Setting up your rFactor FOV - Tutorial

ok I will. But of course I have another one, feel free to ignore the question if you want but I have to do it anyway. With multiview, can I can configure separately each monitor? Can I set a diferent FOV and a diferent camera so I try to adapt the line between the displays?
 
No, you can't but as I said, there's no need to "adapt" anything... just set your side monitors at specific angles in relation to center monitor and as long as all 3 monitors have the same size/dimensions, everything should line up nicely.
 
Here.. A quick Visual Comparison.

This is multi-view off.

Subviews_OFF.jpg


This is multi-view on.

Subviews_ON.jpg


Please note the FOV in these is much too high. The stretching wouldn't be as severe with a lower FOV.
 
ZeosPantera said:
I use to use 58 before I knew better. As for the driving experience this will improve a sim experience and piss off arcade racers.



But Tim. Do you lower it to perfect? If you have a triplehead(which you should) Then this tutorial is for you.



90-95? Are you insane?



I will have to check that out. It should only occur on cockpit forced servers. Most only force cockpit/hood.

Here's an official Race2Play event With me at my 20.5 cam edited FOV. (Note: This is a replay so the virtual mirrors do not show and I have my Look to apex edited higher then 100% in the PLR file)

Click to expand...

I like this idea... Will have to try that angle. This is a good tutorial as I'm always looking for anything to improve my experiences in simracing. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I just tried it with 31 degrees. This is the absolute "kick in the a**" addition this sim needed. I love it. Talk about reinventing the thing! It doesn't even look the same.
I tried a few test at various circuits with the DRM1.1 Capri. I first tried 20 degrees. That was a bit too close for me. I then tried 31. That proved to be the ideal view for me. It forces you to drive proper lines into corners. They seem to come up much faster as well. I need to try the modification to reduce the head bobble over rough curbs. I found I also needed to use my TrackIR to get a wider view of the exit point through decreasing radius corners. Here'a a few without TrackIR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXQqGs5etOs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8Scdfd_5nA
 
Last edited:
Nice vids, but keep in mind for this to not look really inhibiting for other people they need to view those fullscreen, and have a fairly equivalent setup to yours (screen size vs distance). Watching small youtube vids does low FOV no justice at all.
 
Seb Vettel had a helmet cam during free practice in Brazil this weekend. Worth a look.
 
PLAYLIFE said:
Seb Vettel had a helmet cam during free practice in Brazil this weekend. Worth a look.
Click to expand...

Found it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pQoIj0oJeU
And people complaining the cockpit vibration isn´t real. lol

Founf one with Rubens Barrichello but o think they put the cam in his ears:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eswaETH62Fg

One of lucas de Grassi with better quality but not real look (don´t know in english, seems "grande angular", fish eye how you call)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3DY7HIjXMc
 
ZeosPantera said:
This last one is how I feel whenever a sim or any game is set to a high fov. Like your looking into infinity directly ahead of you. Can't make out a thing!
Click to expand...

you right.
I´ll read all this topic later, with patience because english isn´t my mother language., it seems have good information provide by you and others to help me to set my home made cockpit.
If you could give some tips to help me I would be grateful
 
wow, I'm hugely impressed. I've been sim racing for more than 20 years (since indy500) and can't believe I completely overlooked this variable all decades long.

Many thanks for your thread, it already changed my simming experience. I don't think right now I'd go for setting as low as 20 but setting it lower than what looks a "default 60" already helps A LOT in the overall experience. I can't wait to drive some more.

It's impressive how this parameter completely changes the screen from a "game" to a simulator. And indeed the youtube videos do no justice to it.

Maybe I get used to lower values the rfactor limit of 35 would indeed become an issue. I'm signing below your statement (and request) that people should at least have the choice.
 
SLuisHamilton said:
And people complaining the cockpit vibration isn´t real. lol
Click to expand...

Oh its real alright, ive done a 4 day formula 1600 school, a season of formula ford 2000 (detuned, no roll bars, street tyres, like the academy racer), and a 2 day prototype looking 500+hp bmw engined beast test in Italy. The shaking is even worse in real life than in game.

