A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Simulators
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New PC's FFB



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 5th 12, 10:23 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Well, I got new PC, and there are some changes. On this PC I can
clearly feel where I am regarding latency (cockpitLookDeadZone setting).
Here, my latency definitelly is somewhere around 0.038500. Well, this has
more sense than what I wrote previously. But, there are some changes,
compared to previous PC. On this PC I kept everything on default, while on
previous I did some changes to Nvidia control panel. Also, while now I also
have Class 1 video setting in iRacing, previously I didn't use DX10
optimization. Previously I had keyboard and mouse on PS/2, while now I have
them on USB. Previously I had wheel into USB 2.0, now I have it into USB
3.0.
Thankfully now I can clearly distinguish where I am with my latency,
so I can experiment with different settings (if I find time to do that).
Regarding the feel of FFB, if latency is too low, your are chasing car, if
it is too high, car is chasing you. When it is too low, car runs away from
you, but you cannot catch it. This isn't so easy to distinguish, but it is
very easy to distinguish too high latency. In short, with too high latency
FFB behaves somehow like a yo-yo. Like it has a spring in itself, and this
spring acts exactly like a yo-yo. It is controlable, but of course, because
of latency it plays around, and in adjsuting to this, all feels just like a
yo-yo.
Well, now that I am sure what is what, now I can freely experiment
with different video settings, to see how they affect latency.
Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
this to a finer degree in iRacing.
Also, previously I used FFB settings 117/117/117/117, but now I like
118/100/100/100. But I'll take another look at this when I adjust better,
and when I test different cars.
But, on this PC I also (like on previous PC) like to have hight of
screen at 0.0%. Interesting.

Ads
  #2  
Old April 5th 12, 11:27 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
this to a finer degree in iRacing.
-------------------------

This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge of
the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.

  #3  
Old April 5th 12, 05:12 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
FolkGT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default New PC's FFB

On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 12:27:49 +0200, "Mario Petrinovic"
> wrote:

>Mario Petrinovic:
> Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
>62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
>this to a finer degree in iRacing.
>-------------------------
>
> This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge of
>the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.


Isn't the correct procedure to measure the distance between your eyes and
the screen?
  #4  
Old April 6th 12, 03:08 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

FolkGT:
Mario Petrinovic:
>Mario Petrinovic:
> Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
>62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
>this to a finer degree in iRacing.
>-------------------------
>
> This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge of
>the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.


Isn't the correct procedure to measure the distance between your eyes and
the screen?
--------------------------------

You would need four hands and two bodies to do this. And, at the
end, WHY would you do this? Well, to find the correct FOV, of course. And
what if, after all this measuring you make some mistake in measurements?
Then you will have WRONG FOV.
The sole and whole reason to measure this is to find the RIGHT FOV.
I have a metod to see what FOV is right the other way. The CORRECT way. You
see, WHY would you need the correct FOV in the first place? Well, to
correctly set things up.
99% of people CLAIM that FOV doesn't make a difference. They are
basing their claim on what? Mostly on their dreams. People who claime this,
either never tried different FOVs, or they have their FFB so badly set up
that EVERY FOV gives wrong result.
Well, for me, the sole reason to adjust FOV is to make FFB work
correctly. And, isn't the ONLY "correct" way to see if FFB works correctly,
well, to see if it works correctly. Simple as it can be. Well, my FFB works
correctly (-tliest) with FOV of 62. I know that this is the correct FOV, and
there is no need for me that I announce the right distance publicly so that
I can help myself. I do this so that I can help others.
So, did you try 42.5 cm? Did it work better than what you previously
had?

  #5  
Old April 8th 12, 09:06 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Tony R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default New PC's FFB

On 06/04/2012 15:08, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> I
> have a metod to see what FOV is right the other way. The CORRECT way.


