WhiteShadow
Sorry I meant bezel peeking shortcut.
One camera picture res. 5760x108 and one with res. 6000x1080 (bezle corrected V1&V2 = 120) would be nice
TechAde
I wouldn't pay any attention to what you see when you hit the bezel peeking shortcut, I'd expect that to look squashed. Rather than discarding the pixels behind the bezels pressing bezel peek makes them visible, by squashing up the 'visible' 1920 width so that it includes what's behind the bezels.
What matters is what you see on the centre monitor with a bezel corrected resolution selected in rF2 compared with when you have a non-bezel corrected resolution selected in rF2. They should be identical. The outer monitors will be slightly different, as the bezel corrected resolution has the side monitors accurately aligned, whereas when not running bezel correction the view on the side monitors will actually be angled in a touch more than it should (unless your physical monitors don't actually have any bezels!).
What matters is what you see on the centre monitor with a bezel corrected resolution selected in rF2 compared with when you have a non-bezel corrected resolution selected in rF2. They should be identical. The outer monitors will be slightly different, as the bezel corrected resolution has the side monitors accurately aligned, whereas when not running bezel correction the view on the side monitors will actually be angled in a touch more than it should (unless your physical monitors don't actually have any bezels!).
WhiteShadow
TechAde
You're talking about hitting Ctrl-Alt-S with rF2 running? Ctrl-Alt-S is enable/disable Surround, whereas you're actually talking about bezel peeking (Ctrl-Alt-B). Hence, lots of confusion!
WhiteShadow
Lol, that makes my claim stronger
Center monitor, yes. Can you confirm this to me please? (Racing engineer or some other object)
PS. Use CTRL+ ALT+ B
Last edited:
Spinelli
For the 50th time; can you please quit the whole keyboard shortcuts stuff? CTRL-ALT-B/X/A/S/5/8/ whatever. You're screwing up the image as you're using bezel peek or just disabling surround all together even though RFactor is still running at it's original set resolution. Why are you obsessed with this keyboard shortcut thing? Can you just please do what we're saying and forget it? You're screwing up the image with the keyboard shortcuts. It's like me sitting on top of a pillow and then asking why it's so much thinner than before. Are you not able to understand that (serious question, not trying to offend you, I'm seriously wondering if you're not able to understand that)?...
Again, read post #330. One test with GPU and RF BOTH set to 5760x1080, quit game, set GPU and RF BOTH to 6000x1080 (bzl crrctn from GPU) and test again, and DON'T press any keyboard shortcuts in any test, NOT the first one (5760x1080), NOT the second one (6000x1080), NONE. There, done, simple as that. Why can you not just do that and get it over with? The answer is right there for you to see.
Again, read post #330. One test with GPU and RF BOTH set to 5760x1080, quit game, set GPU and RF BOTH to 6000x1080 (bzl crrctn from GPU) and test again, and DON'T press any keyboard shortcuts in any test, NOT the first one (5760x1080), NOT the second one (6000x1080), NONE. There, done, simple as that. Why can you not just do that and get it over with? The answer is right there for you to see.
Last edited:
TechAde
I have no idea how.Lol, that makes my claim stronger
Center monitor, yes. Can you confirm this to me please? (Racing engineer or some other object)
PS. Use CTRL+ ALT+ B
I've already explained what bezel peeking does. Bezel peeking intentionally squashes the image, what else would you expect it to do other than change the width of everything on screen?
Please, you keep going on that something is wrong because when you hit the bezel peeking shortcut things on-screen get squashed. That's what is meant to happen!
WhiteShadow
If you look my pictures there are actually also two pictures where no shortcuts are used.One with rFactor2 Video setup res. 5760x1080 and one with rFactor2 Video setup res 6000x1080. Why does those two pictures look like they do?
My English is bad but I think that my brain is able understand what I can see and not see.
WhiteShadow
This is what I have tried to explain. 24" Samsung triples with 2mm bezels res. 5760x1080 (recommended) don`t have same real life view as 24" LG triples with 40mm. bezels res. 6000x1080 (bezel corrected). Right?
Last edited:
WhiteShadow
"WhiteShadow, I dont see any stretching. I tried what you said."
Euskotracks
Please ISI stop this. I don't think whiteshadow wants to really solve anything here. It is pretty clear that he is doing things as he wants and doesn't want to hear three people already proving him he is doing something wrong.
