38 replies to this topic

[Nicolas]

I've tried the GPLSA route with 45 FOV. I got some nice results where you actually partially look through the windscreen (not too much, that would be midget racing ), however I found it very hard to control the car, couldn't look around hairpins, and most important: FPS was almost 10 lower than with the FOV at 89. Very strange, I had assumed it would be opposite. With other engines, I always see an FPS increase at lower FOV because there's less scene in view. Not so in GPL. I assume it is because larger FOV = cockpit smaller in view = less high res stuff to render.

Anyway, larger FOV seems better for my FPS and for my driving. Though it does indeed look a bit less realistic. Maybe I'll tweak a bit with an FOV around 80 and some GPLSA magic.

Edited by Nicolas, Jul 27 2014 - 12:18 PM.

[Nicolas]

Pete Gaimari, on Jul 27 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

You look like you're sitting on the engine now. You don't need GPLSA unless you're going to set the FOV way forward of what you're using now. 78 degrees is not what our natural vision is.

I know, I build simulators for a living (no historical F1 simulators though ). But as I said, our natural vision includes the capability to move eyes and head left and right, so you have to do something to regain a bit of that capability in a sim. You have to be able to look into a turn a bit. It's not like in reality we're racing with horse blinkers on. Ideal would be 45 FOV and a head tracker (or Oculus Rift or something), unless you go for multiple displays.

So I'll experiment a bit more between realistic FOV and sufficient vision to properly race on hairpin tracks, and I'll post what works best for me here.

[Pete Gaimari]

This is my view. No change in fps, and if anything. I see corners better.

[bart]

Thanks for the link Pete

Nicolas, maybe you could use the addon called GPLGlance.

It can help with the 'look into the turn' issue. All it does is make your head turn towards the direction you're steering.
You can configure GEM to start it up right before GPL. I use it with default settings and think it's quite good

Attached Files

•  GPL_Glance.zip   13.74K   21 downloads

[Nicolas]

I'll try GPL Glance when I get a chance.

Bart, I see your view is higher than mine, I sit almost on the floor now. So I'll have to raise the cam a lot and try again. That might work better. The FPS thing is related to my underpowered laptop, on a decent system you wouldn't notice the penalty of having the cockpit more in view.

[Pete Gaimari]

That's my view. The height is the default height. I'm 6' 1", and I figured that would be my view.

[Nicolas]

This is what I have now, 76FOV in GEM and a little bit of GPLSA. Seems to work, though it's still a 4FPS drop from 89° FOV on this crappy system.

[Nicolas]

Small problem: the driver doesn't have a head now...I assume this is due to (something I did in) gplsa. I already played with the "move driver's head" option but couldn't correct the issue. Any help?

[Nicolas]

Solved by recopying the car 3DO's and doing GPLSA again without selecting the driver's head option.

[Nicolas]

I tried GPLGlance, but it doesn't work with the 60fps mod so that's not an option here. Anyway, 76FOV works fine here and it doesn't look that unrealistic.

[Pete Gaimari]

Pretty much the default view you're using, except you lowered it some.

[one2fwee]

I've made many posts about issues like this in the past and i would just link you to them but i cannot find them - i think they have been deleted! I was not aware this forum deleted old topics but if it does that's kind of unfortunate as it means we are going to lose a lot of useful information and possibly content.

Things like this could do with going in some kind of FAQ as they come up a lot.


Anyway, what you are experiencing is because GPL uses a horizontal FOV value. As you have changed aspect ratio, you have effectively, according to GPL, shrunk your vertical field of view, as the vertical aspect is smaller in comparison to the horizontal.

In fact, even 1280 * 1024 is not the aspect ratio that GPL was designed for, it would have been designed for 1280 * 960 instead.
This means that with a 5:4 aspect of 1280*1024 you will see slightly more vertically than originally intended.


That said, i would encourage a more realistic FOV anyway, as unless you have an extra-ordinarily large screen then the default FOV in GPL is way too high!
This distorts your perception of distance and height, making tracks look flatter and things look further away than they are.

Can anyone help me find the old topics where i posted about this? They would be interesting for reference but according to my profile, it only lists posts back until mid 2013 :/

Edit
------

The posts are not deleted but for some reason you cannot search your own posting history that far back anymore as it seems broken - no idea why??

