PDA

View Full Version : is the game representing reality wrong or is reality which is wrong

raaaid
04-21-2007, 10:36 AM
what you see in the game when you have a fov of 90º is the same you would see in a picture taken with that angle of view

in fact it is so realistic that if you stare at the center of the screen seeing the screen with an angle of 90º, equal to fov, you couldnt tell the difference from reality

but this arises a problem, one axiom in this reality is that what you see farther appears smaller

imagine you are flying low along a river upside down, you look to your zenith, in this case the nadir because you are upside down and in the screen you see 2 paralel lines that conform the river

apparently the wideness of the river remains constant however the distance because the lines are paralel but this is not true because the top and bottom part of the screen ar farther from our eyes than the center and again we know something farther looks smaller, seems like vision could be defined as a projection in a screen which is projected onto another screen and so on to infinity

but the oddity comes when we look at the river panning 45º up from the nadir

because the river in the screen would be a V

the bottom of the V would be the end of the river the middle of the V would be whats underneath our plane and the top of the V would be behind

now the question is how comes the top of the V is bigger than the middle of the V if the part that represents the top of the V is farther from us that the middle of the V which would be just underneath us and therefore closer

i think the answer to breaking the axiom of the farther the smaller it looks lays in which flat perspectives are different than spheric ones( an spheric would be seeing an spheric screen from its center)

we use spheric vision

but if i project a movie either in a flat screen or spherical one shouldnt i see exactly the same in both if my eyes are in the same place than the projector?

this really has me stuck

in the end all this to say i prefer cfs2 wider angle of view though any help would be appreciated

raaaid
04-21-2007, 10:36 AM
what you see in the game when you have a fov of 90º is the same you would see in a picture taken with that angle of view

in fact it is so realistic that if you stare at the center of the screen seeing the screen with an angle of 90º, equal to fov, you couldnt tell the difference from reality

but this arises a problem, one axiom in this reality is that what you see farther appears smaller

imagine you are flying low along a river upside down, you look to your zenith, in this case the nadir because you are upside down and in the screen you see 2 paralel lines that conform the river

apparently the wideness of the river remains constant however the distance because the lines are paralel but this is not true because the top and bottom part of the screen ar farther from our eyes than the center and again we know something farther looks smaller, seems like vision could be defined as a projection in a screen which is projected onto another screen and so on to infinity

but the oddity comes when we look at the river panning 45º up from the nadir

because the river in the screen would be a V

the bottom of the V would be the end of the river the middle of the V would be whats underneath our plane and the top of the V would be behind

now the question is how comes the top of the V is bigger than the middle of the V if the part that represents the top of the V is farther from us that the middle of the V which would be just underneath us and therefore closer

i think the answer to breaking the axiom of the farther the smaller it looks lays in which flat perspectives are different than spheric ones( an spheric would be seeing an spheric screen from its center)

we use spheric vision

but if i project a movie either in a flat screen or spherical one shouldnt i see exactly the same in both if my eyes are in the same place than the projector?

this really has me stuck

in the end all this to say i prefer cfs2 wider angle of view though any help would be appreciated

BoCfuss
04-21-2007, 10:40 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

DooDaH2007
04-21-2007, 10:47 AM
You can change the FOV in this game... Look in the in-game control options for the keys...

EDIT: ok, this is raaaid I am talking to...

leitmotiv
04-21-2007, 10:49 AM
Reality is clearly wrong and Oleg, much to our benefit, corrected it.

x6BL_Brando
04-21-2007, 12:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Reality is clearly wrong and Oleg, much to our benefit, corrected it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, and his was once a Communist country - and, as every one in the free world knows,..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Raaaid, you must be a bouncer's dream!

B

AKA_TAGERT
04-21-2007, 12:09 PM
Got Reality Track?

p-11.cAce
04-21-2007, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Reality is clearly wrong and Oleg, much to our benefit, corrected it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif see I knew you and I would agree eventually! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Raaaid for what its worth I think that we would see a "truer" view if we had spherical projection instead of flat - just like in an imax theater that uses a 180 degree image projector. The problem with spherical projection is that it only "works" from one specific position - namely with the viewers eyes centered in the focal point of the 180 degree screen (which is why I ALWAYS try to sit dead center at an IMAX). The problem as I see it is that you are still left with spherical abberations due to the fact that the projection is not in stereo, but originating from a single source. If images were projected onto a 180 degree screen in stereo would the spherical abberations lessen or disappear?