TechAde
I don't understand the question, what do you mean by "real life view"?
WhiteShadow
What I see in real life (monitors) when I am playing.
TechAde
No, what you see "in real life" won't be the same, you're running rF2 in two different resolutions and aspect ratios. The bezel corrected resolution will have the correct horizontal field of view, the non-bezel corrected resolution won't. Nothing will be squashed, it's just the total horizontal field of view will be different (by the amount of bezel compensation).
WhiteShadow
WhiteShadow
Really, look answer from TeachAde.
Euskotracks
I suggest you read it again. I just read NOTHING WILL BE SQUASHED.
Spinelli
OK we can end this all right now...
I have done ACTUAL precise measurements.
Graphics card and game both set to 5760x1080
Length of pit-out board direction arrow (cockpit view, FOV 27) - 4.2 cm
Length of text on the back of car (third person "chase" view, much higher FOV) - 9.6 cm
Graphics card and game both set to 6000x1080 (achieved by GPU bezel correction [bzl crrctn value of 120])
Length of pit-out board direction arrow (cockpit view, FOV 27) - 4.2 cm
Length of text on the back of car (third person "chase" view, much higher FOV) - 9.6 cm
No difference. No distortion. Case closed. Enough with all the misleading/false information about ISI's multiview which - although doesn't have as many "convenient" in-game setup options as some other sims - is still fully and easily capable of rendering a just as good/"perfect" image, and - if I may add - regardless of whether you use (e.g.,) 15" 4:3 monitors , 34" 21:9 monitors, or 60" 16:9 televisions.
With that being said, you clearly have some issues on your end, WhiteShadow, and me and many around here would be more than happy to help you. Maybe start a new thread if you wouldn't mind?
I have done ACTUAL precise measurements.
Graphics card and game both set to 5760x1080
Length of pit-out board direction arrow (cockpit view, FOV 27) - 4.2 cm
Length of text on the back of car (third person "chase" view, much higher FOV) - 9.6 cm
Graphics card and game both set to 6000x1080 (achieved by GPU bezel correction [bzl crrctn value of 120])
Length of pit-out board direction arrow (cockpit view, FOV 27) - 4.2 cm
Length of text on the back of car (third person "chase" view, much higher FOV) - 9.6 cm
No difference. No distortion. Case closed. Enough with all the misleading/false information about ISI's multiview which - although doesn't have as many "convenient" in-game setup options as some other sims - is still fully and easily capable of rendering a just as good/"perfect" image, and - if I may add - regardless of whether you use (e.g.,) 15" 4:3 monitors , 34" 21:9 monitors, or 60" 16:9 televisions.
With that being said, you clearly have some issues on your end, WhiteShadow, and me and many around here would be more than happy to help you. Maybe start a new thread if you wouldn't mind?
Last edited:
Euskotracks
thanks spinelli
TechAde
Thank you
Case closed and solved.
Are you sure?
Let me expand that previous answer...
The view on the outer monitors will be slightly different between the bezel corrected and non-bezel corrected configurations. This is because without bezel correction enabled rF2 renders the view with no break between the monitors, yet when viewed in the physical world there will be a gap between the monitors. This means the output from rF2 is having gaps inserted into it in the physical world. This throws the horizontal field of view off slightly, but it should only affect the outer screens - the view on the centre screen should be identical. With 2mm bezels we're talking a tiny amount of difference on the outer screens.
In theory bezel correction should fix this entirely as rF2 is rendering the full width of the display, gaps between monitors included. They're just stripped out of the final image by the video driver.
I'm not going to have time to get the camera & tripod out to confirm the centre views are identical for a couple of days (I've done it with screen shots but as you say that's not quite the same).
In summary:
Yes, the view on a 6000x1080 bezel corrected display and a 5760x1080 non-bezel corrected display will be different, but only on the side monitors. The view on the centre monitor should be identical.
And edit:
Which Spinelli appears to have confirmed, thanks!
So, that still leaves WhiteShadow with a quandary, if I understand correctly, in that the view on his centre monitor is different when running bezel corrected to when running without bezel correction. As Spinelli suggests maybe a new thread would be sensible to get to the bottom of that?
Spinelli
No need to, TechAde. Check out post #379 (2 previous to yours).
ZeosPantera
I still just want to see Shadows entire triplehead in pictures. Forget the macro closeups with MM tape on it.
Back the hell up and lets see what happens across all three screens!