You wouldn't happen to related to Jean-Marie Balestre by any chance?
  #6  
Old April 9th 12, 02:26 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Well, I got new PC, and there are some changes. On this PC I can
clearly feel where I am regarding latency (cockpitLookDeadZone setting).
Here, my latency definitelly is somewhere around 0.038500. Well, this has
more sense than what I wrote previously. But, there are some changes,
compared to previous PC. On this PC I kept everything on default, while on
previous I did some changes to Nvidia control panel. Also, while now I also
have Class 1 video setting in iRacing, previously I didn't use DX10
optimization. Previously I had keyboard and mouse on PS/2, while now I have
them on USB. Previously I had wheel into USB 2.0, now I have it into USB
3.0.
-------------------

Oh yes, another thing. Now I keep Profiler running all the time on
my computer (this means that it is running during boot-up), while previously
I had it shut down and opened it only when I went to the simulation. Who
knows, maybe this is why I feel FFB more clearly now.

  #7  
Old April 9th 12, 06:09 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
FolkGT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default New PC's FFB

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 16:08:04 +0200, "Mario Petrinovic"
> wrote:

>FolkGT:
>Mario Petrinovic:
>>Mario Petrinovic:
>> Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
>>62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
>>this to a finer degree in iRacing.
>>-------------------------
>>
>> This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge of
>>the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.

>
>Isn't the correct procedure to measure the distance between your eyes and
>the screen?
>--------------------------------
>
> You would need four hands and two bodies to do this. And, at the
>end, WHY would you do this? Well, to find the correct FOV, of course. And
>what if, after all this measuring you make some mistake in measurements?
>Then you will have WRONG FOV.


I sit pretty close to my screen. It only took one body and a tape
measure.


> The sole and whole reason to measure this is to find the RIGHT FOV.
>I have a metod to see what FOV is right the other way. The CORRECT way. You
>see, WHY would you need the correct FOV in the first place? Well, to
>correctly set things up.
> 99% of people CLAIM that FOV doesn't make a difference. They are
>basing their claim on what? Mostly on their dreams. People who claime this,
>either never tried different FOVs, or they have their FFB so badly set up
>that EVERY FOV gives wrong result.
> Well, for me, the sole reason to adjust FOV is to make FFB work
>correctly. And, isn't the ONLY "correct" way to see if FFB works correctly,
>well, to see if it works correctly. Simple as it can be. Well, my FFB works
>correctly (-tliest) with FOV of 62. I know that this is the correct FOV, and
>there is no need for me that I announce the right distance publicly so that
>I can help myself. I do this so that I can help others.
> So, did you try 42.5 cm? Did it work better than what you previously
>had?


If it feels good to you, that's all that really matters.

I was basing my question to you on the information found in the .PDF
document you can download from he

http://www.silverball-magic.com/my-s..._Explained.pdf

On page 10 it give this formula to determine FOV:

2 * arctan (0.5 * w / d)

w = width of screen
d = distance from your eyes to the screen.

To be honest, if I use that formula for my setup it gives an FOV that I
feel is too narrow. So, whatever works for you is good. I was just
curious how you came up with the idea of measuring from your eyes to the
wheel, instead of from your eyes to the screen. The distance from your
eyes to the wheel in theory should never change once you have your setup
in place, but the distance between your eyes and the screen can be
drastically different, depending on whether you're using a 24" monitor or
a 54" TV screen.
  #8  
Old April 9th 12, 08:15 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

FolkGT:
Mario Petrinovic:
>FolkGT:
>Mario Petrinovic:
>>Mario Petrinovic:
>> Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
>>62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
>>this to a finer degree in iRacing.
>>-------------------------
>>
>> This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge
>> of
>>the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.

>
>Isn't the correct procedure to measure the distance between your eyes and
>the screen?
>--------------------------------
>
> You would need four hands and two bodies to do this. And, at the
>end, WHY would you do this? Well, to find the correct FOV, of course. And
>what if, after all this measuring you make some mistake in measurements?
>Then you will have WRONG FOV.


I sit pretty close to my screen. It only took one body and a tape
measure.


