View topic - PLP Layout Size & Shape Review

Submitted by imusrt on 5 July, 2015 - 23:02

Consideration of your next PLP layout's approximate size & shape is important. The features you pick will impact your enjoyment of games, for a long time. Users will have different preferences. To help with your decision, each screen scenario's impressions are described below. The goal is to pick your ideal range of size & shape. There's a good chance that some layout choices will match your preferences.


(Sniper Elite 3 2014, manual PLP)

Pick Your Layout Size

Small PLP Layouts

  • Center size: 21.5" - 26"
  • Total gaming pixels: 2,220,000 - 5,200,000 (weight class 1-8 / 30)
  • Limited eye coverage & therefore low immersion.
  • Often fairly high PPI, which allows for close viewing. This increases perceived size to mediocre.
  • Not ideal, but still great fun & tend to be cheap. A decent entry point.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions do not really apply here. This is due to layouts' sub-par size; any increase method takes precedence over "ideal shape". E.g. fat sides to increase overall layout size.


Big PLP Layouts

  • Center size: 27" - 34"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,732,000 - 9,101,000 (weight class 4-17 / 30)
  • Thorough eye coverage (when used close) & therefore high immersion.
  • Layout-shape notes are provided for this size, listing nuances that will help hone your final decision.


Very Big PLP Layouts

  • Center size: 36" - 42"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,628,000-14,516,000 (weight class 4-30 / 30)
  • Bigger than is needed for complete eye coverage & immersion. But impressive & offers flexible sitting distance.
  • Layouts have very big size. Peripheral vision concerns are generally irrelevant. Inner bezel position also becomes of little consequence.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions only slightly apply here.


Enormous PLP Layouts

  • Center size: 47" - 84"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,628,000 - 14,516,000 (weight class 4-30 / 30)
  • Appropriate if sitting further back. Massive layouts, usually with big pixels.
  • Layouts have enormous size. Peripheral vision concerns are generally irrelevant. Inner bezel position also becomes of little consequence.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions only slightly apply here.


Pick Your Center Screen

In PLP, the center monitor is a layout's key visual feature. It also strongly impacts layout's overall shape. Each choice has pros & cons.

16:9

Center is perceived semi-wide & semi-short. Width prioritized, height slightly limited. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center (unless used with slim sides). Attached sides will show less height (than if 16:10 center was used). 3D gaming view is prioritized over computing view & platformers. Inner bezels feel pushed comfortably out of central vision. Middle-ground, & biased tester's top choice.

16:10

Center is perceived semi-tall & semi-slim. Height prioritized, width slightly limited. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center (unless used with fat sides). Attached sides will show more height (than if 16:9 center was used). Computing & platformers view is prioritized over 3D gaming view. Inner bezels may feel encroaching, being pushed weakly out of central vision.

~21:9 UltraWide

Center is perceived extremely wide & extremely short. Width extremely prioritized, height an afterthought. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center; vertical peripheral vision will not be covered. Attached sides will show less height (than if 16:9 center was used). But LLL crowd & others may find center very appealing. Its layout views are nearly LLL aspect. Will feel very height-limited in 3D gaming view & substandard for platformers & computing view (latter negated if screen-segmenting software). Inner bezels feel pushed far out of central vision.


Sides For Big 16:9 Center

Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.

Medium Sides

  • Sides have medium perceived width. Large enough for game immersion & computing. 5/10 (medium) extra weight on resources. Middle-ground, & biased tester's top choice.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized well. Peripheral vision is covered on sides, with no overkill side width. Overall layout may feel hint short & wide.


Slim Sides

  • Sides have slim perceived width. Still very good, just large enough for game immersion & computing. 4/10 (medium-low) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit strongly. Peripheral vision remains basically covered on sides, while height is very slightly emphasized.


Semi-Fat Sides

  • Sides have semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit weakly. Peripheral vision is covered amply on sides, with slight overkill side width. Overall layout may feel somewhat short & wide.


Fat Sides

  • Sides have fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 7/10 (high-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized weakly. Peripheral vision is covered in abundance on sides, with overkill side width. Overall layout may feel significantly short & wide.


Skinny Sides

  • Sides have skinny perceived width. Likely unsatisfying. Not large enough for proper game immersion & cramped for computing. 3/10 (low-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized very strongly. Peripheral vision is poorly covered on sides, while height is emphasized.


Sides For Big 16:10 Center

Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.