I think what most people complain about is that in real life you can focus on a specific point/object even if your "world" is shaking, this is simulated sort of in iRacing where the car/cockpit bumps around rather than your view/helmut/world around you.

Maybe technically on paper thats the more realistic way to do it, but the rFactor way gives a wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more realistic feeling of how it is in real life, and then the headshake on top of that (which is although sort of faked and not really calculated based on anything excpet maybe speed) still gives a wayyyyyyyyyy more real feeling of how it is in real life.

Thats one of my problems with iRacing and even more so Netkar Pro, everything just feels sooooo smooth and calm and serene, its not like that though, you get beat up in the cockpit and everything is freaking vibrating liek crazy, and rFactor gives by far the best representation of this. I had a guy up my ass and I couldnt even read the big number on his nose in my mirror, i knew there was a number there because I know the cars, but I couldnt actually read it, and they were big stickers and his entire nose was taking up my mirror he was real close.
 
Last edited:
I thought id add its the same with the steering, too many people set theire ffb so low so that they can steer soooo smoothly and calmly. Its not like that, I remember in the ff2000, there was a corner where I would use the curb on the outside on entry to not only get a slightly wider line but the curbing was really abrasive, more so then the tarmac.

Well everytime I would be about to get on the curb I would have to get a real grip on the wheel and anticiapte the car trying to suddenly get sucked into the curb HARD, id have to really try to keep the car straight for that moment as the wheel tries to snap and turn into the curb.

If that happened nowadays people would just complain and say either the ffb in game is fake or they would turn their steering wheel ffb settings down, like as if they know it all lol.

Anyways sorry everyone I kinda got off topic, low FOV is good but everything seems to come at you slow, sometimes it seems like you are going at a constant speed rather than accelerating, hopefully getting triple screens will fix all that :)
 
Last edited:
I´m pretty happy with the way i´ve set things up atm (monitor position + ingame seat position + FOV) :)


 
You guys need to watch this video on FOV:

A low fov on a single monitor may be correct but is uncomfortable because it is a low fov. A high FOV on a single monitor is incorrect because it causes distortions at the edges of the screens but it is much more comfortable due to how the human eye works and focuses. You also don't usually notice the distortions as explained in that video due to the focal point, although it does cause problems with estimating distance when racing as evidence by the videos posted. If you play on a single monitor with 20 fov it would be like sitting in a car with a rectangle tube/box taped on your face so that you could only see straight ahead and would have to move you head to look around. If you play with a high FOV the game world itself is distorted but the FOV is more close to a real human eye.

This completely changes once you start adding additional screens. You can play at a lower, and more correct FOV, because the additional screens add to the field of view, even when the game is set to a low FOV. This way you can have it so that the game world is not distorted and it simulates the peripheral vision and fov of the human eye, which makes for a comfortable and more realistic experience.

Overall you cannot have an accurate view with a single monitor. It is not possible. You can get closer with three monitors and you could achieve accuracy with wrap around VR goggles or a 180 degree curved monitor which would fill all or most of your peripheral vision. You guys seem to have spent a lot of time arguing about how to set up the game for one monitor correctly when its obviously not possible to replicate reality with one monitor. You have to sacrifice something and I think it comes down to personal choice. I personally play with a higher fov 60-90 when I first get on a track but tend to lower it as I get comfortable with it.
 
I debunked that guys video a long time ago. His random calculations off the top of his head were all WAY OFF.. 30" monitors 24" from your face is not the norm and still doesn't equate to 90° it equates to around 60°H if I remember and his 50" TV setup made even less sense.

I will rewatch it when I get home and give you the exact numbers.
 
Ok but even if the video is not accurate it's still a fact that you cannot have simulate realistic vision with a single monitor, or even three monitors. You have give up something. You either going to have a distorted game world or an accurate world, but with very little peripheral vision, which may or may not matter to you. Either way that is not how we see when we are driving a car. The future or gaming is something like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYa8kirsUfg&feature=related
Of course the first generation devices are going to be very crude and may not have the proper fov or decent resolutions available but at least it's a start.
 
I am all for what Carmach is trying to accomplish. I have been saying **** like that for years.

