Realistic Zoom Setting?

[Paul Golding 92]

Never been sure what I'm doing wrong but with the VC, if I zoom in more than 80% then move the seat back to where most of the gauges are visible. I loose the click spots. So I always ran at 60 to 70% zoom factor in the VC.

The disappearing clickspots are being caused by your moving the eyepoint too far back; it's actually inside part of the aircraft, like a seat.

 

Whether or not you see the gauges you want to see, has nothing to do with what the correct zoom setting is, it's ust a convenient way of making the VC look a bit like an old FS9 2d panel.  Very convenient, but it gives a false view of the outside world by making things appear farther away than they really are and this affects things like perception of speed.

 I rather have a view I like than a correct one.  ^_^

And there's nothing wrong with that at all, because you know it's not a correct view.  What I find frustrating in similar threads is all the users claiming silly things like, 0.3 is correct for me because I can still read the gauges on my 42" screen LOL!!

[LHookins 3,102]

Is there anyone who thinks the CORRECT zoom would be the same on an 8' TV screen as on a 19" monitor?  Or that your 27" monitor sitting 18" from your face would have the same CORRECT zoom as the same monitor sitting 35" away? 

 

There is no such thing as CORRECT zoom.

 

You may have heard from various sources that 1.0 zoom with wide angle true is CORRECT.  Have you ever done the measurements yourself?  Do you even know how?  Do you know what the TAN function does on your calculator?  Ok, many of you will.  But have you done the calculations yourself?

 

The ONLY thing anyone can say for certain is that "X.XX zoom is correct for my purposes."  This means that "0.3 is correct for me" is a true statement.

 

Set the zoom anywhere you want.  If you're happy, then it's the correct zoom.  If you change the zoom at a later date, this will also be the correct zoom.

 

Hook

[hoser70 40]

I wish there was a way to only "zoom" the view of the VC in or out and not the scenery outside. .3x - .7x is simply so wide of few that it becomes unrealistic. As mentioned here already the approaching scenery is zoomed out too far and is in no way a real representation of what it would look in real life wile coming in for a landing.

 

While I've gotten used to it, I've always wondered why the only option was moving my seat back in the VC to see more of the panel. And before you call me out there, yes I realize zooming the VC is also not realistic, but I can not move my head around while sitting at my computer like I can in real life while sitting in the cockpit.

 

Track IR is annoying and I can't use it so a way to zoom the VC only while retaining the zoom level outside the plane sure would be a nice feature. Heck, simply two zoom options. One for the VC and one for the exterior.

 

For those of you saying you are using .3x zoom - - how in the heck can you even see the runway while landing??? LOL!

[Paul Golding 92]

 

For those of you saying you are using .3x zoom - - how in the heck can you even see the runway while landing??? LOL!

Well according to Hook above, it doesn't matter, especially if you have a big enough screen.

 

The zoom has nothing to do with whether the gauges are in sight, small or large, or even peripheral vision. 

 

Let's put it this way, pretend you have to drive to work tomorrow (or wherever), wearing a pair of binoculars....special ones with no magnification i.e. zoom =1.0.  So you now have to accept that you have limited peripheral vision and will actually need to glance down at the speedo once in a while.  You're given the option of another pair of conventional binoculars that you'll have to look through the wrong way round so everything appears smaller (we've all done it before, I'm sure.....though not in a car I hope).  As it happens, this zoomed out pair of binoculars have a fixed zoom of 0.5.

 

So, I'm wondering who thinks they can judge speed wearing the reversed binoculars?  Anyone think they could actually drive more than a few blocks without driving into a car a the lights because they judged the distance wrong?

 

I don't know if that was actually worth typing, but hey ho.

[hoser70 40]

I think you just said the same thing I did Paul... However, those would need to be some rather LARGE screens, or perhaps a projector to make .3x work.

[FlyIce 354]

Oculus Rift! I'm dying to fly it with P3D. It's great to hear from LM that P3D v2 is designed to be compatible with OR, but the problem is that Oculus is so slow to bring the high HD version to the market. I have no problem to beg them to take my money, as long as they have the HD version right now...

[FlyBaby 659]

I wish there was a way to only "zoom" the view of the VC in or out and not the scenery outside. .3x - .7x is simply so wide of few that it becomes unrealistic. As mentioned here already the approaching scenery is zoomed out too far and is in no way a real representation of what it would look in real life wile coming in for a landing.

