metalnwood Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 I have been what you would call a real HT nut. I probably threw $80k at it before I needed to reclaim the space and had to say goodbye to it. Wouldnt it be nice if that gear kept more of its value! I had 100% light control and used various screens matched to projectors, an expensive exercise in itself. $2500 is darn god these days, it was more around $20k 10 years ago when I started getting more hardcore about it. Anyway, the point was that a lot of people seem to think projectors are better than TV's for games. Sure, the projector will look good, as much as anything it's because of the size of the picture but when you say that the resolution of a tv wont be any good on a 42" screen you have to realise that it's pixel density is much, much greater than a projector and it will look a lot better. Sorry if I read your quote wrong but i looked like you were saying you would go the route of a projector if you had the room and that seemed contradictory to saying TV's dont have enough resolution for the size of the picture.
metalnwood Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 Those are 2560x1080, very wide. 3 of those in portrait will provide 3240x2560. The problem with these is that the 1080 pixels width (in portrait) is too narrow, it is like you look at the world through a narrow window. You can easily try/test with a normal 1920x1080 monitor in portrait mode because it has the same 1080 pixels width. The difference between 1440 and 1080 is significant for this purpose in my opinion. Of course you can do 3 x 1920x1080 in landscape if you want, which is much more cost effective than the higher resolution monitors. As in everything we should always think about value for our money and what the objective is. While I am on it though.. :) Another misconception that sometimes comes up is that the resolution of the screen has something to do with the FOV. I.e. you say that the FOV will be greater with the 1440 monitor than the 1080 monitor. It doesnt have anything to do with resolution of the monitor but the size. For two 27" monitors 16:9, one having 2560x1440 and the other 1920x1080 in portrait mode, they will have the same FOV for a person sitting at the same distance. The higher resolution screen will show a bit more detail but cannot show more FOV.
Sorin Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 metalnwood I would still do 4 projectors for gaming and end up with a zero bezels, 3840x2160 quality image on a 106" screen. The problem is that I have no room to ceiling mount them properly. The only compelling argument for projectors is zero bezels. Anyway, I am happy so far with my 5 monitors and thick bezels. Real cockpits have a lot of obstruction, unless you are in a F22 Raptor :) 3 TVs are good for gaming, but only quality TVs. And when you do that the TVs gets more more expensive than 3 higher resolution computer monitors. They do provide a bigger image but the resolution is much less. Which TVs would you pick for 3 screens gaming? I did not say anything about FOV in this thread. For our purposes here there are 2 geometry items that greatly influence our visual perception: image size and image resolution. Ideally they should be both as big as we can afford. Also they must be balanced, for example a smartphone screen of 4" and 1280x720 is just way too small despite having an amazing resolution for its size. Everyone should buy whatever they like but my money will always go for high resolution displays, not bigger displays. 1080p is just not cutting it anymore. The industry is gearing up for higher resolutions. 4K displays are coming and they are coming for a reason: Lots of pixels are good... I think we can agree on that. :beer:
Loz Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 (edited) for example a smartphone screen of 4" and 1280x720 is just way too small despite having an amazing resolution for its size.: Unless it was part of Oculus Rift, and DCS was optimized for it. LOL ;) Oops Duck as I get Subliminal's hopes worked up. :drink: Edited April 27, 2013 by Loz i9 9900x at 5.1 Ghz // ASUS ROG Maximus XI Formula EK Bloc // 64Gb Corsair Vengence 3600Mhz DDR4 Ram // Gigabyte Aorus 3090 Watercooled block//Samsung SM951 M2 x4 SSD // Windows 10 64 Bit //48inch LG48 @ 3840x2160 120Hz//Asus ROG Swift PG35VQ 3440 x 14440 144Hz // TM Warthog HOTAS (Ser. No. 00836) //MFG Crosswind Pedals // TrackIR 5 //Varjo Aero An old pilot is one who remembers when flying was dangerous and sex was safe. My YouTube DCS World Four Screen Videos
metalnwood Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 The problem with these is that the 1080 pixels width (in portrait) is too narrow, it is like you look at the world through a narrow window. You can easily try/test with a normal 1920x1080 monitor in portrait mode because it has the same 1080 pixels width. The difference between 1440 and 1080 is significant for this purpose in my opinion. I thought this quote was where you were referring to FOV. When you said put a screen that is 1080 on its side, it is too narrow but a screen that is 1440 wide would have a significant difference. Only if that screen was significantly bigger, not if it was the same size, e.g. 27" but only had more pixels. It would not seem less 'narrow'. If you were not referring to FOV when looking 'at the world through a narrow window' I dont know what you were meaning. A TV I have seen measured as an example is the LG 42LD450. Should be under 500 pounds in the UK and has its actual lag measured less than the panasonic AE4000 projector and about the same as some monitors made from dell, eizo - within 1ms. If anyone was serious about tv's I would invest in this http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=89&products_id=212 That way you can try the tv's/ projectors before you buy and see if it will give you problems.
