No problem. But you should also consider all the above points including the coordination between the RW RECORDED accelerometer data for head movements and aircraft motions, plus of course the intelligent supervision and control provided by the LWE. The LWE models most forms of turbulence both at low, mid, and high altitudes. Sorry, but both the effects and their use is as real as it gets. I have never seen or flown an aircraft behaving the way it was wobbled back and forth using my previous camera package, back and forth like a see saw. I repeat, I would not bother with sim flying without LWE and LC DHM + intelligent turbulence.

 

Stephen

Mmm, I completely understand and appreciate what you are saying Stephen regarding the integration of the different data to simulate the correct movements, I also appreciate what you have done with the software, but as I say, it's just  apersonal preference. Maybe I've just not seen a video where the camera movements have been set up correctly. I am always open to be swayed, so perhaps I will take another look.

Movement in the sim, whether it be airframe or pilot movement is really a very subjective thing. Everyone will have a slightly different perception of what's actually happening when comparing to real world perceptions. For example sitting through some turbulence one person may feel that the aircraft around them is what's shaking...yet someone else will feel that you dont notice the aircraft bouncing around as much as they fell their own bodies getting jostled around.

 

The data in a situation like this is almost irrelevent I'm afraid, because we are talking about visual cues and how we each perceive them...in a full motion sim however, where you actually can feel things, the data is much more useful of course.

 

If data was all that mattered then real pilots could fly and land in FSX without trouble on their first couple of attempts when new at the sim...but sadly that is not the case and many real world pilots will and do crash alot at first. It's due to the visual perceptions being so different than reality.

 

I prefer the look and "feel" of other cams like Howard. But there will always be others who perceive things and prefer something very different, regardless of what the data says I'm afraid.

 

I guess the more choices we all have, the more likely we'd all be satisfied...but obviously for design reasons there needs to be limits on that, so no troubles really...I understand the plight is all.

Actually Dave, you have reminded me of a great analogy... that of digitally recorded music and analogue. I remember when the first CD was released and everyone was saying how great they were and that the digital recording was the ultimate in playing music exactly how it was recorded. Well, that may be the case, BUT, there were many audio buffs, including myself, who preferred the sound of the old vinyl. Sure, it came with the scratches and the clicks, but it portrayed soul in the music, listenability, immersion and a reality that was never matched by digital. Sure, digital has come a long way since those early days, but I still remain an advocate of the vinyl disc. Another example is that of digital photography. I have been a photographer for all my working life. I was brought up on film and then moved across to digital. BUT, I still prefer the 'look' of film to digital and no one can convince me otherwise. Sure, I use digital, but that's not becuase of the quality, but simply because it offers greater creative freedom and flexibility. So sure, while things can often tick all the right boxes and be mathematically correct, with all the zeros matching and all the one's adding up, that doesn't necessarily mean they combine to produce a fulfilling and convincing end product :wink:

Stephen, I have to say, that while I am a strong supporter of Opus RW I am nevertheless extremely disappointed at having to effectively uninstall Ezdok and reconfigure everything to have a turbulence effect. I actually like Ezdok and want to continue using it, but in doing so Opus RW eliminates any turbulence. I am confused as to why I cannot simply have your weather engine inject the weather and allow Ezdok to run my cameras. I understand that Opus has been designed in a particular way that requires RW and camera views to be somehow linked, but I nevertheless feel it's a mistake. As I said, I am a strong user and supporter of Opus, but nevertheless I'm disappointed with this particular aspect of the software. (constructive criticism ^_^ )

The whole point of having the DHM effects were to be tied into the camera usage. Seeing how OPUS is a weather engine, having the camera effects which just happen to be recorded by real world data and impacted by data which is straight from NOAA and is processed through the LWE and fed into your sim is just a bonus and much easier to configure. I don't see why people are so upset about wanting to keep EZdok.

 

 

I don't see why people are so upset about wanting to keep EZdok.

 

Hmm... Read Howard's post again.  Some of this just comes down to our own personal biases and preferences.  I could (and in other venues probably would :lol: ) strike up lively arguments with him about digital photography and digital music and where they are today vs film and vinyl (you'd have to pry my music server and hi-res 24-bit/96 KHz digital files from my cold dead hard drive!), but I still understand where he's coming from on each.  It isn't at all about right and wrong, it's about what we're comfortable with (and yes, a little bit about coping with change and making adjustments).

 

In my own case, it's not EZdok (I never owned it) that hangs me up - it's struggling to adapt from my old way of moving about the cockpit with Opus camera views enabled.  I'm used to being able to make subtle eyepoint adjustments in-flight that I can't do when I enable the cameras.  I understand and even appreciate what Stephen is saying, why the views are necessary and why I can't have what I want - but I still want it.  But I'm trying to adapt what I do to what the software requires.  We'll see...

 

 

Scott

Hopefully we will be able to satisfy some of your wishes when we develop the Live Camera Control (LCC) feature which will not only allow you to move the camera's eye point 'live' but also configure interesting and creative panning shots to replay at the touch of a button. The idea being LCC will also assist in video making.

In answer to some other comments. Of course no other camera control program uses 'recorded' RW data at all, all the effects are simulated and appear rather too sine wave oriented for my taste, not resembling anything I have experienced in over 17 years of flying in the stuff. As I repeat, I have never seen an aircraft behave that way, wobbling or oscillating from side to side ... if aircraft were designed to behave like that nobody would travel on them.

Stephen

You should be very careful about judging the DHM motions when looking at videos (pretty obvious really). The videos rarely show the smooth DHM motions due to their much lower sampling rate. You cannot see the 20ms sampling rate of DHM, the eye cannot percieve changes occuring 50 times a second, if it could TV would be unwatchable. But many screen videos are captured and much lower sampling rates and hence the DHM motions are not captured correctly.

 

Cheryl

... I might add a slider control for those who wish to alter the Bump Aircraft scaling.

 

This feature will be added very soon.

 

Stephen :smile:

 

 

Hopefully we will be able to satisfy some of your wishes when we develop the Live Camera Control (LCC) feature which will not only allow you to move the camera's eye point 'live' but also configure interesting and creative panning shots to replay at the touch of a button.

 

Sounds interesting!  Thanks,

 

Scott

Stephen-

 

The feature that you mention of allowing the user to move the eyepoint around live, during the simulation is a feature that has been holding me back from switching from EZDOK to Opus cameras. In EZDOK, you set an eyepoint for a particular view, and if you need to move your eyes closer to something, or look at the overhead, you press the middle mouse button to pan upwards, and then can use the arrow keys to move back and fourth, just as your head would do. Its extremely straightforward and easy. If we could do the same in Opus that would be great! 

 

I don't have a pan switch on my yoke as it's all FAA-approved hardware used for training, so I'm relegated to using my mouse-middle-button for panning, the +/- keys for zooming, and the arrow keys for moving around- and it works just fine. I'm not sure if theres a way to do all this with the live cameras.

Live Camera control is on our 'to do' list. At present you can use either the standard hat switch, FSX Mouse Look or TrackIR, so on your setup you can use the standard mouse look holding down the middle wheel button whilst moving the mouse around. FSX Mouse Look conflicts with TrackIR so if you are using this you need to disable TrackIR (F9) prior to using Mouse Look.

We have no intention of interfacing directly to the mouse, we prefer to leave the standard FSX key/mouse assignments intact.

If you want some encouragement to use Live Camera then look at this comment from someone who has just switched to Live Camera. If you are using the sim for training then you won't get anything more realistic than our DHM which is intelligently linked to weather conditions and uses accelerometer data recorded on our own light aircraft and a 737.

 

Give Live Camera a go, just remember to run the EZCA configuration utility "Restore" function to restore all camera views to FSX default prior to enabling Live Camera. We have some provided some 737 and RealAir Legacy predefined cameras (CDFs) in the OpusFSX folder and there are some on our website which you can import.

 

Regards

Cheryl

I've played around with your DHM for a week or two and it is an ok feature, but I still come back to the same question I asked initially...is there a way to adjust the view point within FSX using the ctrl/shift key commands?  It is completely unrealistic to have to exit the sim and adjust the view point in Opus every time you get into the traffic pattern or you want to see something on the panel.  Am I doing something wrong, or do you honestly have to exit the sim to adjust the view point with trial and error going back and forth between FSX and Opus until you have the correct result?  I could decide not to use the DHM effect and I am ok with that, actually I would prefer not to use it, but without the DHM effect enabled there is no turbulence effect.  Kind of a deal breaker for me.  What am I doing wrong, or is it just the way the software is designed?

Just create ALL the VC views you NEED and switch between them to view your panels etc.. Its very simple.

 

I created several VC views for the 737NGX ... Captains View, First Officer View, Centre View, Overhead Panel, Pedestal Panel, Throttle Quadrant, MCP, and just flick between the views I need. I have DHM and turbulence enabled on the first three VC views only.

 

Opus does NOT handle ANY keyboard keys or mouse actions to move the eye point ... The future Live Camera Control may do something along these lines.

 

If you have DHM and turbulence enabled in a VC view then obviously you will NOT be able to make any adjustments to the views XYZ coordinates as these are being constantly adjusted by the DHM. Use the standard hat switch to pan around, that's what its for and it alters the eye points PBY, hence no conflict.

 

Alternatively buy TrackIR and just move your head.

 

Stephen

 

Kind if a deal breaker ..

 

Fine, if you can't see the benefits of the RW effects and intelligently controlled turbulence effects (best there is) and the ease of use, ability to create whatever camera views you need, then use something else but don't moan about realism. I've just returned from flying for real today and have also used the sim. in my opinion, the sim with OpusFSX LWE, the excellent OpusFSX RW DHM effects, and intelligently controlled turbulence effects transforms the sim and makes it worth while using. I wouldn't bother with it at all without LWE and DHM. If you do not feel the same then just use something else.

 

Stephen