 

I think there may be a way to zoom the cockpit view (not eyepoint) independent of the scenery FOV. I do not have P3D to confirm, but I read about it before and this thread seems to indicate this as well. Can anyone confirm?

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=4581

[odourboy 1,288]

I only use one widescreen large screen, but my zoom is set to 100%. I have also moved myself back into the seat back to give me slightly wider perspective and constantly use my POV to scan the cockpit instruments. But in reply to your question check out these two videos specifically related to FSX (and P3D) for an answer to your question. These are the definitive answer to your question and I know that because my wife is a commercial photographer and she agrees :lol:  :lol:     :-

 

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjbCFNSofpk#t=3

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikwToOzX_UA

 

These videos, I believe, should be compulsory viewing for anybody that wants to post a screen shot and get rid of that fisheye and distorted effect that comes with a low zoom factor :wacko:   

 

I've seen both these videos before but this thread got me interested in pulling out my calculator and actually running the numbers. I normally use a 40" HDTV monitor (19.5" high) with a zoom setting of 0.80 and a viewing distance of about 40". (I've set the same zoom in all the views so the 'size' of the world is consistent no mater what view I'm using). When I plugged in the numbers I was sure surprised that find that for my viewing distance, the correct zoom setting is 1.25. By moving the monitor 7.5" closer to my eyes (moving it close to the front of my desk) I was able to position it for a correct zoom of 1.0 (according to the formula).

 

Well I went in with an open mind and tried it... and I have to admit that, although the VC seems strange with so little of the instrument panel 'on screen' without looking around, the distances, sizes and motion does seem more natural than my previous 'optimal' configuration. I could get used to this. :rolleyes:

[LHookins 3,102]

 

 

I could get used to this.

 

Good post.

 

I finally got back to watching the last half of the second video (and the third one as well).  I'd seen them before but forgotten that they had the basic math in the later part.  Thanks YouTube for cutting off the video last time.

 

There's still some problem with the assumption that the vertical field of view is 35 degrees, but I'll let others work that one out.  When I did my calculations, I used the size of instruments and Heidi's head.  But at least the video highlights the problem with screen size and viewing distance.

 

Hook

[Arwen 289]

There's also the issue that there doesn't seem to be a standard for virtual cockpits viewpoints and interior zoom amounts.

 

Here's the default Bonanza with zoom set to 0.56 (wide view aspect off, so this equals zoom 1X for my 1920x1080 monitor):

 

And here's the default Mooney Bravo, with zoom set to 0.56:

 

In both cases I tilted my view down, so that the size of instruments could be compared, but didn't alter my forward/back viewpoint in either.

 

With the Bonanza, I have to move my viewpoint back as much as I can (without clipping issues), but I still feel like I'm too close to the dash, so I also decrease my zoom a bit.

[Guest]

 

 

There's also the issue that there doesn't seem to be a standard for virtual cockpits viewpoints and interior zoom amounts.

 

Agreed. The differences can be quite big. The problem for me is that I can't simply change the seat because I use TrackIR so I sometimes feel forced to change the zoom a bit to get a better view on the gauges.

[RoboRay 126]

The problem for me is that I can't simply change the seat because I use TrackIR so I sometimes feel forced to change the zoom a bit to get a better view on the gauges.

 

I just lean slightly forward or back, hit the "Recenter TIR" hotkey, then shift back to my "comfortable" position.  :huh:

[Guest]

I just lean slightly forward or back, hit the "Recenter TIR" hotkey, then shift back to my "comfortable" position.  :huh:

 

Yes, I know that trick ^_^ but that's not precise enough for me. I like things to be the same, consequent, reproducable, etc. ^_^

[odourboy 1,288]

 

 

there doesn't seem to be a standard for virtual cockpits viewpoints and interior zoom amounts.

I get that feeling also. I have a few aircraft that feel like there's only a foot or so between the seat back and the HUD. Is that possible or are VCs built to correct physical dimensions? (or can the VC builder incorporate an internal 'zoom' factor?)

Yes, I know that trick ^_^ but that's not precise enough for me. I like things to be the same, consequent, reproducable, etc. ^_^

I think you have to live with it... I re-centre my TrackIR every time I change aircraft.

[onebob 125]

Best to set it at 1.0 then adjust seat to best position, use shift and control keys along with enter and backspace keys to get comfortable. Set desired position to see what instruments you prefer to be in view.