Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
  1. To: John, I just need to repeat the experiment and the proof I provide in my post, but this time with your lens shader. When you have the LCD panels in one plane you can simply adjust the distortion using your algorithm. But this is not what almost all is using. People are using rotated (turned) LCD panels. So, go ahead and provide a proof that with your shader produces correct geometry when using 45 deg left and right panels FOV with 180 deg. Just use the same or similar line of reasoning about the real outside world. This is the only way you will be convinced if your algorithm can be used for such a setup or not. Just provide some solid evidence as i did in my post. And again: STOP crying like a small child. NOBODY stole your algorithm. Those trigonometry rules have been discovered way way before me and I ware born. The way I use the trigonometry for geometry correction is different that the way you use in your shader. So, gain.... Go ahead, "go lift weights, eat steroids or whatever you need to do", and come back with the solid analysis and visual proof of 180 deg setup. I would be very interested to look at them and provide you some feedback. I already asked you to contact me directly on this subject and not to interfere on this forum thread. Unfortunately you continued here. Your choice. Now I'm really stopping. I will restrain replying to your comments any more on this thread. I already made my point and provided evidence. To ALL: Sorry for this interference. A "disagreement" on any subject is actually a very good think and a solid discussion helps very much in improving the insights and eventually improving the end-products. But this guy simply jumped in as a "crying child" and in his first sentence already used the words "I discovered the algorithm", "you steel the idea from me", etc. He is simply WRONG. I had to provide a solid proof to convince him. Now it is his turn.... Unfortunately it took some post to reach this state, and I promises no more posts of such a nature from my side any more. Feel free to contact us at http://fly.elise-ng.net/ or support@elise-ng.net. We are continuously improving our solutions so together with your input and suggestions we will provide even better next version. Happy flying :-), Nikola
  2. TO: John (denali) Here is how the 100% geometric correction works: - Imagine you have 3 LCD panels in front of you. For this post I just use 3 LCDs put in a configuration to cover 180 deg horizontal field of view from the user eye-point. Note: the left and right LCD panels are rotated so that when the user turns his head about 90 deg left it sees the left edge of the left LCD (exactly-90 deg left). The same when hie turns 90 right. This is what the pilots do when they fly traffic patterns. - Now imagine the the 3 LCD panels are your "windows" to the real outside world. You can only see your real outside world from the eyepoint through those "windows". This also means that if part of the real world is not visible through the windows, it can never be shown on the windows. Simple right? Ex: Imagine that you have a 1m x 1m rectangular window at distance 1m in front of you (eyepoint), you can only see the objects in the outside view which are on 45 deg (left, right up, bottom) from your eye point. So again, 100% geometrical correction makes sure that when you have such 1m x1m LCD display at distance 1m in front of you, you will not be able to observer the outside world beyond 90 deg field of view. - Now, to prove that LCD Designer PRO does exactly this and ensures 100% geometrical correction here is what I did: Imagine the outside world is a simple scene created in a shape of a cylinder with floating spheres. A "stonehenge" like structure if you like :-). The eyepoint is in the middle. So, now let's put our LCD displays in a 180 deg horizontal FOV configuration. By this out LCD displays are the views to the outside world and we can only observer the outside world through those LCD display "windows". When you position the person in the eyepoint and let the person look just straight ahead at the outside world without the LCD panels this is whey the person will see. So now we position the LCD panels, and on the LCD panels we show the images which are generated with the exported FOV for each LCD panel and additionally warped by Immersive Display PRO. What you see is that the warped image on the LCD panel exactly resembles what the users would see from the outside world when the LCD panel would be his window to the outside world. Let's do the same for the left and right view. Just rotate the persons head to the left to be able to see up to around 90 deg left. This is what the user would be able to see from the outside world. When we turn the LCDs with the warped images person sees the exact outside world on the LCD panels. For completeness, turn the user head to the right to see the right 90 deg of the world and this is what he sees: Now again with the warped LCD panels. Important note: Do not mind the stretched spheres on