Sorin Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 The distance to screen, the physical displayed image width, the horizontal resolution and the zoom define the image we see for our purposes (DCS sim). Just talking horizontal, but of course vertical matters as well. There are many other factors like display color capability, contrast, brightness, image flicker, latency, etc but we let's leave them out for now. Talking about horizontal FOV... there is physical FOV (given by viewing distance and screen image width) and simulator FOV (given by image horizontal resolution and zoom). At the same zoom the simulator FOV is smaller for a lower resolution screen and bigger for a higher resolution. Easy to test by running DCS on a laptop at 1280x800 (extreme example). In our discussion above the higher resolution 1440 pixels compared with 1080 will permit a higher FOV in the sim because of the zoom: just zoom out, see more and still see the details because the monitor can do it. On a low resolution display when we zoom out we loose details. That is because the details are becoming too small for the display to show them. For example no display can display something smaller than one of its pixels. IMHO for about the same money a 27" 2560x1440 monitor is better than a 42" TV 1920x1080 because one can see more details. Image quality is more important than image size. I do not have a 27" monitor but I have just compared my 30" Samsung 305T monitor (2560x1600) with my TV (1920x1080). There is no competition whatsoever, DCS looks much better on the monitor. I am pretty sure that all these can be proven mathematically but I have no time to delve into it, sorry. Fellow forum members that I know are more experienced than me please help.
metalnwood Posted April 27, 2013 Posted April 27, 2013 In our discussion above the higher resolution 1440 pixels compared with 1080 will permit a higher FOV in the sim because of the zoom: just zoom out, see more and still see the details because the monitor can do it. On a low resolution display when we zoom out we loose details. That is because the details are becoming too small for the display to show them. For example no display can display something smaller than one of its pixels. You are confusing resolution for FOV, they are not the same. Yes, a screen with a higher resolution will show more detail for any given FOV but it will not show a larger FOV. It's similar to modern digital cameras. If the sensor is the same size and they both have a 50mm lense then the photo they will take will have the same FOV, the sensor with more pixels will have more detail under scrutiny of the image but the FOV will not be any different. Also jsut because you have a higher number of pixels does not mean you want to zoom out. Lets say you put 30 degrees FOV on a 1080p 27" screen, you are not going to want to put more FOV on a 27" screen with more pixels because you are just fisheyeing your picture, there would be no practical advantage to it. IMHO for about the same money a 27" 2560x1440 monitor is better than a 42" TV 1920x1080 because one can see more details. Image quality is more important than image size. I do not have a 27" monitor but I have just compared my 30" Samsung 305T monitor (2560x1600) with my TV (1920x1080). There is no competition whatsoever, DCS looks much better on the monitor. I am pretty sure that all these can be proven mathematically but I have no time to delve into it, sorry. Fellow forum members that I know are more experienced than me please help. There is no doubt that it will look crisper on a 30" monitor with more pixels than on a TV. Will you see more detail, that is debatable, you are also on a much smaller screen which in turn is hiding that detail. Remember a 24" 1080p screen will also look just as crisp and clear as the 30" showing lots of detail. Put that exact same image on a 42" and you have no less detail but it is more life size and easier to see that detail. I never have to squint, look forward or zoom much in to the screen to see things that are on a smaller screen with the same resolution. Here are 3 42's, sorry, they are a bit bluury but that is because of the iphone trying to get focus , you can see the 23" touchscreen has bad focus too and would be very crisp. A small monitor is OK but when the OP has also asked about TV's I dont think they can be dismissed because nothing can beat the immersion other than a projector. There are not many other ways you will get your side views going down past your feet for a great outside view, especially cool on landings. You yourself have said you would go for projectors with less pixel density if you had the space so why tell the OP not to go for tv's with more pixel density?
