SharpeXB

How is the bottom edge “nowhere near” the level of your knees? That’s doesn’t compute. Just eyeball the distance from the figures eyebrow to the lap. Close enough. I just cropped it to save space. That wasn’t intentional. All the diagrams are similar enough, I don’t see how that label makes any difference to what I’m pointing out. Some of us are emulating a cockpit here not just using a computer. People have sticks, HOTAS controls, panels, rudder pedals. When you use controls similar to an airplane you start needing the ergonomics of a cockpit, not a computer station. I use mine for sim racing too, there you really need cockpit style ergonomics. If not you really will hurt yourself. Here’s another one with a reference. Enjoy. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=120357

For an office workstation, not a cockpit. And not using the type of large screen that can be very common today. Here’s the standard that’s more relevant for a simpit

Not the distance to your knees in the standing position, when you’re seated. The height of my 48” screen is 24”. That’s the measurement from my lap to my eyebrow. That’s what I’m sketching on those diagrams. Looks pretty odd.

As much as I can figure without drafting it all out that’s about the height of my screen. It’s the distance from my lap to just above the eye. Does that look like what the standard had in mind? Are there standards for sitting in front of a 48” screen? If you place the large screen per the diagram it would end up like this. Doesn’t that seem odd? Are my eyes going to be damaged by looking above the horizontal? Will I hurt myself sitting the same way as in my car?

Without the restriction of bifocals (and a screen that’s probably too close) your eyes can easily look at the top of the screen. Sure. Here’s my opinion of what a 48” screen looks like in that diagram. Not quite what the standards had in mind I suppose.

No not everyone has pedals. Just pointing out why standards for office workstations might not work well for simpits. Lots of people don’t wear bifocals either. So this monitor placement stuff is a non issue for them.

That’s confusing because it’s referring to “Multifocal Progressive” lenses. If those are supposed to be eyeglasses those behave the same as bifocals. Multifocal contact lessens aren’t progressive. For eyeglasses “bifocal” and “progressive” are literally the same for the purpose of a seating diagram. The effect of Multifocal contact lenses is like just having your perfect eyesight back. Rather remarkable. Sorta fits that middle category but again they’re not progressive. And those diagrams don’t really work very well for a much larger screen. The other difference for flight simulation is you need to sit lower and perhaps reclined, literally like an airplane cockpit or car seat. Upright high like that you can’t use pedals very well. That lowers your eye point even more.

A progressive lens is a type of multifocal lens. There’s also a multifocal contact lens that’s concentric and behaves very differently. Then there are bifocal contact lenses similar to that progressive. Getting the terms mixed up is confusing. My doctor refers to these as progressive eyeglass lenses and multifocal contact lenses. I think you can see why. It’s better to be clear about definitions otherwise it’s just derailing the whole thread arguing about semantics.

Everything people write here is an opinion, I’m sure that’s obvious (in my opinion) The term is used interchangeably it seems. The lens there looks like it’s actually a progressive. For the purpose of this discussion it’s better to consider these separately. One arranges the zones horizontally (progressive) the other (multifocal) is concentric. The second kind is much more suited to looking at a large screen in front of you in my opinion. My doctor refers to them as separate types maybe because I wear both that would just get confusing.

You don’t need a degree in optometry to wear eyeglasses and know what they are As I understand it multifocal and progressive lenses are two different things. Progressive lenses are like bifocals without the etched horizontal line between the two or three lens types which are arranged horizontally. Multifocals are contact lenses or even implanted lenses with multiple concentric zones in the same lens. I’m not aware of multifocal eyeglasses, perhaps the term is used interchangeably. Multifocal lenses are better for looking at a screen in front of you since the up close correction is across your whole field of vision instead of just along the bottom. Bifocals or progressives are not. Although if you find yourself tipping your head back like that chances are your screen is too close or your prescription isn’t right. Clearly that’s not ideal. But don’t ask me, ask your eye doctor!

I’m in the presbyopia club as well. I’ll bet the DCS player demographic hits squarely into this age group. When I found myself looking at the screen through the lower part of my progressive lenses I realized my old 32” monitor was too close and too small. That’s why a big screen set farther away is a life saver. And at that distance there’s less eye strain and you can just use the normal part of the lens. A prescription update was in order too. Progressive or bifocal lenses aren’t great for using a PC screen in front of you, they’re made for reading. If the screen is too close even a normal size one is going to mean tipping your head back like that. A better solution would be computer glasses which simply magnify everything instead of just the bottom. What I use most of the time are multifocal contact lenses which are fantastic. Those simply allow you to see near and far at the same time across the whole field, not just the bottom. In my experience contacts also provide much better vision than eyeglasses.

I know I’m just saying this for comparison. Can you see these targets you mentioned using a screen?

I wonder what the culprit is here. The headset in question has basically the same resolution as a 4K monitor 2,000x4,000. Perhaps the trouble is in the upscaling. I thought the system was supposed to take that into account but it looks like it’s not. What happens if you run the headset at its native res? Arguably you’d see the same thing as a monitor player sees. PS reading that post again it seems indeed like upscaling is causing the problem. And the trouble with putting the same dot into VR as on a monitor is that it appears gigantic like in the Kermit video, I trust that’s the early version.

I’m using a 4K monitor, specs below.

Definitely something wrong there. Realize the dots are in fact just dots and at that range the 3D model would be bigger than the dots. I can see other aircraft very well miles away and I’m seeing a model, not a dot. I can see small missiles like Mavs flying to their targets. Dots have another issue which is afaik they’re just black. I don’t think light colored dots appear over dark backgrounds, how could they? The ocean is especially good at contrasting light colored aircraft in front of it or that AGM-65.

My experience with OLED burn-in. I’ve used the LG monitor below for three years, continually all day in my home office as well as gaming. No sign of trouble at all especially things like the Windows task bar along the bottom show no signs of image retention. I do of course have all the screen protection features such as pixel shifting and cleaning. Truth is any technology that isn’t backlit like an LCD has the potential for burn-in CRTs, plasma and so on. It’s a fantastic display so the risk is worth the reward IMO

I’d like to see a picture of what you think a big screen simpit should look like…

His windscreen

Someone should tell airplane designers that the windscreen should be down around the knees Tell this guy is screen is too high! Dude you just live in your own world and we’ll live in ours.

Show me someone with a monitor mounted like that

And you’d have to be stupid to mount a 48” 16:9 screen the way you’re reccomending

I wish I could say that was mine but I just searched for an example of a big screen sim rig which showed the height clearly. Sim players are generally out to replicate “cockpits” even if they aren’t as elaborate as the example above. Sometimes that means having screens that emulate real world view properties, not computer workstations.

You’re talking about standards for computer workstations that use common size smallish monitors. Lots of people with bigger screens are set up more like this. Are you telling us that the top of these screens should be at eye level?

Not workable with a 48” screen. If you’ve never seen one, just cut out a piece of cardboard that’s 24”x 42” and set the top of it where you’re recommending. The bottom of the screen will be at your knee level. Pretty awkward if you ask me, I doubt anyone has their setup like that.

A 48” monitor is 24” high. If the top of the screen is at your eye level, where’s the bottom? At your knees.