Medium Sides

  • Sides are tall & medium perceived width. Large enough for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized well. Peripheral vision is basically covered on sides, while height is slightly emphasized. Overall layout may feel tall & slim.


Semi-Fat Sides

  • Sides are tall & semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 7/10 (high-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit weakly. Peripheral vision is covered on sides, with no overkill side width. Overall layout may feel a hint tall & slim.


Fat Sides

  • Sides are tall & fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 8/10 (high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized weakly. Peripheral vision is covered amply on sides, with slight overkill side width. But side width compensates well for the slim center.


Sides For Big ~21.9 UltraWide Center

Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.

Semi-Fat Sides

  • Sides are short & semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 5/10 (medium) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized fairly strongly. Peripheral vision is covered amply horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel somewhat far away. Overall layout feels quite short & wide.


Fat Sides

  • Sides are short & fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized strongly. Peripheral vision is covered in abundance horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel slightly far away. Overall layout feels very short & wide.


Medium Sides

  • Sides are short & medium perceived width. Looks good, just large enough for game immersion & computing. 3/10 (low-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized very strongly. Peripheral vision is covered horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel far away. Overall layout feels short & wide.


Skinny Sides

  • Sides are short & skinny perceived width. Somewhat unsatisfying. Not quite large enough for ideal game immersion & bit cramped for computing. 2/10 (low) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized extremely strongly. Peripheral vision is covered on sides through 21:9 center's compensating width. But vertical vision lost & sides will feel quite small & far away. Overall layout may feel awkward, short & wide.


More Help

Source PLP wiki, unabridged layouts list & how-to
http://plp-gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Good_PLP_Monitor_Setups

Wookiegr
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 1
Joined: 21 Oct 2014, 23:48
Consideration of your next PLP layout's approximate size & shape is important. The features you pick will impact your enjoyment of games, for a long time. Users will have different preferences. To help with your decision, each screen scenario's impressions are described below. The goal is to pick your ideal range of size & shape. There's a good chance that some layout choices will match your preferences.

(Sniper Elite 3 2014, manual PLP)


Pick Your Layout Size



Small PLP Layouts


  • Center size: 21.5" - 26"
  • Total gaming pixels: 2,220,000 - 5,200,000 (weight class 1-8 / 30)
  • Limited eye coverage & therefore low immersion.
  • Often fairly high PPI, which allows for close viewing. This increases perceived size to mediocre.
  • Not ideal, but still great fun & tend to be cheap. A decent entry point.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions do not really apply here. This is due to layouts' sub-par size; any increase method takes precedence over "ideal shape". E.g. fat sides to increase overall layout size.




Big PLP Layouts


  • Center size: 27" - 34"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,732,000 - 9,101,000 (weight class 4-17 / 30)
  • Thorough eye coverage (when used close) & therefore high immersion.
  • Layout-shape notes are provided for this size, listing nuances that will help hone your final decision.




Very Big PLP Layouts


  • Center size: 36" - 42"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,628,000-14,516,000 (weight class 4-30 / 30)
  • Bigger than is needed for complete eye coverage & immersion. But impressive & offers flexible sitting distance.
  • Layouts have very big size. Peripheral vision concerns are generally irrelevant. Inner bezel position also becomes of little consequence.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions only slightly apply here.




Enormous PLP Layouts


  • Center size: 47" - 84"
  • Total gaming pixels: 3,628,000 - 14,516,000 (weight class 4-30 / 30)
  • Appropriate if sitting further back. Massive layouts, usually with big pixels.
  • Layouts have enormous size. Peripheral vision concerns are generally irrelevant. Inner bezel position also becomes of little consequence.
  • No additional layout-shape notes are provided for this size. Common shape impressions only slightly apply here.





Pick Your Center Screen



In PLP, the center monitor is a layout's key visual feature. It also strongly impacts layout's overall shape. Each choice has pros & cons.



16:9


Center is perceived semi-wide & semi-short. Width prioritized, height slightly limited. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center (unless used with slim sides). Attached sides will show less height (than if 16:10 center was used). 3D gaming view is prioritized over computing view & platformers. Inner bezels feel pushed comfortably out of central vision. Middle-ground, & biased tester's top choice.


16:10


Center is perceived semi-tall & semi-slim. Height prioritized, width slightly limited. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center (unless used with fat sides). Attached sides will show more height (than if 16:9 center was used). Computing & platformers view is prioritized over 3D gaming view. Inner bezels may feel encroaching, being pushed weakly out of central vision.


