Widescreen Gaming Forum

[-noun] Web community dedicated to ensuring PC games run properly on your tablet, netbook, personal computer, HDTV and multi-monitor gaming rig.
Last visit was: less than a minute ago It is currently 06 Jun 2020, 03:08

All times are UTC [ DST ]




 [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2011, 13:01 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
I agree about the 120hz projectors. Right now there are some really good options out there at the $600 level that are 3D Ready DLP and 1280x800. I've actually used GT720 with NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround and it's quite impressive. I'm also working with AMD to work through getting the DDD and iz3D 3D drivers working triple-projector on the AMD side. Personally I want to sell my own Optoma EX525ST and swap them out for Optoma GT700 or GT720. I've used GT720 with the AMD events and just wish I had more readily access to them instead of my EX525ST. The EX525ST are decent brightness, lens throw and bulb life, but they are way too bulky a projector compared to the GT700/GT720. I only wish a company like BenQ or Optoma would listen to my input on projector specs. In an ideal world I'd like to see a 1080p, 0.49:1 lens throw, 120hz dual-dvi & displayport capable, 2500 lumens LED light source entry level projector. I guess dreaming is nice. It got me this far. :wink:

If I would of had my way edge blending would have been implemented in NTHUSIM a year ago. This is a very active debate internally. 100% of the concern is how opening edge blending to NTHUSIM might effect Immersaview's Sol7 customer-base. Sol7 is much better income for Immersaview than NTHUSIM is. Sol7 is the commercial line which has a much different license policy. The issue becomes, what happens if edge blending is implemented in both Sol7 and NTHUSIM? NTHUSIM users are only licensed for home/non-commercial use. What keeps an unethical commercial user from simply just buying NTHUSIM and paying 1/10th the cost to do what they need? The reason why there is no movement yet on edge blending is because there is no straight cut answer yet to that issue that has been worked out yet. The code for edge blending has always existed in Immersaview products. It's just commented out for NTHUSIM builds until a proper answer can be found for this issue.

I pose the question knowing full well most every NTHUSIM user wants edge blending -- me included. How does Immersaview keep the commercial user from using NTHUSIM and cutting out Sol7 use? We already know how to combat Warpalizer -- simply just add in edge blending. Problem is, the issue is the commercial side of things and not Warpalizer itself. Although Warpalizer sort of invalidates the whole argument, because they target Warpalizer at both hobbyist and commercial. Edge blending is something I definitely want, but the issue is not so easy as just adding it in.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 


PostPosted: 24 Jan 2011, 13:27 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
Hi Brad,

You have actually touched on something there that I had been meaning to check out, and you seem like you might know the answer. The card I was thinking of using for additional displays is an Nvidia Quadro NVS 440 (because it's Nvidia, cheap and provides 4 ports from a single slot (I will be very tight for space), it's also passively cooled and since the whole PC will be watercooled and practically silent that is important to me).

It is listed on the NVidia site as using the Quadro driver so would be a different driver than the cards which will be running the projectors (I'll be using 580GTXs). I hadn't realised up till now that there were different drivers for the quadro cards. Does the fact that this uses a separate driver mean it won't work? If that's the case I might have to consider keeping my th2go to put on a geforce type card, as I am not aware of any that are cheap and provide 4 ports, unless you can suggest something.

By the way, if you don't mind me taking the thread off-topic slightly and asking you another question I'd like to ask how I should deal with projector placement. I am considering viewsonic pjd7382 (4:3) projectors which have a throw of 0.61 to 1. Doing the numbers I see that I am just able to place them such that each is exactly the right distance to throw equal size images around a 180 degree screen. The numbers I'm working with generate throws between 39 and 48 inches in a radius somewhere in the 57 to 72 inch range. I see from the spreadsheet that I can't increase the FOV much beyond 180 degrees without the placement starting to become very tight - I had considered going to 225 degrees (FSX can do this by using multiple view windows) of physical screen, then when playing other stuff with a maximum FOV of 180 degrees I could warp the image in to the middle thus sacrificing about 25 percent of my horizontal resolution to maintain the 1 to 1 relationship between game FOV and screen arc and stop things looking stretched. Could I even leave the warping set up as it was for 225 degrees then create a custom resolution to get the game to use 180/225ths of the actual resolution horizontally, or if I did that would the projector just scale that back up and project it across the whole screen? - it looks like 225 degrees actually won't even be possible due to projector placement problems, but I see I might get 210 or something, have you ever tried anything like this?


Although it's a Quadro card, I believe the standard NVIDIA driver installer can see that card too, or the inf can at least be modded to use the standard Geforce driver. Some of this is assumption on my part and from seeing Quadro reference in the driver inf previously.

