

-Esa

[DHenriques_]

I don't think anyone though you were being critical Vince, it's just that "pushing the scenery in or out" (of our onscreen view of the virtual world) is what we do when we decide on our preferred zoom setting in the sim. As discussed, it's simply not possible to say there's one particular zoom setting which is 'correct'. When you say as you keep your view "as close to what you would see in the real world" how do you define what that is? Preserving the angular diameter and spacing of objects as they'd appear in real life, or representing on the screen your rough field of view when sat in the cockpit? The problem is that depending on monitor size and distance these two things can be very different, more so with smaller screens of course.

Yes, precisely. While it is not that much about the topic, but perhaps more of technical yap related to it, I find the point worth pushing a bit because it is confusing, and often misquoted. I am not to criticize anyone's preferences, but to hunt down the "everyone set the zoom to 1.0" (or some other specific setting) fallacy! It has been correctly noted, that the focal length alone for instance does not determine a normal lens or perspective. This is because cropping (or sensor/film size) has exactly the same effect that changing the focal length has. Also the print/display size matters.

The point is this: If I take a wide angle image and print it into a two meters wide poster...and if I now take a telephoto shot of the same scene, I can insert a smaller print of that into the wide angle picture, and it fits perfectly. Assuming good lenses, there is no change in perspective (difference in proportions of objects at different distances) between the two.

This is a composite of two screenshots, the only difference in between which is the zoom setting (click for larger). There is no perspective distortion whatsoever, only the field of view changes.



In the simulator, your framing is fixed, and thereby the image size, determined by your monitor. If we locked the viewing distance, and plugged in a very small monitor, the zoom setting of the insert screenshot would provide the same angular view into the virtual world than the wider does for a very much larger monitor! Only that it is through a smaller "window". Do your triangles, and one easily finds what is the realistic angular field of view through one's specific display plus viewing distance combination. For every display+viewing distance combination, there is exactly one zoom setting that results in natural view angle, but it is not tied to 1.0, 0.75 or any other single number but depends on one's setup.

Let me bring this up once again:



The only way to set the zoom setting for any number that has any absolute meaning whatsoever is to set it to represent the natural angle you have over the width of your monitor. And it does not have any single correct zoom setting that applies to every user but varies strongly with the physical setup. This unfortunately results in a tunnel vision effect on most setups having relatively small screen sizes in comparison to the viewing distance. How to combat that tunnel vision effect is entirely up to one's taste, because it always gives up some realism in proper angular sizes of objects.

-Esa

Interesting!

I'm beginning to think I probably represent the "simple side" of all this technical engineering.
I simply bring up the plane then mentally place myself in the seat visually "measuring the distance" from my eyes to the panel as the panel would look to me were I sitting in the seat in the actual airplane. I then accept whatever zoom that gives me and go flying. I've discovered over time that doing this doesn't cause any distortion of perspective either inside or outside the aircraft.
I believe the reason is that what I see as being normal isn't that far off the defaults.
I realize this is the KISS principle but it works for me. I should add that as immersion is critical to me I would notice immediately if anything looked out of perspective with what I would be expecting to see while using FSX.
Can't speak to P3D as I have yet to use it.
Dudley Henriques

[RotorWash]

I don't think anyone though you were being critical Vince, it's just that "pushing the scenery in or out" (of our onscreen view of the virtual world) is what we do when we decide on our preferred zoom setting in the sim. As discussed, it's simply not possible to say there's one particular zoom setting which is 'correct'. When you say as you keep your view "as close to what you would see in the real world" how do you define what that is? Preserving the angular diameter and spacing of objects as they'd appear in real life, or representing on the screen your rough field of view when sat in the cockpit? The problem is that depending on monitor size and distance these two things can be very different, more so with smaller screens of course.

Yes, precisely. While it is not that much about the topic, but perhaps more of technical yap related to it, I find the point worth pushing a bit because it is confusing, and often misquoted. I am not to criticize anyone's preferences, but to hunt down the "everyone set the zoom to 1.0" (or some other specific setting) fallacy!

-Esa

My research informs that screen size or resolution really has little to do with it, if anything, the biggest factor is how far you sit from it. Now i am not much of a tech head, though i like to extensively research and pass on what i think is good quality information (whether i totally understand it or not) ? I did not mean to sound like i was hunting down the non conformers, but was surprised that for most here, this is not necessarily the way we do things ?

For those who decide to purchase a camera suite, i recommend trying it at the 1:1 setting and set up your views from there.

Nuff said from me, its been a very interesting chat

[rod55]

All this on top-down or bottom-up arrangement, however you like your yolk in the morning, i.e. "field of focus", has literally shifted my views. Aspiring for realism, allowing compromises, always promoting immersion. I've particularly learned from Dudley (as always), Oracle and Alan.

It is exciting to read how a real life pilot sees it and so can only expect and accept that. So now I can enjoy flying, just seeing the top row of dials i.e. this real world imitation, which I currently find it easiest in cruise phase.

This ideal standard is sometimes compromised by me wanting to gaze at the GTN or GNS which means just slipping down to see the top 2 rows "6 pack", I guess. In that arrangement, I can see the top of the grip handles, "the horns", with the C182 (and Seminole). Keeping alive the fantasy that it's MY HANDS IN THERE AND ON THIS AIRPLANE'S YOLK!

"Normal isn't that far off the defaults" assures Dudley.

(I have to slip down another row to see the tops of the "horns" for Comanche (and Turbo Duke and Conquest II)).

Completely unrealistic, BUT just as tasty, every quarter of an hour or so, I beam myself outside and admire these fantastic machines from a sideways, backwards a bit, Spot View; especially as they bank and turn.

[rod55]

Slept on it; and re-emerged sunny side up (ha).

Just sneaked into Heathrow (Orbx England) in my favourite Comanche. The officials' disapproval of GA was almost tangible ....stuff 'em! With my HEAD UP AND JUST TOP DIALS SHOWING (at the foot of the monitor) for descent and landing! Yeah! Hoping Scott and Dudley would be proud of me.

This topic and all you A2A Forum Pilots out there (at a variety of locations across our little planet) have had a massive and profound effect on my knowledge, attitudes (views, pun!) and skills. Now I'm not only looking up more, sustaining that view, but I'm also looking up AND down more often, checking/monitoring controls, including awareness of the top of the horns moving. So my head is less in a vice as before, Ron's valuable point.

More realism. More immersion. Better pilot, I hope!

Judging by the viewing figures and replies, I'm hoping this is useful to other people..........

Rod
Birmingham , UK

[Lewis - A2A]

I have what I personally call S%^£ eggs, that are done both sides and generally not cooked through hehe. Nice and easy to cook, no worries.

For my view, when flying I try to use VR as much as possible so moving my head around lots is nice and easy to better replicate real world.

cheers,
Lewis