Back the hell up and lets see what happens across all three screens!
WhiteShadow
yes unfortunately it still leaves me a quandary and my centre monitor is different when running bezel corrected to when running without bezel correction. When I took my camera pictures I took also pictures from the right monitor the left and the righ side bezel.
No shortcuts is used. Pictures are res. 5760x1080 and 6000x1080
1.Res. 5760x1080 Right monitor the right bezel
2. Res. 6000x1080 Right monitor the right bezel
Picture 1 and 2 from my right monitor the right side bezel. From my pictures you can see that the image Moves from right bezel 4 mm towards the center in my right monitor.
3. Res. 5760x1080 Right monitort the center bezel (Left bezel)
4.Res. 6000x1080 Right monitort the center bezel (Left bezel)
Picture 3 and 4 is from my right monitor the center bezel (Left bezel). From my pictures you can see that the image Moves from right bezel 4 mm towards the center in my right monitor and the edge of the second railing moves towards the center about 20 mm and disappear behind the bezel.
5.Res. 5760x1080 Center monitor
6. Res. 6000x1080 Center monitor
Picture 5 and 6 is from my center monitor. From my pictures you can see that railing is moving and it is 4 mm wider with res. 6000x1080.
What you can not see from my pictures is that the center monitor image also has movment towards to the left 20 mm. and towards to the right 20mm.
What I can see is that with res. 6000x1080 image is moving from the left and the right towards the center and center image is wider and moving towards to the left and to the right.
Last edited:
TechAde
Are those with MultiView on?
Does the same thing happen with MultiView turned off?
Please can we see an in-game screen shot (F12) of the same scene in each resolution?
Does the same thing happen with MultiView turned off?
Please can we see an in-game screen shot (F12) of the same scene in each resolution?
WhiteShadow
Yes multiview is on. I do not know I never race multiview off.
I take screenshots and post them soon.
WhiteShadow
No shortcuts are used. Screenshots F12, Multiview on and off. Fov 19
5760x1080 Multiview on
View attachment 16880
6000x1080 Multiview on
View attachment 16881
5760x1080 Multiview off
View attachment 16882
6000x1080 Multiview off
View attachment 16883
5760x1080 Multiview on
View attachment 16880
6000x1080 Multiview on
View attachment 16881
5760x1080 Multiview off
View attachment 16882
6000x1080 Multiview off
View attachment 16883
Lazza
Why did you resize the images?
*Or maybe the forum did? At first glance I think they look ok, but there's a 'zoom effect' happening because they're all 1920 wide, so the height is changing...
*Or maybe the forum did? At first glance I think they look ok, but there's a 'zoom effect' happening because they're all 1920 wide, so the height is changing...
WhiteShadow
Screenshots are uploaded from my computer, Camera pictures from the web, TinyPic.
TechAde
Everything looks spot on with those screen shots, once they've been resized correctly.
The pit guy does move a little between shots so he's not the best thing to measure against. Everything else is perfectly static in the centre view with MultiView on (and the entire view with MultiView off).
The pit guy does move a little between shots so he's not the best thing to measure against. Everything else is perfectly static in the centre view with MultiView on (and the entire view with MultiView off).
Euskotracks
And finally... can you take a picture with your tape from your center monitors when using first the first two configurations? According to what techade has explained they should be the same. He is telling you not use bezel peeking because it actually stretches the image. set your bezel size of 120/0in your card configuration and don't activate bezel peeking it in between changing the configurations.
WhiteShadow
My camera pictures res. 5760x1080 are with no bezel peeking Nvidia Surround V1&V2 = 0 res.5760x1080.
WhiteShadow
Why are my camera pictures so different from screenshots ?
What about this post https://community.racesimcentral.ne...r-FOV-Tutorial?p=361341&viewfull=1#post361341 why are res.5760x1080 and 6000x1080 measurements the same ?
WhiteShadow
Hmm, I see he is talking about length . Of course length has same measurement when you are 100% lined and the resolution of the height is unchanged with res. 5760 and 6000. I just can not understand how that makes ISI multiview perfect. When you are playing the game and you are entering the corner you are not 100% lined. You are looking in to that corner from a angle. When wide is as in my pictures 5760 vs 6000. Bezel corrected res. 6000 image of the corner looks much more sharp (short) then res.5760.
