Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi folks!! As you may probably realise, I am not into computer graphics. Anyway, I'be been having this question for quite a while. The screenshots taken are from TW's F-14 In the zoomed photo the numbers of the speed indicator can be esaily read, but in the wide view, it's more difficult, the graphics are not as good. Why is it? Is there a way to correct that using Adobe Photoshop? Tanks!!!

 

 

                                              Regards,

                                                                                Ignacioc91

post-57511-0-56195000-1393376962_thumb.jpg

post-57511-0-85055400-1393377001_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This problem can be solved: combine monitors to get the same pixel density around the instruments at wide angle that you have when you are zoomed in.

Of course, you will need to run high end gpu's in SLI to even come close and have a reasonable frame rate.

Going from a 1080p monitor to an ultra HD (quad HD) monitor is the same as using four 1080p monitors.

That would double your resolution and make a noticeable improvement, but still wouldn't look as good as your zoomed in pic, would presently limit you to 30 fps due to the current HDMI connection available with first gen UHD TVs, and you would struggle to hit those 30 fps with 1 gpu.

When the UHD monitors become available that have either display port or a higher spec HDMI capable of at least 60 fps and a single gpu can easily handle that many pixels with vsync enabled, that is the direction I am going.

In the mean time, I have the zoom control mapped to an axis on my throttle if it isn't mapped to my Track IR so that I can easily trade between field of view and detail.

 

P.S. A good 1920x1200 monitor is a good way to go unless you can afford a 2560x1600 monitor and some gpu power to drive it.

Edited by streakeagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or get one big 40 to 50in monitor, or wear binoculars. On second thought forget the binoculars, would just be all pixely.

Edited by Spectre8750

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting a bigger monitor won't help out any unless it has a significantly higher resolution than the monitor you are complaining about.

Otherwise, the pixels will just look bigger and uglier.

I can say that sitting about 2 or 3 feet from a 46" 1080p LCD TV generally leaves my gauges looking full size and good resolution... very readable.

Unless, I open my field of view out to something like 90 degrees.

Typical 60-80 degree fields of view are quite readable if not perfect.

Most of my problems stem from the lack of color range on LCD TVs compared to dedicated PC monitors (CRTs really excelled in this area).

At the 46 inch scale with limited color range (typically 70% of the NTSC standard) antialiasing doesn't look as good no matter what multiplier you use from x4 to x16.

A blue sky with a wide range of blue hues (almost every decent sim I know of) looks more like 16-bit color with its banding.

I recently forced my DVI output to my LCD TV to use Adobe color scales (closer to 90% range of NTSC) since my specific model of Mitsubishi TV was famously known for having a much wider percentage of NTSC standard colore mapping.

It may be a placebo effect, but the blue banding of the sky seems less obvious after having done so.

 

What I want is a quad HD PC monitor in the 46" to 60" range with a full color spectrum usuable by the HDMI input of the TV and output of my card.

In the interim, given the limitations of current gpus and HDMI ports, I might settle for a 2560x1600 30" monitor...

The resolution increase sounds awesome, but having enjoyed the large field of view provided by a 46" monitor, I don't think I will downgrade my monitor size just to get slightly smoother gages and possibly better color shades.

I have been running 1600x1200 since SFP1 was released on an old Radeon 8500 128MB.

It is about time the market provide me with a decent resolution increase at an affordable price and fully usable by the PC hardware at decent quality settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..