Personally, I've done nothing over 180 degrees because I setup my system to be as generic as possible for gaming and movies. With how most game camera code is done, anything over 180 degrees leads to either issues or outright crashes of the game. The 225 FOV is something I've worked up the math for previously using 1280x800 projector specs for though. The primary issue is that every projector model is different when it comes to mounting location. Lens throw and aspect ratio are the major dictating factors for that. The only real target for something like 225 FOV would be MSFS as it's the special exception to the camera code issues I mentioned previously.

I guess my questions before attempting to answer are #1, what is your target use for the setup? #2, Will it always be dedicated to that target use? #3, What specific software/game are you going to use?

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 26 Jan 2011, 08:20 
Offline

Joined: 16 May 2007, 00:38
Posts: 20
Hi,

There is an answer to a question I have not found yet.

For those that are really keen for edge blending on their projected commodity games with Windows 7; how do you intend to produce an image overlap such that you actually have something to blend with?

I have no knowledge of Warpalizer but its advertising alludes to a function for this (in the absence of an application or display driver extension handling it). I can only assume that is will do some framebuffer combining and chopping (perhaps as SoftTH might) then scaling or cropping so that a standard resolution is presented to the projector.

Sol7 does not advertise such a function for image overlap but it is preferred practice in the simulation industry to have control over your application's camera FOV's and channels sizes.

I also do not have (recent) experience of multiview flight sims, if you can control your camera fov for them I guess you could create an overlap. How would you anticipate a standard single camera game will look in surround 2d/3d when the projectors are overlapped?

Shame that the NVidia Surround bezel management utility does not handle negative values, we'd be getting close to such a utility.

Cheers


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 26 Jan 2011, 12:31 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
I don't happen to have Sol7 installed at the moment, but SimVisuals is just like Sol7 as far as functionality and configuration. Hopefully the pics below help explain a bit.




_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 02 Mar 2011, 05:09 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 Feb 2011, 09:31
Posts: 49
BHawthorne can you please include a link to SimVisuals, i can't seem to find it via google.

_________________
)'(


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 02 Mar 2011, 10:58 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
BHawthorne can you please include a link to SimVisuals, i can't seem to find it via google.


http://www.immersaview.com. It's Sol7, but with desktop prewarping and a screen kit that comes with it. SimVisuals is a package deal type of setup, while Sol7 is just a software option.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 03 Mar 2011, 13:01 
Offline

Joined: 25 Sep 2007, 02:33
Posts: 25
Warpalizer definitely wins in image quality as you can see in all of the videos posted. Its biggest problem though is compatibility; currently not all games work with Warpalizer, it has no DX 10 or 11 support at the moment, and zero support with Steam overlay. I'm not sure if NTHUSIM suffers from the same problems, but the people over at warpalizer are working on these issues.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 03 Mar 2011, 17:59 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
Warpalizer definitely wins in image quality as you can see in all of the videos posted. Its biggest problem though is compatibility; currently not all games work with Warpalizer, it has no DX 10 or 11 support at the moment, and zero support with Steam overlay. I'm not sure if NTHUSIM suffers from the same problems, but the people over at warpalizer are working on these issues.


Not sure which videos show image quality that you refer to. The only difference is edge blending. NTHUSIM also is incompatible with Steam in-game overlay. This has been an incompatibility issue for about a year now. NTHUSIM blows Warpalizer away as far as compatibility. DX 7, 8, 9, 10, 10.1, 11 and OpenGL work great.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2011, 08:27 
Offline

Joined: 25 Sep 2007, 02:33
Posts: 25
I do like the compatibility of NTHuism, but the video quality is very different. I use both, Nthusim distorts the image and makes small text and details hard to make out. Warpalizer doesn't do that, and it controls the light of the 3 projectors much better.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2011, 12:47 
Offline
Insiders
Insiders
User avatar

Joined: 06 May 2006, 12:46
Posts: 1640
I do like the compatibility of NTHuism, but the video quality is very different. I use both, Nthusim distorts the image and makes small text and details hard to make out. Warpalizer doesn't do that, and it controls the light of the 3 projectors much better.



Hrrrm, wonder if that wouldn't be a side effect of what type of scaling type they use. I'm curious what both use. Nearest neighbor, bilinear or bicubic scaling? Thanks for pointing it out. I'll see if NTHUSIM can't use bicubic scaling.

_________________
Brad Hawthorne
Product Manager
Nthusim Pty. Ltd. | www.nthusim.com


Top
  
 
 [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group