Other than todays post I see this is a little old.   How did you go about doing the gauges?

 

    I find the 42" screens good but I dont want to use them for my gauges so I run them on a 23" touchscreen - which has other advantages being a touchscreen, I do all my button flipping on it.

 

     This is how I have mine configured.    The only problem with triples is the framerate, it will be very hard to keep it acceptable.

 

   

.. nice jason ...

 

I'm running 42" Plasma GTX560ti, from 1 port & all my instrument on 2 15" widscreen through TH2G, like the size very much, quality after tweaking is nice too, the thing that I miss is the peripheral, I'm trying to figure out what's the best way to get 225 Degrees

Cheeres

 

Yair  

It is a tough one for the peripheral view.

 

   I used to have my screens all in landscape but the extreme distortion put me off it in the end.   Of course we can render three different views but the frame rate goes to nothing and track IR doesnt work across the different views.

 

   I am now running xplane and DCS, both work well with good frames on my configuration, unfortunately FSX does not work with my monitor configuration but at the same time if it did I would have frames < 10 fps.

 

   The other nice thing with portrait landscape portrait is that the screens consume a lot of your field of view but the overall aspect ratio is closer to a single screen so the distortion is not too bad.

Bigger is sometimes better, but not always. I'm a great advocate of quality over size, hence why I LOOOVE my 2560x1600 pixels displayed on a 30" screen. Having 1920x1200 pixels on a 42" screen is OK, providing you don't sit too close. You'll effectively have the same amount of pixels as you would with a 24" monitor! I guess at the end of the day it's just down to personal preference.

Howard,as always,you are the voice of reason

Howard,as always,you are the voice of reason

 

:wub:

Bigger is sometimes better, but not always. I'm a great advocate of quality over size, hence why I LOOOVE my 2560x1600 pixels displayed on a 30" screen. Having 1920x1200 pixels on a 42" screen is OK, providing you don't sit too close. You'll effectively have the same amount of pixels as you would with a 24" monitor! I guess at the end of the day it's just down to personal preference.

 

    Absolutely, personal preference!

 

    They look different but each is nice.   I have a 30" dell on another computer that I have done some FS development on and it is a nice screen.  It is more crisp for sure, xplane takes on a different quality on the 30" but then again the 30" just doesnt have the presence and immersion of the larger tv's.

 

    I think 42" is as large as I would go because of the resolution issue.   I know someone with a setup like mine who went to 27" screens and I think he would have preferred 42" screens.   I think 42 is a good compromise and to the OP, I am not sure 52 would be better for flight simming if it was the tv's primary task.

 

    I think there is probably little in it for a single 42" vs a 30".   I might even go for the 30" if those were my options.   When you have 3x42" screens thats where imho the gaps widens a lot more.

 

    Now, having said that I myself think it is imperative to have the 4th monitor for gauges.  This leaves the tv's mostly for scenery although they are easily good enough to check gauges if they happen to be on the screen.   I just prefer my gauges on a crisper monitor.

 

   People often look at projectors and think they are great for the scenery and often you only have one projector with a large image of only 1920x1080.   Three tv's over a small area have a much higher pixel density and can look very good.

 

   One issue that is very common is that people dont know how to hook up a modern tv properly to the computer so that it is matching 1:1 on the pixels.  there are a few steps that need to be done, as well as turning of tv processing like sharpness etc that will turn a TV  properly in to a monitor.

 

   I know a lot of people plug in a tv and never see the sharp image it can produce because its not set up correctly.  Unfortunately it is never plug and play with a graphics card.

I'm flying with a 50" 1080p plasma and I used to fly with a 30" Dell of 2560x1600. Although the resolution on the plasma is lower, the physical size of a 50" screen makes an incredible difference in terms of immersion factor. To me there is no way for me to back to 30" 2560x1600. Yes, a 4K 50" would be sooo nice but have to wait for a while at least.

Current TVs and graphic cards play with each other very well in terms of achieving pixel to pixel mapping. A little bit tweak in the TV menu will do. Just few years ago pixel mapping could still be a huge headache, but fortunately not anymore.

My next dream is either a projector at 120" or a 4K screen of 50 - 60". Oh, the Oculus Rift could be a killer if it works well with FSX.

Flylce, how far back from a 50" unit would you recommend sitting? My office (flight deck) is not very big. Was thinking 3 x 40". Two for side views. 

I've done the single small monitor and 3 monitor setup and never could get fully immersed so I am now using a 60" led monitor from about 3' away and the immersion is incredible but there is a compromise on clarity but worth it to me.

 

Flylce, how far back from a 50" unit would you recommend sitting? My office (flight deck) is not very big. Was thinking 3 x 40". Two for side views. 

 

  As another reference, from my three 42 inch screens I sit 30", for that size  I think it's good.  Better pixel density than a 50" and for you with a 40" it would be a slight improvement again.

 

 

 

 

Current TVs and graphic cards play with each other very well in terms of achieving pixel to pixel mapping. A little bit tweak in the TV menu will do. Just few years ago pixel mapping could still be a huge headache, but fortunately not anymore.

 

 

     Very true, new tv's of any known brand will be able to be set up correctly but as of yet I havent seen one that just plugs in and is working right off the bat, they all need a couple settings made but not everyone is aware of this in incorrectly get a bad idea of what a tv can do in terms of clarity.

Use passive 3dtv 42in Vizio lose pixels clarity, but stereo 3d is awesome in ga plane feels your body in the plane, Trade off get jaggles across but run it 720p 60 fps stereo 3d sense of speed is realistic, but you lose pretty pictures gain feel of speed and flight dyamics. . 1080p is what I use in Xplane and fsx with one monitor looks great at night, but have to turn down scenery to allow the AA to make clean picture.

drumsonly2002, on 08 May 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

 

Flylce, how far back from a 50" unit would you recommend sitting? My office (flight deck) is not very big. Was thinking 3 x 40". Two for side views.

I'm sitting pretty close, or very close actually. I measured that when I sit down and fly the FSX my eyes are about 45" away from the screen. So the distance roughly equals the screen size -- this is very different from watching videos.

 

I also put TV on a slight lower table of like 22" height or sth, so when I sit down I look *down* slightly at the center of the screen. I found that adds even more to the immersion factor.

IMO, the distance from the screen is too close when you can see the pixels.

.. Big Screen TV are getting better & better quality wise & more & more affordable as well, & seems that most of us agree the immersion is indeed incredible, I set close to 3ft from my 42" Plasma TV & it is so real ... I think that our biggest problem is the limitation of FSX, a Big Bulky old outdated piece of Software that doesn't keep up with technology ..... all you can do is work around a bit but that's about it (-:  .