Here are (at least some of) the topics - there might be more but since i can't search really, it's hard to find them.

http://srmz.net/inde...680

http://srmz.net/inde...944

http://srmz.net/inde...t=15#entry88198



So, to match up with the vertical area of a 4:3 aspect you would use a FOV value of 94.
However if you want to match up with the same vertical area you had with your 5:4 aspect ratio, you should use a FOV of 98.
For how i came up with these numbers, see the topics i have linked.


To be honest though, i really wouldn't recommend driving with either of these FOVs if your screen is small (and/or far away). Mind you, considering you work building simulators like i've done i guess that isn't exactly news to you either. Of course, unless you have a gigantic screen it is always a compromise between realistic FOV and being able to see enough of the world around you.
Also, GPL only supports 1 flat surface for rendering, which is not ideal for triple-screen support. This means side screens should be arranged in one flat plane. Sims like Assetto Corsa, Rfactor 2 and iRacing, however support separate rendering on multiple surfaces, which is good!

Edited by one2fwee, Jul 27 2014 - 04:24 PM.

[Pete Gaimari]

Those FOV settings would really makes things seem far away. It would be like looking down a tunnel.

I'm more concerned on how the track looks than the cockpit. All I see in the cockpit when i'm driving is the tach.

[Nicolas]

My current view is indeed almost the default view, just decreased the FOV a little bit and lowered the cam a bit. Playing on the laptop my actual FOV of course is smaller than the simulated 76°, but that's my compromise between realism and drivability (and FPS on this system).

With settings >90° you get a lot of vertical FOV, but then the discrepancy between actual and simulated horizontal FOV becomes huge. I'm not a fan of that myself, so I prefer a smaller FOV.

I don't know what exactly was the problem, but to me the sim became quite undrivable at 45° FOV. I couldn't keep the car stable in slight turns (I need 8:1 rack in Oliver's Mount, so it gets twitchy anyway). At 76° FOV, I just ran my personal best time at Oliver's Mount. We shouldn't count on Oculus Rift support (yet), as it is quite impossible at the moment to use Rift with DX7. Otherwise, it would be a) totally amazing and a very realistic experience to drive GPL with a Rift set up with realistic FOV.

@One2Fwee: the search function of this board isn't the best. Thanks for the links!

Edited by Nicolas, Jul 28 2014 - 01:04 AM.

[fajanko]

I started having fps problems with new mods (SCX mainly) and searched for solutions. I use a laptop and a 1920x1080 display for GPL. If I change resolution to 1280x1024 it's much better, but then I have to adjust my FOV settings which now is 68. Feels old school after years of wide screen driving

As I read through the topic, I realized that since the last post Lee made the No Letterbox patch. In case you still want to remove the black bars.
http://gplmotorworks.gplworld.de/

[Roger_F]

Some suggestions please!

I would be interested in the opinions or this astute group regarding the best FOV for GPL formula cars.  On tight tracks with close walls (like Monaco) a low 90s FOV allows one to see the walls and avoid brushing them mid turn;  also allows the sight of other cars that are trying to pass?  Not sure why the AI think they have room to pass but that is another topic.

Mid 60s FOV let you see both mirrors but objects close to the track are difficult in turns.  Frames per second capability effect screen detail and perspective as well.  I use a 1920x1080 wide area display for GPL  (available since I recently upgraded my video card and monitor) and also use the 60fps patch; most tracks can be run at 99% detail and full objects with my home built gaming setup.

The u-tube experts suggest much lower FOVs (40s and 50s) with distance from eyes to monitor in the 24 inch range for a 25 to 27 inch monitor?  Who to believe?  

Thanks in advance ...Roger

[Millennium]

For a single monitor I would never use a 1:1 fov, you just can't see enough to properly use it.
I use the lowest fov possible while still being able to see both rear view mirrors, which is around 75 degrees on my 1080p monitor,

[Cookie]

I use FOV 62 with a 16:9 27' monitor as calculated with Roo's FOV calculator.

BUT then

You can use GPLShift or GPLSA to move the Drivers position without changing the FOV to see the mirrors!

Edited by Cookie, Dec 29 2019 - 05:39 PM.

[Roger_F]

Thank you both for your replies!

Seeing most of both mirrors seems like a must if you are driving with other cars.  The 1920 X 1080  perspective really helps in this regard as it noticeably widens the screen so the ends of both mirrors are generally visible at mid 70 FOV values.  

Some day I would like to try a three screen set up, that should allow really low FOVs (more accurate according to the sim racer types) and still provide the mirrors in the two side screens.

Thanks again,

Roger