~21:9 UltraWide


Center is perceived extremely wide & extremely short. Width extremely prioritized, height an afterthought. This perception will remain in all layouts created with this center; vertical peripheral vision will not be covered. Attached sides will show less height (than if 16:9 center was used). But LLL crowd & others may find center very appealing. Its layout views are nearly LLL aspect. Will feel very height-limited in 3D gaming view & substandard for platformers & computing view (latter negated if screen-segmenting software). Inner bezels feel pushed far out of central vision.



Sides For Big 16:9 Center


Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.

Medium Sides



  • Sides have medium perceived width. Large enough for game immersion & computing. 5/10 (medium) extra weight on resources. Middle-ground, & biased tester's top choice.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized well. Peripheral vision is covered on sides, with no overkill side width. Overall layout may feel hint short & wide.




Slim Sides



  • Sides have slim perceived width. Still very good, just large enough for game immersion & computing. 4/10 (medium-low) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit strongly. Peripheral vision remains basically covered on sides, while height is very slightly emphasized.




Semi-Fat Sides



  • Sides have semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit weakly. Peripheral vision is covered amply on sides, with slight overkill side width. Overall layout may feel somewhat short & wide.




Fat Sides



  • Sides have fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 7/10 (high-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized weakly. Peripheral vision is covered in abundance on sides, with overkill side width. Overall layout may feel significantly short & wide.




Skinny Sides



  • Sides have skinny perceived width. Likely unsatisfying. Not large enough for proper game immersion & cramped for computing. 3/10 (low-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized very strongly. Peripheral vision is poorly covered on sides, while height is emphasized.





Sides For Big 16:10 Center


Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.


Medium Sides



  • Sides are tall & medium perceived width. Large enough for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized well. Peripheral vision is basically covered on sides, while height is slightly emphasized. Overall layout may feel tall & slim.




Semi-Fat Sides



  • Sides are tall & semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 7/10 (high-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized a bit weakly. Peripheral vision is covered on sides, with no overkill side width. Overall layout may feel a hint tall & slim.




Fat Sides



  • Sides are tall & fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 8/10 (high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized weakly. Peripheral vision is covered amply on sides, with slight overkill side width. But side width compensates well for the slim center.





Sides For Big ~21.9 UltraWide Center


Impressions relevant primarily for 27"-34" centers.


Semi-Fat Sides



  • Sides are short & semi-fat perceived width. Ample for game immersion & computing. 5/10 (medium) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized fairly strongly. Peripheral vision is covered amply horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel somewhat far away. Overall layout feels quite short & wide.




Fat Sides



  • Sides are short & fat perceived width. Overkill for game immersion & computing. 6/10 (medium-high) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized strongly. Peripheral vision is covered in abundance horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel slightly far away. Overall layout feels very short & wide.




Medium Sides



  • Sides are short & medium perceived width. Looks good, just large enough for game immersion & computing. 3/10 (low-ish) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized very strongly. Peripheral vision is covered horizontally, but vertical vision lost & sides will feel far away. Overall layout feels short & wide.




Skinny Sides



  • Sides are short & skinny perceived width. Somewhat unsatisfying. Not quite large enough for ideal game immersion & bit cramped for computing. 2/10 (low) extra weight on resources.
  • Overall layout shape: Center screen is emphasized extremely strongly. Peripheral vision is covered on sides through 21:9 center's compensating width. But vertical vision lost & sides will feel quite small & far away. Overall layout may feel awkward, short & wide.





More Help


Source PLP wiki, unabridged layouts list & how-to
http://plp-gaming.wikia.com/wiki/Good_PLP_Monitor_Setups
Last edited by Wookiegr on 12 Aug 2015, 20:54, edited 6 times in total.
Reason: Edit
Haldi
Editors
I Donated
Like a Boss
Joker
User avatar
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 2295
Articles: 2
Game Reports: 41
Joined: 08 May 2011, 18:58
Thats a pretty awesome post!
One thing I've always wondered was: when I have a 37" 16:9 Center Monitor, what Size side monitors do I need in which format to get it working physically and looking good?
Thats one thing you could improve.
We gonna send it to outa space!
imusrt
Insiders
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 344
Blogs: 231
Game Reports: 3
Joined: 21 Oct 2014, 23:33
Thanks Haldi. The post's text is bit subjective & biased, though I tried hard to be fair. I hope it does not offend any PLP owners. Critiquing layouts can be touchy business, because everyone is biased to some degree (including me). The pictures speak for themselves; varied layout shapes in-line to show exactly how they differ.

