Target visibility

[irR4tiOn4L]

All I can say is you're missing the point and need to re-read my posts and the OP.

I think you're getting sidetracked by the OP's attempt to find an ingame FOV equivalent to a 50mm photography lens. Ignore that, he was just making the point that 39 fov, for him, on his monitor, made for an almost 1:1 visual representation.

The important thing to note is that the upper picture is taken at 39 FOV ingame and the lower (despite being smaller, again, its cropping, ie, you are not seeing the full screenshots, but part of them! Just ignore that) at 70 FOV.

The thing to look for is the relative SIZE of the aircraft at the same ingame distances (50m out to 4km) - you will note that the aircraft appear SMALLER at higher FOV's despite being the same distance from the ingame camera. You can see the same thing in the photos you have posted - notice how distant planes appear SMALLER at higher FOV's? This makes them much harder to spot at long distance, because their size on your screen decreases more rapidly and they become dots sooner.

Now look at the 3km and 4km distant aircraft in both the photos I provided. Remember, ingame, these are at the same distance. Notice how at 70 FOV both those aircraft have turned into 'dots', and are very difficult to spot, yet at 39 FOV they are both still models/tiny horizontal lines that are much more apparent?

THAT is what I am talking about when I say that the LOD rendering is different between 70 and 30 fov and that aircraft are MUCH easier to spot at 30 FOV than 70 FOV (provided you are looking in the right place).

[adonys]

that's why the models (at least for the airplanes, should be scaled up to 200% in size for the 70 FoV in order to have the same apparent size as at 30 FoV.

they did it that way for MS CFS, and it was good. When flying in formation, you really felt like flying in formation, a feeling you can't get in IL2 unless you are touching the wing of your flight mate.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

All I can say is you're missing the point and need to re-read my posts and the OP.

I think you're getting sidetracked by the OP's attempt to find an ingame FOV equivalent to a 50mm photography lens. Ignore that, he was just making the point that 39 fov, for him, on his monitor, made for an almost 1:1 visual representation.

The important thing to note is that the upper picture is taken at 39 FOV ingame and the lower (despite being smaller, again, its cropping, ie, you are not seeing the full screenshots, but part of them! Just ignore that) at 70 FOV.

The thing to look for is the relative SIZE of the aircraft at the same ingame distances (50m out to 4km) - you will note that the aircraft appear SMALLER at higher FOV's despite being the same distance from the ingame camera. You can see the same thing in the photos you have posted - notice how distant planes appear SMALLER at higher FOV's? This makes them much harder to spot at long distance, because their size on your screen decreases more rapidly and they become dots sooner.

I believe that is exactly what I was saying and it does this because of the way the image shifts to accommodate the larger FoV on the same size window (screen)

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Now look at the 3km and 4km distant aircraft in both the photos I provided. Remember, ingame, these are at the same distance. Notice how at 70 FOV both those aircraft have turned into 'dots', and are very difficult to spot, yet at 39 FOV they are both still models/tiny horizontal lines that are much more apparent?

THAT is what I am talking about when I say that the LOD rendering is different between 70 and 30 fov and that aircraft are MUCH easier to spot at 30 FOV than 70 FOV (provided you are looking in the right place).

LoD (as such) doesn't change though (is the LoD not determind by ingame distances?)... image size gets reduced by the larger number of pixels drawn, as you said earlier " ~ or at least the way they are rendered ~ "


60 degrees is much closer to normal human (looking straight ahead) vision. than 70

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

All I can say is you're missing the point and need to re-read my posts and the OP.

I think you're getting sidetracked by the OP's attempt to find an ingame FOV equivalent to a 50mm photography lens. Ignore that, he was just making the point that 39 fov, for him, on his monitor, made for an almost 1:1 visual representation.

The important thing to note is that the upper picture is taken at 39 FOV ingame and the lower (despite being smaller, again, its cropping, ie, you are not seeing the full screenshots, but part of them! Just ignore that) at 70 FOV.

The thing to look for is the relative SIZE of the aircraft at the same ingame distances (50m out to 4km) - you will note that the aircraft appear SMALLER at higher FOV's despite being the same distance from the ingame camera. You can see the same thing in the photos you have posted - notice how distant planes appear SMALLER at higher FOV's? This makes them much harder to spot at long distance, because their size on your screen decreases more rapidly and they become dots sooner.