> The sole and whole reason to measure this is to find the RIGHT FOV.
>I have a metod to see what FOV is right the other way. The CORRECT way. You
>see, WHY would you need the correct FOV in the first place? Well, to
>correctly set things up.
> 99% of people CLAIM that FOV doesn't make a difference. They are
>basing their claim on what? Mostly on their dreams. People who claime this,
>either never tried different FOVs, or they have their FFB so badly set up
>that EVERY FOV gives wrong result.
> Well, for me, the sole reason to adjust FOV is to make FFB work
>correctly. And, isn't the ONLY "correct" way to see if FFB works correctly,
>well, to see if it works correctly. Simple as it can be. Well, my FFB works
>correctly (-tliest) with FOV of 62. I know that this is the correct FOV,
>and
>there is no need for me that I announce the right distance publicly so that
>I can help myself. I do this so that I can help others.
> So, did you try 42.5 cm? Did it work better than what you
> previously
>had?


If it feels good to you, that's all that really matters.

I was basing my question to you on the information found in the .PDF
document you can download from he

http://www.silverball-magic.com/my-s..._Explained.pdf

On page 10 it give this formula to determine FOV:

2 * arctan (0.5 * w / d)

w = width of screen
d = distance from your eyes to the screen.

To be honest, if I use that formula for my setup it gives an FOV that I
feel is too narrow. So, whatever works for you is good. I was just
curious how you came up with the idea of measuring from your eyes to the
wheel, instead of from your eyes to the screen. The distance from your
eyes to the wheel in theory should never change once you have your setup
in place, but the distance between your eyes and the screen can be
drastically different, depending on whether you're using a 24" monitor or
a 54" TV screen.
-----------------------------------

First, thanks for this excellent link. Some time ago I searched all
through the Interenet to find info about all this, but never found anything
as good as this.
Good additional info is that eyestrain stops at the distance of
90cm. IOW, eyestrain at 90cm is the same as eyestrain at 900cm, or 9000cm.
But, closer from 90 cm it is, the bigger the eyestrain is.
Regarding your "tape measure" and "one body", I measured A LOT this
same distance, and even "hired" others to measure me. There were a lot of
different results, it isn't easy to do this, and your natural FOV that you
get from mentioned formula can change 5 degs up or down, depending on how
well you did the measuring.
And preciesly this was the reason why I am giving people the
(horizontal) distance from my eyes to the edge of table. I am of normal
hight, and I presume that my arms are of normal length, so I presume that
every person of normal hight has this value the same, or very similar. If
you are taller, this value is greater, if you are smaller (maybe woman),
this value is smaller. So, to know this specific value can be of extreme
help, because it is easy to measure from the edge of table to the screen,
and adding those two together can EASILY give you your distance from eyes to
screen.
I really wonder why iRacing, or anybody else, didn't do this before.
It would cut a lot of mistakes people do, when they rely on their WRONGLY
made measurements. Basing on my meausurements, once I was convinced that my
natural FOV is 65 (or even 67), other times I was convinced that it is 57
instead. And, look at that, it is 62.

  #9  
Old April 9th 12, 08:28 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario PetrinovicFolkGT:
Mario Petrinovic:
>FolkGT:
>Mario Petrinovic:
>>Mario Petrinovic:
>> Also, while previously I had FOV at 61, now it is clear that it is
>>62. It makes difference, and it really is a shame that you cannot adjust
>>this to a finer degree in iRacing.
>>-------------------------
>>
>> This, actually, means that the distance from my eyes to the edge
>> of
>>the table where I am attaching my wheel isn't 44 cm, but it is 42.5 cm.

>
>Isn't the correct procedure to measure the distance between your eyes and
>the screen?
>--------------------------------
>
> You would need four hands and two bodies to do this. And, at the
>end, WHY would you do this? Well, to find the correct FOV, of course. And
>what if, after all this measuring you make some mistake in measurements?
>Then you will have WRONG FOV.


I sit pretty close to my screen. It only took one body and a tape
measure.

> The sole and whole reason to measure this is to find the RIGHT FOV.
>I have a metod to see what FOV is right the other way. The CORRECT way. You
>see, WHY would you need the correct FOV in the first place? Well, to
>correctly set things up.
> 99% of people CLAIM that FOV doesn't make a difference. They are
>basing their claim on what? Mostly on their dreams. People who claime this,
>either never tried different FOVs, or they have their FFB so badly set up
>that EVERY FOV gives wrong result.
> Well, for me, the sole reason to adjust FOV is to make FFB work
>correctly. And, isn't the ONLY "correct" way to see if FFB works correctly,
>well, to see if it works correctly. Simple as it can be. Well, my FFB works
>correctly (-tliest) with FOV of 62. I know that this is the correct FOV,
>and
>there is no need for me that I announce the right distance publicly so that
>I can help myself. I do this so that I can help others.
> So, did you try 42.5 cm? Did it work better than what you
> previously
>had?