And I know you can't fully 100% simulate what you would see. That is due to the depth of the screen being not there and the 3D not being good enough. Focusing on distant objects and having close objects go blurry and vice versa can only be accomplished in two ways.. Holographic screens and Accurate Retinal tracking that knows what you are looking at and blurs the rest.

But 94% will have to do. Lower you fov.
 
I spent ages tinkering with my triples angles and FOV trying to get something that both looked and felt right, the day I found this thread everything fell into place. For me an FOV of 27 was the magic number, no idea of the actual angle my monitors are at, I just adjusted them until lines carried through without kinking. Everything now feels fight, the rig, race seat and wheel now feel part of the car I am driving. So thanks to the Zeos man you have added to my enjoyment of sim racing no end ;)
 
I don't understand the whole screen size thing, if your screen is bigger than you don't need as low a fov?

That means that you will have a more distorted image as the FOV is higher, you will also have a higher sense of speed, a flatter looking world (especially with up and down hills) and objects will seem to have more distance. Basically all the things u get with a higher FOV.

So how does having bigger screens fix all the issues with a higher fov? I just don't get it......
 
Last edited:
it's not a real field of view what makes issues. in-game fov is a reason of ones.
If game is able to produce realistic perspective, then immersion is realistic.
If you have "small screen" you have to set higher in-game FOV to see more. But it causes perspective distortion. This is the reason of all issues listed by you: higher sense of speed etc.

In short, if you are able to set low enough in-game FOV, all issues are gone. Doesn't matter if whole screen matches your eyes fov or not. Because appearance of issues depends on projected perspective, not on size of screen.

Just imagine, you are going on bus watching ahead through windshield or with use of some small hole in a mask created from paper. In second case the "image" will be way smaller but in both cases you will see the same perspective and you will feel the same sense of speed. it's comparable to two displays: normal monitor and triple screen; small and big. but both with the same, realistic perspective which is achievable in rF with low FOV
 
Last edited:
Yes but when ppl use a FOV calculator, it always calculates to use a higher fov the bigger the screen is, which makes no sense to me, because then the elevation changes and distance perception will be totally different on 2 different fov, regardless if they are both correct according to the calculator.....
 
Spinelli said:
(...) because then the elevation changes and distance perception will be totally different on 2 different fov, regardless if they are both correct according to the calculator.....
Click to expand...
No. When you don't change your distance to the screen, then it all goes up or down in proportion. Bigger screen? Then bigger FOV and vice versa. FOV = Field of View. If you switched to a screen two times wider, then your horizontal FOV should also be 2 times bigger, to get things back in place.
If you won't chenge screen and just increase FOV, it will be like you had 2 times more view than you should, which is a fake (I mean, you can't do that with your eyes in real life ;-) ).
The confusion might come for you, because you probably didn't have a chance to sit in front of more than one screen.
Also keep in mind, that in rF you define vertical FOV. That means, if I go from 1x22" to 3x22" (one next to each other) then the only thing I have to do in rF is.... nothing ;) What changed, is just my horizontal view and rF calculates horizontal FOV based on resolution ratio. If my 22" are 1920x1080 and I go with 3 of them, then I will have 5760x1080. Aspec ratio change then from 16:9 (1.78:1) to 48:9 (5.33:1). It become 3 times wider, so rF (with the same vertical FOV all the time) just recalculate horizontal FOV to be 3 times wider. Again, it all goes in proportions to each other.

Here's an example:
rffovtest07.jpg


Link to full res: CLICK

FOV in rF was set to 25 for this one.

The perfect solution, would be to have VR helmet (so, screens are always in the same distance from your eyes = only one FOV would be matemathically correct) with a head tracking device (so your head movement is translated into in-game cockpit camera movement).
 
Spinelli said:
Yes but when ppl use a FOV calculator, it always calculates to use a higher fov the bigger the screen is, which makes no sense to me, because then the elevation changes and distance perception will be totally different on 2 different fov, regardless if they are both correct according to the calculator.....
Click to expand...

But most people is not able to drive with calculated fov because it gives not enough visibility from car.

Zeos' screen may be confusing (at least to me). If image is generated with the same resolution and the same FOV, it doesn't matter how big screen is, it always will display the same part of scene. The image suggests that without FOV changes (perspective is untouched) on bigger screen you will see more must not be true.
 