those screenshots. This is because I'm using computer graphics eyepoint to prove this concept and the computer graphics perspective projection tends to stretch images. That's why we need geometry correction after all. Just to show you how the image will look on the most right LCD panel This is how the image look when it is not corrected (warped): ,and here it is with geometry correction (warping) for 100% correct geometry when observer from the eypoint and person turning his head 90 deg right. You can say "But it is stretched.... And I say: yes it is stretched but when you put this image on the LCD panel and observed it from the the eypoint here it how it will look like: No distortion and geometrically correct. The images will only look corrected from the eyepint location. So John, please feel free to apply your lens shader and create this 180 deg geometrically correct outside views using just the same or similar scene. I would be very interested to learn from your research. ///////////////////////////// To ALL: Yes, it does not feel very intuitive, and a lot of people have issues grasping this, but that's simply how it works. This software is for those who really do care about their correct geometrical views. For those who do not care and those who are satisfied with less, fortunately there are alternatives and John can provide you one. /////////////////////////// Nikola
  3. denali, I do not know your actual name. Sorry. So I address you as denali. There is one simple way to proof you are not correct about the stretching LCD Panel Designer algorithm. If you are good in Direct3D or OpenGL or any other scene graph software you can do the following: Create a scene in this way: Draw a cylindrical surface with a radius 1 m (or whatever you like) and high enough to be completely seen from the eye-point (usually 0,0,0). Then on each 10 deg along the radius of the cylinder draw spheres. So you should end up with 36 spheres along the perimeter and you can then stak them along the cylinder height. This is a very nice scene to evaluate any stretching or distortion of the perspective projection used by DX or OpenGL "camera" Now, lets imagine a LCD setup with 3 LCD (the left and the right rotated by about 40 deg) and an eyepoint in front of the second LCD put in such a way that the total horizontal FOV is around 180 deg . For the simplicity, ignore the bezels. You can position camera in this scene , use whatever FOV you need and try to capture images with this camera. Now, you can try both your algorithm (single view) and LCD Designer algorithm (multi-view) and try to produce bitmaps for all LCD panels. You can again use LCD Designer to paste the bitmaps on the LCD displays, move your position to the eyepoint and rotate your head to observe the spheres pon all LCD panels. If the correction is OK in both algorithms, then on the LCD panels you will be able to see about 18 spheres (180 deg view) and the spheres along the cylinder perimeter will be seen as circles and not as elongated ellipses. Will you give this suggestion a try? In the next version of LCD Designer I will add this "spheres" scene as a standard scene in the software to evaluate the distortion. I propose to take this discussion offline. You can always contact me directly using my email box in this forum or contact Fly Elise-ng directly. Regards, Nikola
  4. It is, when you put yourself at the designed eyepoint no more stretch. That's how it works. N.
  5. Hi All, No PhD required to make or use LCD Panel Designer software. Just to let you knwo that we just released an new version of LCD Panel Designer. Thanks to everyone who used LCD Panel Designer v1.0r1 and provided us with useful feedback. We integrated some of the feedback and suggestions in this new release. Give it a try..... http://fly.elise-ng.net/index.php/news/78-news-immersivedisplaypro10r2 Regards, Nikola
  6. OK, then enjoy the "4 minute mile" correction, but your view is not geometrically correct.
  7. Gerald, It is not mathematically possible to correct for the distortion when using only one view. So, for each LCD a view is created and this view is corrected for correct geometry given the LCD size and position as well as eye-point. Regards, Nikola
  8. Hi Denali, Nobody stole you algorithm. It is just what Fly Elise-ng is developing for more that 5 years. The Fly Elise-ng software in calculating the needed geometrical correction and edge blending for multi projection setups in order to get 100% geometrically correct views on all display surfaces. Next to calculating the correct view orientation and zoom factor (FOV) (based on the physical position, orientation and size of the displays surfaces) , also an amount of warping (image correction) is needed to get the correct view that 100% matches the reality. That's why Immersive Display PRO is needed. All the efforts and all tools available so far do not address this. So, I believe an apology is appropriate in this case because we are not using any bit of your algorithms because they are just not correct. Regards, Nikola
  • Create New...