If it feels good to you, that's all that really matters.

I was basing my question to you on the information found in the .PDF
document you can download from he

http://www.silverball-magic.com/my-s..._Explained.pdf

On page 10 it give this formula to determine FOV:

2 * arctan (0.5 * w / d)

w = width of screen
d = distance from your eyes to the screen.

To be honest, if I use that formula for my setup it gives an FOV that I
feel is too narrow. So, whatever works for you is good. I was just
curious how you came up with the idea of measuring from your eyes to the
wheel, instead of from your eyes to the screen. The distance from your
eyes to the wheel in theory should never change once you have your setup
in place, but the distance between your eyes and the screen can be
drastically different, depending on whether you're using a 24" monitor or
a 54" TV screen.
-----------------------------------

First, thanks for this excellent link. Some time ago I searched all
through the Interenet to find info about all this, but never found anything
as good as this.
Good additional info is that eyestrain stops at the distance of
90cm. IOW, eyestrain at 90cm is the same as eyestrain at 900cm, or 9000cm.
But, closer from 90 cm it is, the bigger the eyestrain is.
Regarding your "tape measure" and "one body", I measured A LOT this
same distance, and even "hired" others to measure me. There were a lot of
different results, it isn't easy to do this, and your natural FOV that you
get from mentioned formula can change 5 degs up or down, depending on how
well you did the measuring.
And preciesly this was the reason why I am giving people the
(horizontal) distance from my eyes to the edge of table. I am of normal
hight, and I presume that my arms are of normal length, so I presume that
every person of normal hight has this value the same, or very similar. If
you are taller, this value is greater, if you are smaller (maybe woman),
this value is smaller. So, to know this specific value can be of extreme
help, because it is easy to measure from the edge of table to the screen,
and adding those two together can EASILY give you your distance from eyes to
screen.
I really wonder why iRacing, or anybody else, didn't do this before.
It would cut a lot of mistakes people do, when they rely on their WRONGLY
made measurements. Basing on my meausurements, once I was convinced that my
natural FOV is 65 (or even 67), other times I was convinced that it is 57
instead. And, look at that, it is 62.
------------------------------

Just to make things even more clear.
When you are sitting and driving a simulation, you ALWAYS take THE
SAME position. And this position is same to 1mm. Believe me. I experimented
a lot with moving my screen 1mm closer of further, and I always got the same
FFB sensation at the same mm, and the other (same) sensation 1 mm closer or
further. When you go to drive simulation, you always take the same position
(I repeat). If you chair is further away, you will sit at the edge of chair,
if it is closer, you will push your back into the chair, and feel very
uncomfortably, but you will never-the-less, be at the same position you
always take when you are driving, and this is up to 1 mm (or even more
precise, believe me). Always the same, no matter what.
The problem arises during measurements. During measuremenst you put
your body in different position, and you are apsolutely convinced that this
is that same position you have while you are driving. But, IT ISN"T, believe
me.

  #10  
Old April 10th 12, 06:06 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
FolkGT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default New PC's FFB

On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 21:15:40 +0200, "Mario Petrinovic"
> wrote:

> First, thanks for this excellent link. Some time ago I searched all
>through the Interenet to find info about all this, but never found anything
>as good as this.


I'm glad you found it helpful!
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FFB latency Mario Petrinovic Simulators 2 March 20th 12 11:14 PM
FFB progress Mario Petrinovic Simulators 5 February 14th 12 05:36 PM
FFB (so far) Mario Petrinovic Simulators 0 September 25th 11 10:57 AM
FFB Mario Petrinovic Simulators 26 September 5th 11 08:52 AM
G25 v. ECCI - To FFB or not to FFB [email protected] Simulators 1 August 17th 07 02:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.