I'm confused about the steepness of elevation changes, wouldn't a FOV for example 35, have the exact same image on a 23 inch and a 45" monitor? Just that the 45" one is expanded, but since it's the exact same FOV as the 23" it should have the exact same image with regards to visual hill steepness and such.......

Maybe I need to see both side by side to understand, I just can't get my head around how an image of 2 completely different FOVs will look identical to each other as long as you increase/decrease the size of the monitor to compensate for the change in FOV, just can't seem to grasp that, as 2 different FOVs will give 2 entirely different visuals on screen, regardless of screen size.

Maybe pantera can chime in here?
 
Spinelli said:
I'm confused about the steepness of elevation changes, wouldn't a FOV for example 35, have the exact same image on a 23 inch and a 45" monitor?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would remain the same actual image on screen until you change the FOV in game IF IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. Look here.

ibxuXb7MPfjq0e.jpg


Here are 4 different sizes screens that ALL HAVE THE EXACT SAME FOV because the screens move back as they get larger. If you get a bigger screen and DON'T move it back the FOV would increase. The FOV is a real life measurement from you to your screen. Matching that number in game is what this whole thread is about.



Spinelli said:
Maybe I need to see both side by side to understand, I just can't get my head around how an image of 2 completely different FOVs will look identical to each other as long as you increase/decrease the size of the monitor to compensate for the change in FOV, just can't seem to grasp that, as 2 different FOVs will give 2 entirely different visuals on screen, regardless of screen size.
Click to expand...

Assume that your current screen all the sudden magically grew insanely large, taking up your whole vision. The Speedometer on the dash in front of you would stay the same size, The track scale would stay the same. all that would magically happen would be you would see more and more of the world around where your old screen borders were.

As far as having warping on a higher FOV. The warping on screen should only be visible if you step back from the calculated distance.

This is a "normal" in-game High FOV and people sitting far back and the red objects are warped to fit on the screen and the green ones are made smaller to compensate.
fov_2a.gif


This is a "proper" in-game FOV for people sitting the same distance. The red objects are not shown at all and the green ones are to scale with the real world.
fov_setup.gif


This one shows the first High in-game FOV but now it is "proper" because the subject has moved much closer to the large screen. The red dots and green dots are visible and to scale. This is difficult on a small screen (as you would need to sit VERY close) but on a big TV you can accomplish this.
fov_3.gif
 
Spinelli said:
I'm confused about the steepness of elevation changes, wouldn't a FOV for example 35, have the exact same image on a 23 inch and a 45" monitor? Just that the 45" one is expanded, but since it's the exact same FOV as the 23" it should have the exact same image with regards to visual hill steepness and such.......
Click to expand...
Yes, the same picture with the same FOV, but one or the other will be wrong (or both ;-) ).
The is only one proper FOV for a given distance between your eyes and monitor, for a given monitor size. Just one FOV.
Every other might look better (or worse), but they still will be wrong.
And for that one proper FOV, everything you see on the screen will have proper dimensions (as long as the model itself is done correctly) at a given position in the virtual world. If you stick with the same FOV but change monitor size, everything on it will then be smaller or bigger than should.
When you stay with the same monitor size but change FOV, you will see too much or too less, than you should.
Combination with different monitor size and FOV will be a combination of the above... until you hit another "perfect FOV vs size".


EDIT:
Zeos explained it better :)
 
Ok I understand how the larger monitor requires a higher FOV in order to give both monitors the correct and equivalent FOV to the viewer, that part all makes sense....

but what I dont understand, is that a different FOV value physically changes the look of the world in game (steepness of elevation changes), and those visual changes (steepness of elevation changes) DO NOT change when you increase your screen size, they only change when you change the value ingame as the games graphics does that part of the work, so therefore wouldnt 2 screens both using the correct and equivalent to eachother FOV, have totally different looking elevation steepness because regardless of the screen size to viewer distance ratio, the game is outputting a different image on the screen?