Last edited:
Lazza
Don't know about anyone else, but I half expected your raw screenshots to be wrong somehow. It appears your screenshots are correct (I'm trusting TechAde here, I only gave them a cursory glance and didn't try to match the sizes) which leaves a big question mark on why your two tests, with 5760x 'normal' and 6000x bezel-corrected, are giving different results in your centre screen. The inward-shift of the side screens is as expected for bezel correction, but the centre screen shouldn't be changing at all.
He was measuring objects across the screen to show there's no stretching, which is how it should be. I've got no idea why you're getting something different.
I'm reluctant to get into where you're looking at screens from when cornering, etc. That sort of stuff is even harder to describe without many diagrams and we've struggled enough just with bezel correction.
*I will say that multiview and bezel correction combined will probably move the 'centre' of the side screens (that is, the part that your eyes should be perpendicular to) slightly off-centre, because of where the individual multiview images are drawn and how bezel correction slices the image. But it's only slight, and I can already feel many diagrams are required...
Spinelli
RF multiview works perfect in terms of the rendered image. If, on the other hand, you have your own system-specific issues then it would be nice and appreciated if you could consider creating a new thread for us to help you in - at-least out of respect for this thread which has gone quite off-topic for the past few days.
Euskotracks
Here is the comparison of the two screenshots scaled to their real sizes. 6000 and 5760 both x 1980.
Center images are exactly the same. The pitman is some pixels lateral offset between both but exactly the same size in height and width.
View attachment 16887
What I don't understand is how it renders in your monitors since I don't know how the driver should be configured to eliminate bezels.
IMO your problem is there. Techade and spinelli seem to be getting it right so I guess they could help you via Team Viewer maybe!
Center images are exactly the same. The pitman is some pixels lateral offset between both but exactly the same size in height and width.
View attachment 16887
What I don't understand is how it renders in your monitors since I don't know how the driver should be configured to eliminate bezels.
IMO your problem is there. Techade and spinelli seem to be getting it right so I guess they could help you via Team Viewer maybe!
WhiteShadow
Yes it looks like there is something wrong with bezel peeking. The problem is that I have two PC`s with triples and they both and they both are like. I can also see that Coops have same problem as I do.
I have send mail to Nvidia support and to Microsoft with pictures sys. info etc. We wait and see what happen. I let you know when I get the answer
I have send mail to Nvidia support and to Microsoft with pictures sys. info etc. We wait and see what happen. I let you know when I get the answer
Lazza
I thought we'd got past bezel peeking? Oh well... let us know if you find anything.
Well this being an FOV thread, and FOV and screen placement being important for multiscreen... I'll drag this half back on topic. Think this got lost in the ensuing debate:
Well the issue is when using multi-view the in-game cameras are fixed at 45° away from the origin point. Which is seen in old comparison shots of rF1
They bend at a fixed angle which is hard to tell because that gif also has a high FOV. I think our perception of that angle can be "fudged" by a few degrees either way as it is hard to get reference and 98.4% of the time the eyes seeing it are not dead center of the monitors or have perfectly straight items to judge against.
Thoughts?
Spinelli
I think the in-game cameras are always locked to 45 degrees because, if I recall correctly, ISI stated this in the RF1 patch release notes which first introduced multiview.
Therefore, what it seems like to me (a couple ppl said this is wrong though) is that as long as you use a perfect 1:1 FOV, your monitors should be at 45 degrees as well because your real-life world is identically mimicking exactly the rendered game-world and on an exact 1:1 scale/reproduction/representation from your exact POV. I mean, if the in-game outer cameras are exactly 45 degrees from the center camera, then how could your monitors possibly require anything different if you have everything set to a perfect 1:1 scale between real-life and game?
However, if you're not using a 1:1 FOV, then you have to adjust your monitor angles away (+ or -) from that "perfect" game-1:1 angle.
Therefore, what it seems like to me (a couple ppl said this is wrong though) is that as long as you use a perfect 1:1 FOV, your monitors should be at 45 degrees as well because your real-life world is identically mimicking exactly the rendered game-world and on an exact 1:1 scale/reproduction/representation from your exact POV. I mean, if the in-game outer cameras are exactly 45 degrees from the center camera, then how could your monitors possibly require anything different if you have everything set to a perfect 1:1 scale between real-life and game?
However, if you're not using a 1:1 FOV, then you have to adjust your monitor angles away (+ or -) from that "perfect" game-1:1 angle.
Last edited: