How about making higher resolution panel and 2d views?

[zfehr 1]

In light of the recent discussions regarding using FlyII with higher resolutions than 1024x768. I thought I might put a challenge out there but let's organize it. I haven't tackled this before because I'm not sure just what all if involved.Now first off, to get higher resolutions you do have to modify the fly.ini file and you can't bring up the opening screen with video settings. Now might there be a way to modify that so that a new set of resolutions could be selected? Let's say 1024x768, 1280x960 and 1600x1200. If a modified setup screen and working internals could be made this would allow us tweakers to share it with others that don't do as well when they start messing with files.Next is the panel graphics, I suggest the above resolutions cause they are standard ratios and there would actually only be two sets to be made. Now the graphics themselves should be easy, just use photoshop or Paintshop Pro to make a new set. My question about this part is will FlyII look at the current resolution settings from the fly.ini file and automatically select the correct panel graphics or does this need further programming somewhere?In addition to just making larger graphic files what about the gauges? Now if we're talking a smaller panel (especially) you're gonna want a closer in view so even forward views need to be redone and there are gauges that get placed into those. Would each and every one of those gauge graphics need to be resized and the appropriate coordinates in their line text need also be modified (I'm seeing big headache on this part :( )I plan on futzing with the Socata TBM700 since that is my favorite but anyone that has already gotten their feet wet trying to do this pipe up and tell me if it is just a bigger headache than it is worth. If it is feasible I put the challenge to dole out an aircraft to each of us nuts that's willing to do it and go to work making refits that we'll end up sharing with the community.I've already reset my graphics to 1280x960 and was wowed by the results, didn't know the exterior graphics did look that good. The Socata panel forward view is usable since it is larger but you are now too far away and of course all of the subpanels come up looking out of place. I like it enough though I think I'll keep it that way and let you know how the work goes on the other views.Y'all ready?

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Zane,< I haven't tackled>this before because I'm not sure just what all if involved.>From reading your post you seem to have a pretty good grasp of what's involved. :-)>Now first off, to get higher resolutions you do have to modify>the fly.ini file and you can't bring up the opening screen>with video settings. Now might there be a way to modify that>so that a new set of resolutions could be selected? Let's say>1024x768, 1280x960 and 1600x1200. If a modified setup screen>and working internals could be made this would allow us>tweakers to share it with others that don't do as well when>they start messing with files.Unfortunately the graphic settup screen is hard coded (I think) and to make any changes here would require some reverse engineering and be a violation of copyright...BUT it would be very simple to have a small standalone utility very similar to "Fly!start", where screen resolution could be selected and the relevant changes automatically made to fly.ini before booting up Fly! II.>Next is the panel graphics, I suggest the above resolutions>cause they are standard ratios and there would actually only>be two sets to be made. Now the graphics themselves should be>easy, just use photoshop or Paintshop Pro to make a new set. >My question about this part is will FlyII look at the current>resolution settings from the fly.ini file and automatically>select the correct panel graphics or does this need further>programming somewhere?This I fear might be the undoing of the idea of having MULTI-SELECTABLE high resolution screens. Obviously the selected graphics resolution is passed on from the graphic setup screen to the fly! II engine. But we can't use the graphics setup screen. Whether Fly! II would default to showing the images in the selection of screen resolution I'm not sure. I've just thought of a way to test that as I'm writing. Disable the graphic setup screen and setgamepixx=800gamepixy=600Then run Fly! II and see if the 800 x 600 graphics are used for screen display. I do however have vague recollections of having seen a file displaying the available resolutions of an aircraft but can't be definite about it.>>In addition to just making larger graphic files what about the>gauges? Now if we're talking a smaller panel (especially)>you're gonna want a closer in view so even forward views need>to be redone and there are gauges that get placed into those.Modifying the gauges constitutes 90 % of the work involved. >Would each and every one of those gauge graphics need to be>resized and the appropriate coordinates in their line text>need also be modified (I'm seeing big headache on this part :(Short answer: Yes ! Long answer: Don't let it deter you from your goal. As you've noted, large aircraft don't demand reworking of the instruments. You just see more of them (smaller) on screen, but they are still in proportion to the panel size. It is when you expand a small panel that the need for upsizing the instruments becomes apparent.Gauge faces are simply bitmaps so resizing the faces is simple.You would have to make new/or modify existing pointers. This is not that difficult as Chris Wallace has posted a great tutorial on the topic.SOME (not all) of the standard TRI gauges are SCALEABLE. The Hawker EFIS immediately springs to mind.>I plan on futzing with the Socata TBM700 since that is my>favorite but anyone that has already gotten their feet wet>trying to do this pipe up and tell me if it is just a bigger>headache than it is worth. If it is feasible I put the>challenge to dole out an aircraft to each of us nuts that's>willing to do it and go to work making refits that we'll end>up sharing with the community.If you plan on sharing mate then don't forget to request and obtain permission from ROTW>I've already reset my graphics to 1280x960 and was wowed by>the results, didn't know the exterior graphics did look that>good. The Socata panel forward view is usable since it is>larger but you are now too far away and of course all of the>subpanels come up looking out of place. I like it enough>though I think I'll keep it that way and let you know how the>work goes on the other views.>>Y'all ready? Go for it! Keep us posted of your progress. Most of all have fun and enjoy your simming.Cheers,Roger