In other words, if you had a 23" monitor and a 50", both had the exact same FOV (lets say 30), and both were the exact same distance to your eyes, would the 50" monitor appear to have steeper elevation changes even though the ingame value is the exact same on both?.................If the answer is "yes", then i guess that explains everything, but I just always thought that answer would be "No", since the actual in-game value is set the exact same ingame (regardless of screen size, distance, both using the equivalent and correct fov, etc)
 
Spinelli said:
wouldnt 2 screens both using the correct and equivalent to eachother FOV, have totally different looking elevation steepness because regardless of the screen size to viewer distance ratio, the game is outputting a different image on the screen?

In other words, if you had a 23" monitor and a 50", both had the exact same FOV (lets say 30), and both were the exact same distance to your eyes, would the 50" monitor appear to have steeper elevation changes even though the ingame value is the exact same on both?.................If the answer is "yes", then i guess that explains everything, but I just always thought that answer would be "No", since the actual in-game value is set the exact same ingame (regardless of screen size, distance, both using the equivalent and correct fov, etc)
Click to expand...

The steepness of a hill is dependent on you the viewers perspective. If running Proper, calculated fov on any monitor at any size the hill will seem correct. When the FOV is too high for the user the hill and turns are compressed onto the screen and feel less steep and less sharp.

In other words, if you had a 23" monitor and a 50" both with the same fov set in-game and both the same distance from you one would be right and one would be wrong. Assuming the 23" is calculated the 50" screen would be over exaggerated. You can't have two different sized screens the same distance from you with matching in-game fov's. The larger screen would need to be calculated and once proper would show hill steepness and curve severity with the same intensity as the smaller one.

What is seen though your monitor can be only three things, Too small (HighFOV) a lot of information compressed into a small space. Proper (CalculatedFOV) objects, terrain, distance match 1:1 with real life. Zoomed (ExcessivelyLowFOV) Everything is exaggerated and scaled too large, Binocular vision.
 
ZeosPantera said:
The steepness of a hill is dependent on you the viewers perspective. If running Proper, calculated fov on any monitor at any size the hill will seem correct. When the FOV is too high for the user the hill and turns are compressed onto the screen and feel less steep and less sharp.

In other words, if you had a 23" monitor and a 50" both with the same fov set in-game and both the same distance from you one would be right and one would be wrong. Assuming the 23" is calculated the 50" screen would be over exaggerated. You can't have two different sized screens the same distance from you with matching in-game fov's. The larger screen would need to be calculated and once proper would show hill steepness and curve severity with the same intensity as the smaller one.

What is seen though your monitor can be only three things, Too small (HighFOV) a lot of information compressed into a small space. Proper (CalculatedFOV) objects, terrain, distance match 1:1 with real life. Zoomed (ExcessivelyLowFOV) Everything is exaggerated and scaled too large, Binocular vision.
Click to expand...

Awesome thanks for all the info, I never realized that the perception of hill steepness can change even without touching the ingame fov value, and therefore 2 different size monitors both using the "correct" fov would both have the same perception of hill steepness even though it's a different ingame value.

So according to this theory, just like how hill steepness seems to visually change when you change the ingame fov value, the perception of hill steepness should also change as I move my head away from the monitor or put my face right up real close to it (even though the screen size and ingame fov value didn't change). Is that correct???...
 
Hahaha ok awesome it all makes sense now. Thanks again for all your time and answers to you and everyone else who helped with this.
 
rFactor FOV

Just registered to say

THANK YOU!

exactly what I was looking for.
thank you for your work writing this tutorial
may you become an F1 driver.

Shawn
 
I think this tutorial is wrong if what you're looking for is matching reality. You are changing FOV while the human eye can't do that. To get the same perspetive than eye the FOV should be set to match the eye's FOV as close as possible.
If the FOV is set lower the distances and sense of speed would be lower than real life and proportions will be magnified. If the FOV is higher the sense of speed and distances would be higher and everything will be smaller. That's because people say they lose the sense of speed when following this tutorial, not because you can not see the trees.

The closest lens to the human eye has a focal length between 35 and 50mm, being 43mm the closest. A 43mm lens equals to a 31.2 degrees FOV, so that should be your FOV whatever the size of your screen is.