This is very clearer shown in the dome of St. Ignazio church in Rome.
From here it looks like a dome:
http://www.holidaycityflash.com/article%20pix/Ignazio.jpg

but its not - its an optical illusion - there is no dome at all (go renissance painters!)

leitmotiv
04-21-2007, 01:24 PM
Well done, p-11.cAce, lucid, clear, reasonable (everything I am not today!).

p-11.cAce
04-21-2007, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">lucid, clear, reasonable </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Don't get too used to it - rare qualities for me! I just forgot where I sat my Sapphire and tonic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

erco415
04-21-2007, 03:39 PM
Good to see you back Raaaid!

M_Gunz
04-21-2007, 03:39 PM
Still the same Raaaid.

Half his mind is lost and the other half is out looking for it.

major_setback
04-21-2007, 03:45 PM
There is more than one reality
There is more the one truth
There is only one game

MB_Avro_UK
04-21-2007, 04:05 PM
Hi all,

My recovery was going sooo well...but now I have a medical setback.

My green pills used to be so much better than the red ones but the blue pills seem so much more attractive having read this post....

I shall now turn the lights off, lie down and put Matron back into the freezer.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

leitmotiv
04-21-2007, 04:13 PM
I'm having the mother of all migraines and I have to drive to the drug store for a refill of Zomig: odds of a successful return from mission 5%, odds of making newspapers in major cities of the world 95%.

Old_Canuck
04-21-2007, 04:46 PM
Reality is vastly over-rated, Raaaid, but at least you've still got some virtual friends here in this pseudo-intellectual forum. Good to see you back.

Akronnick
04-21-2007, 10:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MB_Avro_UK:
Hi all,

My recovery was going sooo well...but now I have a medical setback.

My green pills used to be so much better than the red ones but the blue pills seem so much more attractive having read this post....

I shall now turn the lights off, lie down and put Matron back into the freezer.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Best Regards,
MB_Avro. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know what the red pill and the blue bill do but what does the green pill do, and are they anything like the "eat me" and "drink me" labels that make Alice big or small. And what about that rabbit, did he get to his appointment yet? And if you talk to Marla about what Tyler Durden is up to, will he go away?

Frankenstein000
04-21-2007, 11:10 PM
http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/merv/acid.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

F19_Ob
04-22-2007, 12:33 AM
Well, I've tried to understand and read about how the eye works and sees things, but also how the brain interprets the information.

The general problem with simulations is that the views are already processed before we see them, thus we can't have the widest field of view ( wich is about 50% too narrow) and the moost inzoomed view (with most correct perspective) at the same time, as we do in RL.

As you may have noticed screenshots taken with widest FoW looks warped and the plane appears to have too long wings.
However while ingame, and rotating the view, wide field of view appears almost natural. This is because of the motion and the fact that we process info about a 3-D object in realtime and even in a simulation the 3-D image is compensated for in the brain (to some extent).
Although the smallest FoW gives best perspective one may instinctively feel this FoW is to narrow.

Ingame this state of fact has some consequenses.
In a hunting- and attacking- situation it doesn't matter so much because the prey is centered in our wiew already.
The unsuspecting prey however has the visibility cut by about 50% wich makes it harder to be vigilant and to look around properly.
This causes us to fool ourselves to some extent because we have expectations of what we should see when we turn our head to the side or to the rear and when when we have performed these tasks we 'think' we have looked around properly, not realising the cut visibility.

Next time you have recorded a track watch it from cockpit and study how you track and look around and you will see what I mean.
One really see less than what one would expect in the real world but usually we are content with Few and small headmovements ingame and belive we really looked well around.

So really one more really wide FOW should be added with more 'wide-angle' effect to try to mimmick the natural FOW with periphery.
This would give a 'boubble-canopy' feeling.
(Actually in the 10 year old CombatflightSimulator'1' this type of FoW was present although a bit rudimentary.)
As expected it was so zoomed out that the instruments was too small to read (no problem really)but it also gave a bit better Fow upward wich ment that no excessive tracking was needed to keep track of an enemy.

Anyway I explained these effects in detail to several simulatorcompanies at the time but the lack of feedback made me loose interest and I keep most ideas to myself these days (silly I know but my stamina is gone).

raaaid
04-22-2007, 08:49 AM
what i mean can be seen in this picture:

http://www.ider.herts.ac.uk/school/courseware/graphics/...s/3pnt_buildings.gif (http://www.ider.herts.ac.uk/school/courseware/graphics/images/3pnt_buildings.gif)

notice how the top of the building the farthest part is the widest

Agamemnon22
04-22-2007, 02:17 PM
Going back to your original post, raaid, now that I understand it, you're assuming that with a 90 degree FOV, looking down 45 degrees that the middle of the image is what's underneath the plane. This isn't actually true, since you're not looking 90 degrees down. The closest point is the top of the V, and it is also the widest.

Divine-Wind
04-22-2007, 02:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Reality is clearly wrong and Oleg, much to our benefit, corrected it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

raaaid
04-22-2007, 03:00 PM

this is an example of 3 point perspectivee which the game would render if you look down the horizon

the 3 vanishing points would be north, east and nadir

the link provided explains that this distortion happens when the vanishing points are close( which happens with a wide fov)

this is the reason why we cant have a wider fov

as can be seen the top of the building(the top of the V) is farther than the viewer than its center but it appears bigger

so you cant render wide angles of view on flat perspective because of this distortion but this doesnt happen in cfs spheric projection so you can have wider angles of view with no problem

the oddity is that if you take a shoe box home made picture you can get fov of almost 180º and if you photograph with the right angle an skyscrapper you would still get this distortion, the same size appears bigger farther than closer

Platypus_1.JaVA
04-22-2007, 03:46 PM
It is good to have you here Raaaid. Making posts that make people think are good. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

WWSpinDry
04-22-2007, 03:52 PM
Reality isn't real.

Scharnhorst1943
04-22-2007, 05:23 PM
Let the man speak!!

Hear!!! Hear!!!

heywooood
04-22-2007, 05:50 PM
remember these words and remember them well...

..reality is all in your mind.

now, don't you feel better?

Akronnick
04-23-2007, 12:05 AM
Three point perspective is NOT an accurate rendering of reality.

In reality, the further an object is from your eye, the smaller it looks, no matter which direction it is in. In the three point perspective in your link, the vertical lines do not converge when they are above the horizon, which in reality, they do. In reallity, there are an INFINITE number of vanishing points, not just two or three or fifty.

Three point perspective is an APROXIMATE way to render a scene, but it is rife with distortions, as illustrated in the picture you linked to.

ploughman
04-23-2007, 03:28 AM
There was a story a year or so ago where top boffins had calculated that the chances of our 'reality' being a simulation running in a computer are substantially greater than the chances of our reality being real.

So, if this is just code I see before me...I want power-ups!

raaaid
04-23-2007, 05:45 AM
you are right akronick there are infinite vanishing points, took me a while to found out

a vanishing point is where paralel lines seem to converge and there are infinite directions

but this game as most has a photographic flat projection and it has a mistake

if you take a picture of a skyscrapper aiming to the horizont the lines of the skyscrapper that go from zenith to nadir are paralel

if you pan down the camera 1º from the horizon now the lines of the fotographed skyscrapper will cut in a far away down the bottom of the photograph vanishing nadir point and if you pan 1º up the horizon the lines will cut in the zenith vanishing point

so lets suppose you have panned 1º down the horizont

exagerating the skyscrapper looks like a V and the top which is the farthest part from you looks the biggest and as you just panned down 1º
the top of the skyscrapper fits in your wide angle picture

this oddity doesnt happen in a spheric projection

the skyscrapper would be two meridians of an sphere which you are looking from the center

the oddity now would be you would see the meridians perfectly straigth and at the same time cutting in two places the zenith and nadir

hell i think i will have some fun taking pictures of buildings with a shoebox camera

BSS_Goat
04-23-2007, 06:13 AM
All I have to say is .............YEAH Raaid is BACK!!

raaaid
04-23-2007, 07:19 AM
i kind of have an answer:

If you look at the V building picture from the right spot and measure with a sextant youll find out the bigger angle is the one at your height and the narrower the top of the V

so it represents accuratly reality so theres no reason to have a wider view as long as you look at the screen from the right position , no distortion at all

another view would be with 6dof input head position and render how a picture from that angle would look like

Ratsack
04-23-2007, 08:20 AM
It's all explained by the well known fact that the space-time continuum is not merely curved: it is actually bent.

Ratsack

MB_Avro_UK
04-23-2007, 05:11 PM
Time for a beer?

It's Beer o'clock... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v82/MB_Avro/glass.gif

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.