OFF with Richer more Vibrant Colors

[+Lothar of the Hill People 6]

Sorry buddy your formula's not "normal", just wrong. Projecting a 3D world onto a 2D screen you're dealing with a virtual camera, virtual lense--so you have to deal with angles in order to preserve the aspect ratio. For example, the 23:14 you recommend yields an aspect ratio of 1.66 at 1920x1200, while correcting for angles I suggested a 22 hfov for the 14 vfov for an aspect ratio of 1.58--much closer to the real 1.6 aspect ratio of the screen (1920 / 1200). Let me update my 1920x1200 table showing the aspect ratios r:

1. 30:19 (r = 1.601) - closest virtual camera
   
2. 27:17 (r =1.606)
   
3. 24:15 (r =1.615)
   
4. 22:14 (r =1.583) - farthest virtual camera
   

30:19 is the most spatially correct at that resolution, but is most comfortable sitting close to larger displays. Smaller monitor, sitting farther away, you'll probably end up moving down the list a bit to find the sweet spot.

[Olham 164]

With "normal" I mean "normal objective" (for cameras). Wide angle lenses distort the view badly.

My FoV settings are just for zooming more in or out - without distortion. Works fine for me.

[+Lothar of the Hill People 6]

With "normal" I mean "normal objective" (for cameras). Wide angle lenses distort the view badly.

My FoV settings are just for zooming more in or out - without distortion. Works fine for me.

But your calculations actually cause distortion! The physical screen of your monitor is not the same thing as the virtual screen on which the rendered image is projected; you can't just do a simple linear mapping. FOV has absolutely nothing to do with zooming in and out. I've written a ray-tracing engine, trust me. A wide angle works just fine with certain aspect ratios and viewing situations--such as up close to a giant screen.

 

Since everyone hates trigonometry, I've slapped together a little Excel spreadsheet that does all the math and recommends the most accurate settings for your resolution and relation to screen:

 

It will take a little time for mods to approve the download but hopefully it'll be up soon.

[Olham 164]

You have made an interactive calculator? Does it work even if I don't have Excel?

(Just in case it doesn't: my res is 1980 x 1050 pixels. I'm really bad at math -

perhaps you can calculate me two or three FoV with vertical 15 or 16 among them?)

[+Lothar of the Hill People 6]

You have made an interactive calculator? Does it work even if I don't have Excel?

(Just in case it doesn't: my res is 1980 x 1050 pixels. I'm really bad at math -

perhaps you can calculate me two or three FoV with vertical 15 or 16 among them?)

Sure thing! I'll make a post to update this on-topic thread, and post a few common examples for those who don't have Excel.

 

And try 28:15.

[Olham 164]

Lothar, I'm sorry I had made a typo - it must be 1680 : 1050.

 

I have made my calculations again with my own formula (see the other thread),

and I get the same results as you have with your method.

So my way wasn't wrong.

 

But it's nevertheless great for those insecure in calculating maths themselves,

to have your EXCEL calculator.