Now look at the 3km and 4km distant aircraft in both the photos I provided. Remember, ingame, these are at the same distance. Notice how at 70 FOV both those aircraft have turned into 'dots', and are very difficult to spot, yet at 39 FOV they are both still models/tiny horizontal lines that are much more apparent?

THAT is what I am talking about when I say that the LOD rendering is different between 70 and 30 fov and that aircraft are MUCH easier to spot at 30 FOV than 70 FOV (provided you are looking in the right place).

Yes.

Those pictures were made with the help of 3DStudio where Tamat (a great 3D modeller btw) made a box to rappresent the 109 size. Then he reported to me his "on screen" length of this object at different fov (we have similar monitors)... so I could use a 2D software to copy/paste the resized CloD's 109s on a screenshot.

[Wolf_Rider]

and a more representative (comparative) view is achieved by using images at the same size, aspect ratio and resolution.

[irR4tiOn4L]

The dots seem to be drawn sooner, and perhaps too early, at wider FOV's.

Hence why we need to switch to a smaller FOV in order to spot aircraft as easily as in reality.

I can take ingame screenshots of distant aircraft at different FOV's in order to demonstrate this behaviour.

Which FOV is most realistic? I don't know the answer to that, but in reality aircraft do seem considerably easier to spot from most angles


Very interesting point on MS CFS, I did not think it was possible to render aircraft at a larger size while still retaining the correct proportions.


EDIT: On the LOD point, from the OP's screenshots, the distance at which dots (which I regard as part of the LODs) were used seemed smaller at wider FOV's.

I don't know exactly how LOD's are used but they could be tied to distance (in which case they wouldn't change with FOV) or size in pixels (in which case they would). It probably isn't all that important a point though since the size in pixels of an aircraft is larger with a smaller FOV anyway, and all that will happen is that we lose a small amount of model detail (no biggie).

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

The most important point in all this is the rendering behaviour.

yes, which is what happens when switching to smaller or larger FoV in comparison to what is defined as the "normal" FoV
(putting a larger image onto the same size projection surface, that being the screen, which in effect squishes everything and the inverse when projecting a smaller image onto that same size surface, screen, which enlarges everything - distances all being relative)

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

The dots seem to be drawn sooner, and perhaps too early, at wider FOV's.

No, not sooner but because of the distortion associated with switching to the larger FoV when switching up from what has been defined as the normal FoV, smaller.
(putting a larger image onto the same size projection surface, that being the screen... so obviously switching to a larger FoV, from normal FoV, does not help with scanning for targets)

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Hence why we need to switch to a smaller FOV in order to spot aircraft as easily as in reality.

incorrect and smacks of the old "we can't spot the dot" whinge

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

I can take ingame screenshots of distant aircraft at different FOV's in order to demonstrate this behaviour.

Already been done and the distortion associated with the different FoV (in comparison to what has been defined as normal) is apparent

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Which FOV is most realistic? I don't know the answer to that ~

60 degrees

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

~ , but in reality aircraft do seem considerably easier to spot from most angles

eh?

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

Very interesting point on MS CFS, I did not think it was possible to render aircraft at a larger size while still retaining the correct proportions.

well, there you go

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

EDIT: On the LOD point, from the OP's screenshots, the distance at which dots (which I regard as part of the LODs) were used seemed smaller at wider FOV's.

There's no LoD (as such) change... its rendering -

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

The most important point in all this is the rendering behaviour.

- related



*EDIT

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

I don't know exactly how LOD's are used but they could be tied to distance (in which case they wouldn't change with FOV)

That's right

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

or size in pixels (in which case they would). It probably isn't all that important a point though since the size in pixels of an aircraft is larger with a smaller FOV anyway, and all that will happen is that we lose a small amount of model detail (no biggie).

due to the distortion of FoV's other that what was defined as normal




Glad you're getting it

[irR4tiOn4L]

Wolf Rider, for someone who has consistently failed to understand another's points you are being awfully cocky and very rude.

You also make broad based assertions such as "60 fov is correct" (and pray tell, how do you know this?) "you are whining, the dots are not too hard to spot compared to real life" (again, how the hell can you say that? Ever flown an aircraft?) and "the LODs do not change at all between FOVs" (did you program the engine?).