I completely missed 37" monitor. It may open exciting new possibilities :). Will look into it shortly. Yours 1920x1080? A link to your monitor would help, & also your actual real-life diagonal measurement would help. Also wondering how hard it is to buy this size. Uncommon? Current stock somewhere? Reply, PM or ignore me. It will get done in any case.
suiken_2mieu
Insiders
AMD Eyefinity Users
User avatar
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 2359
Joined: 20 Aug 2009, 04:20
Location: Virginia
This is awesome. You're a real PLP Hero.
System Core: | Intel Core i5-2500K + ASUS P8Z68-V + 16GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1333 MHz | Win7 x64 | MSI R7970 Lightning 3GB [1105/1400] |
Display: | 3 x Dell Ultrasharp 3007WFP-HC @ 7680x1600 | Dell u3011 |
Misc: | SilverStone RAVEN RV03B-W | Corsair TX750 | Seagate 1.5TB | Western Digital 1TB |
Peripherals: | Corsair K95 RGB + Unicomp Model M + Logitech TrackMan Wheel |
Audio: | Onkyo HT-S5100 + Sony SS-U520 + Kenwood SW-32HT |

Wife's PC: | Core2Quad Q6600 | 4GB DDR2 | 5870 2GB E6 | 3 x Dell 2709W @ 5760x1200 | Dell 2209w |

Living Room: (In Progress)
Audio: | Receiver + Sansui S-61U + Sub + Flat Speakers + Center |
Video: | Sony Flat CRT (480i) |
Consoles: | N64 + SNES + WiiU + PS3 + GCN |

Game Room: (In Progress)
Video: | Panasonic Widescreen CRT (480i 480p 1080i) |
Consoles: | GEN + 32X + X360 + Wii + N64 + PS2 |
imusrt
Insiders
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 344
Blogs: 231
Game Reports: 3
Joined: 21 Oct 2014, 23:33
Thanks suiken. Someone had to do it ^^. Plus I am endless curious.

Haldi, I have looked into 37" 1366x768 (720p, e.g. LG M3702C, NEC MultiSync LCD3735WXM).
I am able to make some nice layouts with it. I also noticed this 37" has VESA at center rear, which is great for portrait sides.

BUT issues:
- No layout works with this 37" as center. The PPI variance is too high to match to smaller sides. (I went down to 1280x720 on all plausible sides. If you can go lower, maybe something exists.)
- Can use as sides for Enormous layouts (it fits some 50" to 55" centers, with considerable side hang ~5". AMD PLP H-Shape basically needed).
- You can't buy this monitor new, must find used. This is why I didn't notice it during main testing. But it can still be purchased. I found it available used, local. Getting two that look good together may be effort.

My biased purchase advice, ignore as needed ^^:
- If the intention is PLP, I would recommend starting over (your complete ideal layout, size & shape).
- Aesthetic concerns disappear when gaming, so a pretty-looking layout is of very limited value (but great for photos ^^).
- High PPI desire should remain secondary to overall size (if interested in bang-for-buck & high immersion). Full eye coverage has the strongest immersion impact, followed by PPI).
- Perceived layout size is greatly adjustable (by position): you don't need a huge layout to receive full eye coverage. In general 27"-32" centers (Big Light & Big Heavy type sizes) produce excellent layout views. As opposed to Small Light, Very Big & Enormous (which are basically special cases: budget, overkill & TV scenario).

I say "overkill," but Very Big category has some very desirable layouts, including nice high PPI. These are the ultimate PLP monsters, worthy of drool.
imusrt
Insiders
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 344
Blogs: 231
Game Reports: 3
Joined: 21 Oct 2014, 23:33
To anyone interested: If you don't see the exact layout you need on the wiki, tell me (e.g. you want sides to fit X center). I will try to hunt it down.

I am attempting to track down ALL good PLP layouts, & requests would help with this task. It's a big job, still missing ~20 layouts; working on it.
suiken_2mieu
Insiders
AMD Eyefinity Users
User avatar
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 2359
Joined: 20 Aug 2009, 04:20
Location: Virginia
Hey you may want to add this your wiki as information. If you have 3 monitors of exact resolution and move to PLP with the same monitors you will get a reduction in resolution in which can increase performance.

