View Full Version : New Resolution for Flight-Sim

12-03-2008, 04:13 PM
I was playing around with some rez some time ago and to make it as i feel in Real..
Lets see about screen sizes or resolutions for il2.. wider ? or higher? for combat under il2? I find myself surprisingly pleased flying with a complete different format. Just thinking out of the box here.


or a bit less



Well now thinking about it just imagine 3 screens wide format but all turned side ways, If someone would like to test it please write your founding and pics.. I'm extremely interested

Flying with a same range of wide resolution ( hard to make it wider some how ) but enlarging the height ( not too much )it does add to me a realism that i feel in real cockpits..

It's a new way to fly that i found very pleasing.. to a point that maybe they should be incorporated .. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway guys please post your tests since i cannot do this here at home..

Thank again.

12-03-2008, 04:39 PM
Hmm, I may turn my 24" widescreen on it's ear and try it that way, with trackIR it may be better, lol.

12-03-2008, 04:43 PM
With Track ir .. ofcourse.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

12-03-2008, 05:10 PM
Very interesting concept Gozr.

The more I think about it, the more it would seem to work as the more unnatural movement is looking down versus side to side.

The missing piece of "vertical" cockpit seems more profoundly different from reality....

Looking down is a function performed more with eyeballs than head movement.



12-03-2008, 06:37 PM
Interesting concept though I would find it very unnatural.
The human eye's vision is like an oval, longer in the horizontal plain than vertical.
This is one reason why widescreen monitors came out though alot had to do with movies being orientated this way and old tv's would get the VHS tapes "reformatted" to fit the screen. But there is a reason they took the movie film format instead of the more square tv format, it is more natural.
There are a few imax theatres shapped like this, a large oval and they are designed to ingulf most or all of the viewers vision. Still it's good to see people try new things and think outside the box. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

12-03-2008, 08:03 PM
I've always thought that the extreme panorama view that people set up when using three monitors was way too limited in the vertical demension!

Three 24 inch monitors rotated, and then set up with a TripleHead2Go or something would be SWEET!!

TX-ScubaSteve has three monitors set up - maybe we could convince him to try it!!

Maybe someday when I can afford two more monitors, and another video card to SLI, then I'll do it!

12-03-2008, 09:09 PM
I just got a Samsung 19" flatscreen that rotates so it's 1440x900 one way or 900x1440 the other.

Out of the box, yes, be able to see the instruments and still in front of the plane without head move, nice.
Now if I could set three of these up side by side using triple-head type device... 2700x1440 possible?
Of course if I could afford to is another matter.

12-03-2008, 09:13 PM

M_Gunz yes the 3 Flat panels are the key.. for the resolution i don't know yet

In the config.ini there are those lines on the top:

width=1024 << Play with this
height=1280 << play with this
FullScreen=0 <<
EnableResize=1<< able to drag your IL2 window in any way you want ( same as my desktop above ).
SaveAspect=0 <<

If you resize manually, those numbers will change at the exact resolution you left the IL2 window at.

12-03-2008, 10:47 PM
Good idea, TheGozr.

Those without TIR would find this usefull coz when in a DF one does have this problem with the other a/c moving above the top frame... this way you can still keep track of it without moving your view.
For the horizontal view.. it's the same usual story, so in effect this would be an advantage to the player.

12-04-2008, 12:34 AM
Gozr do you mind sharing your Nvidia settings please? The CP settings and the IL2 settings? I remember in that Nvidia frustration thread you had some incredible FRs.. So how bout it.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

12-04-2008, 02:08 AM
Originally posted by TheGozr:

M_Gunz yes the 3 Flat panels are the key.. for the resolution i don't know yet

Best suggestion is Full Screen at native pixels, the panel resolution. It's not as tight
as good monitor color mask and why run windowed, doesn't that draw frames?

The Matrox thing takes one big picture from the PC and breaks it into 3 screens.

The biggest of the Samsung BWX line is a 22" at 1050x1680 in portrait mode. (http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/detail/spec.do?group=computersperipherals&type=monitors&subtype=lcd&model_cd=LS22MYKRFV/XAA&fullspec=F)

I looked for software including MagicRotation, the 24" does not have it.
That's the software that rotates the screen image, it don't know if it might work on any
other hardware than Samsung BWX series monitors.
If it could run on a projection monitor then 3 short-throw projectors mounted sideways
onto 3 tilted walls might be kickas-.

I modify from above to make suggestion using rotated panel only:

width=900 << the best the panel will do, native pixels of the hardware
height=1440 << these are for my 19", the 22" is 1050x1680
FullScreen=1 <<
EnableResize=1<< to use every last screen pixel for 3D image
SaveAspect=0 <<

If you resize manually, those numbers will change at the exact resolution you left the IL2 window at.

Run windowed and don't you get a window frame with that?
It's good to show what the idea looks like on a wide format screen, yes, but I don't have that limit.
900 pixels is very narrow slot to view world from. The front panel may be wider than the view, sides for sure.
EDIT: or look really grainy, like 800x600 grainy, like soooo 10 years ago, LOL!
22" LCD offers 1050x1680 in portrait... 3150x1680 only mar is the frame bars of the panels be WAY overmodeled!

12-04-2008, 02:35 AM
I run it windowed to test because i have a CRT ( as shown in the pic above ), I made the suggestion and i would like to see what you guys with wide screens can do on native res side ways.
I'm not worry for the PFS for me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I run already a high res on my screen so the windowed il2 is quite already high http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
This is a great thread i'm happy to see some of you starting to think about this and coming with infos.

Edited .. here the 1050x1680 format on the left.


12-04-2008, 04:34 AM
Funny coincidence. I was messing with the same thing last night...


12-04-2008, 04:39 AM
Interesting experiments. Some time ago I experimented by connecting my LCD widescreen TV to my PC and playing IL2 with TIR. I reached two conclusions:

1. Bigger IS better. The more of your field of view is taken up by a screen, the more immersion. There is no immediate need for higher resolutions when using a bigger monitor; just increasing the size gives a better experience.

2. With TIR I don't really need a widescreen monitor. It felt as if I missed a bit on top. I know 16:9 should be better because it's more compatible with the natural viewing aspect ratio but if you want to move your head in all directions the 4:3 seems to fit much better....

So basically I'd rather have a huge 4:3 monitor than a 16:9 one when it comes to FLIGHT sims. I also tried racing sims and there the widescreen is superb!

12-04-2008, 05:02 AM
The picture on the left when I rt-click and save-as from your top post is 618x820, a far cry from 1050x1680.
Perhaps the image on the right side? That looks more like 1050x1680 on about 2000x1680 screen resolution.

You're still running at res my LCD can't touch. Native pixels of that is 1440x900 in wide mode.
No video card can make it better than 1440x900 but that can turn 90 deg to 900x1440 at best.

It's just really wide and easier on the eyes once adjusted, 8000:1 bright and contrast at 50% default is pretty bright.
It's not an amazingly sharp picture from real close. It's like someone added enough height and width to a 17" monitor
running 1024x768 to bring it to 1440x900 same sized pixels, the same level of grain only wider and taller as opposed to
the same size screen with more and more pixels to some limit of video card or monitor.

You are able to generate the view as a picture just fine, the subjective view is at the screen only.
My pic would look the same as yours to you as far as cockpit interior detail level.

12-04-2008, 03:32 PM
Well here a test.. Actually you don't need wide screens just get regular flat panels 1024x1280.


This is 3 shots of 1024x1280 ( not 1280x1024 ) side by side

Non wide offer a better sight no weird effects actually http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

12-04-2008, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Gozr do you mind sharing your Nvidia settings please? The CP settings and the IL2 settings? I remember in that Nvidia frustration thread you had some incredible FRs.. So how bout it.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

How bout it Gozr? You do use an Nvidia setup as far as GPU correct? Can you enlighten us ... every screenshot I see that you post looks stellar IMO http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif .. How do you do it?

12-04-2008, 04:50 PM
Don't tell up Gozr! First ask them to "show me the money" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

12-04-2008, 05:04 PM
I have a 17" Samsung SyncMaster 740B.
This monitor has a tilt-screen (90 degrees rotation landscape-portrait). Native res is 1280x1024 (or 1024x1280). I've doodled around flying in Portrait mode.
Some conclusions:
DO NOT use "Magic Rotate" from Samsung.
It will not work.

All that "Magic" stuff is a real dud IMHO. You're better off without.

JUST use the standard video driver.
I have an ATI X1950.
I use Ray Adam's ATI Tray Tools.
To rotate the screen I use an assigned pair of hot keys to switch Landscape - Portrait.
Wen flying in portrait mode the vertical FOV does get increased. I miss the horizontal view however. I prefer the normal 4:3 aspect, even though that has less vertical FOV. Flying in portrait mode has a cmplete different feeling.

The frame rate is the same. Portrait or Landscape.

12-04-2008, 05:40 PM
I don't see anything so special. Here's mine.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


12-06-2008, 11:45 AM
Yes Bearcat99 IL2, BOB, FSX, Lockon, Black-Shark I have a higher frame rate than most with a high quality, This requier a lots of adjustment from driver to hardware, bandwith etc . I tried long ago to explain ( which I'm bad at ) but sparked Arguments and I'm tired of the arguments with Airplanes, hardware, setups etc.. So i just do for myself.