[zfehr 1]

G'Day Roger,I read some of the archived posts by Alejandro and confirmed that you do have to modify all the pbm files associated with a panel so the coordinates are proper (that means any artwork associated with the gauges also has to be resized. Bit more work but I'm gonna give a go at the TBM with the 1280x920 resolution. I'll probably send them all off to ROTW when I finish them, they got the last patch I did for the TBM. Might even have a look at making that copilot HSI work better but gotta remember what I did to it in the first place :-hmmm . Of course the other project I would love to tackle would be the RealAir Decathlon and PMDG 757/777 but that might end up being a bit more sticky when it comes to sharing those files. Might just keep the forward panel view in the PMDG and just work on the ones that need resizing (got a few ideas that probably won't work *:-* ). I'll keep ya'll posted and hopefully won't get too mired in all the other stuff I promised others I'd do.

[Guest Fly II Pilot]

Zane,I wouldn't mess around with the main panel. Most panels are much larger than 1024x768 anyway, that's why you have to scroll around. You'll simply have more of the panel visible at a higher resolution.What really stinks at a higher resolution is the side views because they're fixed at 1024x768 or 800x600, etc. Those are the ones that you need to stretch to the new resolution. Many of ROTW's aircraft, the Dauphin and the Seneca also have gauges for some of the side views, and unfortunately those are not scaleable; most of the earlier panels don't.If the panel uses a PBG, you need to stretch the PBG image, you need to reposition the image, and (in some cases) you need to define the clickable area in the PNL file.Let me know if you get stuck along the way.Good luck!http://www.avsim.com/hangar/fly/dfdg/banneraa.jpg

[zfehr 1]

Hi Alex,Yes, I've been running into what you are explaining... now I'm remembering why I gave up on this a long time ago. I've got a beta somewhere of a panel program someone was working on for FlyII, I'll have to dig that one up and see if it offers any help. don't think there is anything to be done about the side views and if so that about finishes it. 1280x960 does look pretty nice and the downsized screens aren't too annoying... I might see if I can live with that.Nice to hear from you Alex :).

[Guest detector]

I think 1280x1024 should be considered as much as 1280x960, the first one becoming more or less a standard for 17inch and 19inch LCD`s. CRT`s are still better in some ways, but "real" black and proper upscaling will be there soon. CRT`s are on their way out...

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Andrew,On my morning walk I popped into our local corner computer shop and had a good look at LCD monitors.The scaling problem is a limitation of the LCD screens and it appears that 1280 x 1024 is the highest resolution at the moment for LCD screens (17" - 19"). That resolution however is not in the 4 x 3 format so circles will end up being slightly oval. 1280 x 960 is 4 x 3 so this I think would be the better format.The only problem is IMHO that there really isn't that significant an increase in resolution between 1024 x 768 and 1280 x 960. If I was going to go to the trouble of scaling up I think I would want to go the whole hog all the way up to 1600 x 1200 to make the whole exercise worthwhile. Just my thoughts.I've learned a fair bit from this thread and whilst I envy the space saving and the nice bright colour displays of the LCD screens I'll stick with the trusty old CRT's (which are getting cheaper by the minute)Cheers,Roger