Sorin Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 metalnwood, based on what you are saying the current high resolution monitors and the upcoming 4K TVs should not exist... but they do, for a reason. It is quite easy to make a big display but not easy at all to make a high resolution one that is also big. All the evolution of display technology so far points to the same direction: increase the resolution. I stick to my belief, based on my humble experience "for flight simulators resolution is more important than display size". Enough written, sorry, I will stop here. Thank you for helping, it was a good discussion. :beer:
metalnwood Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 I agree with you, for whatever sized screen more resolution is generally better. Not better only when the game doesnt have the horsepower to use the resolution and you get a slideshow. My only point of contention is that resolution has nothing to do with the field of view you get on your monitor. to say as you did that 'In our discussion above the higher resolution 1440 pixels compared with 1080 will permit a higher FOV in the sim because of the zoom' Is not correct. I agree more resolution can be better, I dont agree with the other stuff.
SkateZilla Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 for example a smartphone screen of 4" and 1280x720 is just way too small despite having an amazing resolution for its size. Have you used Oculus Rift yet?, cuz the only problem i had w/ DCS was the Dot Pitch of the Dev Kit units making text blurry, everything else worked fine, You're looking at a screen through a lens, which makes it seem like it's alot bigger than it really is. the Retail units will not use the same screens as the Dev Kits. just sayin' Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2), ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9) 3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs
jay43 Posted April 28, 2013 Author Posted April 28, 2013 Hijackers LOL. Ok guys so gotta get a new card but what to do as the Gainward GTX 570 Phantom II is nolonger available new. I have found some used ones should i trust them or not i'm thinking not but on the fence. Or would i be better to just bite the bullet and get the 680, 690, or summit else. Eagles may soar high but weasel's don't get sucked into jet engines. System Spec. Monitors: Samsung 570DX & Rift CV1 Mobo: MSI Godlike gaming X-99A CPU: Intel i7 5930K @ 3.50Ghz RAM: 32gb GPU: EVGA Nvidia GTX 980Ti VR Ready Cooling: Predator 360 Power Supply: OCZ ZX Series 80 Plus Gold Drives: Samsung SSD's 1tb, 500g plus others with OS Win10 64 bit
metalnwood Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 If you want to go three screens then you need a 600 series card or higher from memory, they are the only ones supporting 3 screens off a single card. Otherwise the ati cards support eyefinity for most models now sold. Ps, not trying to hijack your thread but keep your options alive if you had contemplated tv's I didn't see the need to disregard that option after ones guys post. Many people around here are running them.
Sorin Posted April 28, 2013 Posted April 28, 2013 Have you used Oculus Rift yet?, cuz the only problem i had w/ DCS was the Dot Pitch of the Dev Kit units making text blurry, everything else worked fine, You're looking at a screen through a lens, which makes it seem like it's alot bigger than it really is. the Retail units will not use the same screens as the Dev Kits. just sayin' Yes, Oculus Rift is the future. The moment they provide a 1920x1080 display I will buy one, even if it will cost $1000 instead of the planed $300 for the current OR (1280x800). A Head Mounted Display like OR with proper head tracking and resolution is the best solution because it provides total immersion. Just looking around naturally and seeing the virtual world proportional with the head movement beats TrackIR and any current display solution in the same price range.
Recommended Posts