I am getting quite sick of debating this nonsense with you considering I have to spell everything out and then still have you come back a jerk. Can you tell me what all that "do you know 70mm is narrower than 50mm" nonsense was about? Don't want to because it would make it obvious that your comprehension skills were severely lacking? Then don't come back saying I am "finally getting it".

Show some respect and make your point, then shut it. If that point is that we SHOULDNT be switching from 70 fov to 30 fov because 60 fov is realistic, then PROVE IT or accept that I will REJECT IT.



Oh and finally, here's a pop quiz - my monitor is some 20 inches across approximately 1 metre from my face. Using your analogy of a window, what is the approximate angle of vision, or "field of view", that such a surface occupies in my field of vision?

What should I set my monitor's FOV to in order to approximate 1:1 representation with my real vision? Does this change if I physically move closer to the monitor?

Here's a hint; it isn't exactly 60 degrees, and in this case its likely to be a LOT less (I estimate about 23.5 degrees of my field of vision is covered by my monitor, meaning that I would need to set my FOV to 23.5 to see 1:1 as I would in a real aircraft - compare this to our almost 180 degree forward facing field of vision and you can see why, as gamers, we have to alternate between a wider fov for situational awareness and a narrower one for 1:1 aircraft spotting).

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

No, not sooner but because of the distortion associated with switching to the larger FoV when switching up from what has been defined as the normal FoV, smaller.
(putting a larger image onto the same size projection surface, that being the screen... so obviously switching to a larger FoV, from normal FoV, does not help with scanning for targets)

So what you are saying is that even though the airplane appears smaller at higher FOVs, and thus smaller for any given distance, it will still switch to being a 'dot' at the same distance and will thus not appear as a dot sooner?

So if I have a plane that is 2 pixels across and 4km distant at 39 fov, tell me - how will it look at 4km distance but 70 fov? It will be a dot, wont it! And if its a dot at 70 fov but not at 39 fov, then what I said was exactly right - the dot appeared SOONER, or rather, at less distance from the ingame camera. And thats really what we are talking about. Remember that I regarded this as part of the LODs, because dots are NOT just ordinary rendering - ordinary rendering engines would soon stop drawing even the dot. The game is likely forcing the engine to keep drawing a dot and when that dot appears and dissapears may or may NOT be tied to distance, pixel size or some other criteria like resolution or fov.

To see what I mean, ask yourself these questions;
Do the dots appear and dissapear at the same distance on 1024x768 and 3900x1500 (example) resolutions? (for that matter, are they even the same size or smaller at high resolutions?)
Do the dots appear and dissapear at the same distance at 30 fov and 90 fov?
Do the dots appear and dissapear at the same distance when graphic options are set to high or low?

Etc.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by irR4tiOn4L

I am getting quite sick of debating this nonsense with you considering I have to spell everything out and then still have you come back a jerk. Can you tell me what all that "do you know 70mm is narrower than 50mm" nonsense was about? Don't want to because it would make it obvious that your comprehension skills were severely lacking? Then don't come back saying I am "finally getting it".

Show some respect and make your point, then shut it. If that point is that we SHOULDNT be switching from 70 fov to 30 fov because 60 fov is realistic, then PROVE IT or accept that I will REJECT IT.

who is being rude??


I think, when it come to making a judging on another, what you are really doing is just looking at yourself in a mirror and making the judgement based on who you see there ... "jerk"? ineed

Name calling just suggests you have no firm basis for argument


and if you had of read an earlier post, it was suggested that normal FoV combined with zoom, would be far more effective (when scanning) than switching to a smaller FoV, or... a larger one. Why? for the very same reasons you, yourself, have pointed out.

yet you say 39 degrees is normal and to use zoom... this is just another can't spot the dot whinge thread - pure and simple

The human eye can see up to approx 180 degrees, side to side, without moving the eyes or head - total vision
Vision in each eye is less than this and approx 90 degrees off the side with about 60 to the inside (bridge of the nose gets in the way) inverse for the other eye. up and down varies and is slightly less again. Most have the higher angle though is comprised or the peripheral vision.

put a book in front and you'll be able to read it... put it off to the side, and with holding the eyes straight ahead, you may see the book but you won't be able to read it. The range at which the book will be able to be read consists of an angle of about 60 degrees.

The other bit which needs to be taken into account, is the screen is not photography... it is projection.

If you move closer to your screen... it gets closer, that's all that happens