Now, what you have to do is to place your screen at the distance where that FOV matchs the screen heigh or, if not possible, move the camera in the game forward or backward until the sum of the two distances equals the correct distance. You can find out this distance with a little of math:

h=screen heigh/2
a=FOV/2
d=distance to the screen (what has to be found out)

d=(h x cos a)/sin a

For a 50" screen it would be:

h=62/2=31cm
a=31.2/2=15.6

d=(31 x cos 15.6)/sin 15.6=111cm

So, if you place your screen at this distance from you all the proportions, perspective, sense of speed and distance will be close to real life. The only proportions distorted will be the objects that would be between the screen and you, thats because what you see is the proyections of this object at your screen. If you had a real life cockpit all these proyections would be covered exactly by their real life counterparts. You could set the close clip plane in the .cam file to the distance above not to show the distorted objects.

If you would place your monitor exactly where your steering wheel is and move the camera to match the correct distance you could check that your wheel is the same diameter as the screen wheel.

When you have calculated the distance what you have to do is:

-Meassure the distance from your head to your wheel at the horizontal plane (40cm for example).

-Calculate the distance from the in game camera to the in game wheel. You can do that by moving the camera forward in the .cam file and looking down until the camera is exactly over the wheel (Positionoffset=(0.0, 0.0, -X,X)) (0,5m for example)

-In the .cam file move the camera the offset between your distance and the game distance (40cm-50cm=-10cm. Positionoffset=(0.0, 0.0, -0.1))

-Meassure the distance from you to your screen center (2m for example)

-Caculate the difference between the distance calculated above and the distance to your screen (1.29m-2m=-0.71m)

-Write this in the .cam file *Radius=(-0.71). That moves the camera 71cm forward.

-Now you have matched your settup with real life.

The only problem it has is that the camera rotates upon itself when it should rotate over the driver axis which is the same as yours. I have not find any parameter to offset the camera's rotation axis, maybe someone knows how to do it if it is possible.

I hope it helps someone
 
Last edited:
Dnelpm... I really don't wish to start another discussion on this. The most relevant part of your post relates to the position of the camera inside the car, because even if the FOV is matched to your setup things won't look realistic if the camera is too far forward or back (that is, you're seeing a view a real driver wouldn't see, even though perspective is correct).

You can't say "this FOV is correct no matter your screen size". It doesn't work that way.
 
You are right, moving the camera is not realistic, and setting FOV to match your screen gives you the most reallistic perspective except for the objects that should be between you and your screen, but when you have to set FOV lower than eye's you will be driving as you had a wall in front of you with a hole, it could be realistic but quite dangerous in real life. It could be solved a little by making a larger hole in the wall with a triple screen settup, bur for single monitor settups the best would be to move the screen to the distance where your FOV should be 31.2 and, if not possible, when you have to set the FOV lower moving the camera, although not realistic, I think it is easier to understand to the brain than driving with a wall in front of you, for higher FOVs your approach is the right one.

I'm sorry if my post brought more confusion to someone.
 
Dnelpm said:
You are right, moving the camera is not realistic, and setting FOV to match your screen gives you the most reallistic perspective except for the objects that should be between you and your screen, but when you have to set FOV lower than eye's you will be driving as you had a wall in front of you with a hole, it could be realistic but quite dangerous in real life. It could be solved a little by making a larger hole in the wall with a triple screen settup, bur for single monitor settups the best would be to move the screen to the distance where your FOV should be 31.2 and, if not possible, when you have to set the FOV lower moving the camera, although not realistic, I think it is easier to understand to the brain than driving with a wall in front of you, for higher FOVs your approach is the right one.

I'm sorry if my post brought more confusion to someone.
Click to expand...

What I don't agree with is your 31.2. If the screen takes up 25° of your view vertically, setting the game's v-FOV to 25° will produce correct perspective. If it occupies 45°, then 45° will produce correct perspective. I don't see how you're using a focal length to arrive at some ideal/perfect FOV.

Issues relating to your view ('size of the window into the world') and your in-car position making your physical wheel match the in-game one, are separate.

The 2D representation of this has been illustrated and discussed already in this thread. And before anyone else questions it, a 2D (plane) representation applies vertically, horizontally, and at every infinite number of angles in between - making it also correct for 3D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top