For 16:10 it's a reduction of 25% or 75% of the original LLL resolution.
For 16:9 it's it's a reduction of 29% or 71% of the original LLL resolution.

It's useful if you're on older hardware, although at the moment, that's a R9 285.
System Core: | Intel Core i5-2500K + ASUS P8Z68-V + 16GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1333 MHz | Win7 x64 | MSI R7970 Lightning 3GB [1105/1400] |
Display: | 3 x Dell Ultrasharp 3007WFP-HC @ 7680x1600 | Dell u3011 |
Misc: | SilverStone RAVEN RV03B-W | Corsair TX750 | Seagate 1.5TB | Western Digital 1TB |
Peripherals: | Corsair K95 RGB + Unicomp Model M + Logitech TrackMan Wheel |
Audio: | Onkyo HT-S5100 + Sony SS-U520 + Kenwood SW-32HT |

Wife's PC: | Core2Quad Q6600 | 4GB DDR2 | 5870 2GB E6 | 3 x Dell 2709W @ 5760x1200 | Dell 2209w |

Living Room: (In Progress)
Audio: | Receiver + Sansui S-61U + Sub + Flat Speakers + Center |
Video: | Sony Flat CRT (480i) |
Consoles: | N64 + SNES + WiiU + PS3 + GCN |

Game Room: (In Progress)
Video: | Panasonic Widescreen CRT (480i 480p 1080i) |
Consoles: | GEN + 32X + X360 + Wii + N64 + PS2 |
Haldi
Editors
I Donated
Like a Boss
Joker
User avatar
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 2295
Articles: 2
Game Reports: 41
Joined: 08 May 2011, 18:58
imusrt wrote:To anyone interested: If you don't see the exact layout you need on the wiki, tell me (e.g. you want sides to fit X center). I will try to hunt it down.

I am attempting to track down ALL good PLP layouts, & requests would help with this task. It's a big job, still missing ~20 layouts; working on it.

That would actually be way better in a interactive web page where you can enter monitor size and resolution and it dynamically creates the layouts.
We gonna send it to outa space!
imusrt
Insiders
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 344
Blogs: 231
Game Reports: 3
Joined: 21 Oct 2014, 23:33
I agree, PLP tools like this would be awesome addition on WSGF ^^. Another example is the FOV calculator. I do not believe it works for PLP, though not tested it recently.

Re this lookup engine idea. It would not be fun to code, but someone here could do it if they wanted to. Requires lookup data from a pile of existing monitors (at various resolutions each). But also requires soft logic to find near-matches that will safely line up pixels (user-perceived perfect, once monitors are positioned). Dead-on matches are totally not required for perceived perfect pixel line-up. PPI variance would tell the engine how sides should be positioned, & whether or not user will likely be able to hide a bezel. There are other details to consider, but that's the main. The coder would have to do a fair amount of physical testing first, to understand limits & variables.

Engine should not play it too safe, or it will miss some awesome layouts (hide-a-bezel). Likely best if engine is overly-flexible & shows warnings on questionable matches. Then require human intervention to pinpoint optimal results from all matches listed. (This human would have to be the inexperienced user, using the per-layout warnings as a guide)

Actually listing layouts is also important (at least for the time being):
- It shows people examples, which gives them an idea of what can be done with PLP. ATM the world is poorly informed.
- It allows the showing of warnings or market details, per-layout. An engine could provide this, but doubt it would.

More awesome ideas:
- A multi-monitor stand could be sold that works well with PLP (within a size range. Would need to be more adjustable, as sides are often not bezel-to-bezel).
- A company offering complete PLP layouts for purchase. These would be fine-tuned specifically for PLP, no monkeying required.
Haldi
Editors
I Donated
Like a Boss
Joker
User avatar
Offline
 
Forum Posts: 2295
Articles: 2
Game Reports: 41
Joined: 08 May 2011, 18:58
imusrt wrote:Requires lookup data from a pile of existing monitors (at various resolutions each).


Nearly impossible.
But you could create a tool where you enter Main Monitor in Pixelwidth Pixelheight and size in inches, plus side Monitors and it would show you how well they line up and endresolution / size
Then it would be the users job to find a suitable Monitor.
We gonna send it to outa space!
Next

Return to Blogs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests