32:9 curved, two variants for the FOV, which is correct?

I have been thinking which method is more correct for calculating FOV for curved monitor.

In my case I have 49" Samsung 32:9 1800mm curvature. I am sitting 55cm to the screen.
Here is the data:
screen height Y=336mm
screen curved width XL = 1196mm (actually the aspect 32:9 is the XL:Y)
screen straight width X = 1174mm
distance to screen is D0 = 550mm

I will not go into formulas and calculations, but directly the results:
calculated vFOV = 34 degree
calculated hFOV = 104.85 degree - it is the real view taking in consideration the curvature
calculated hFOVunfold = 94.78 degree - it is the value if the monitor is not curved


ACC is using vertical fov. ACC does not know (I guess) that my monitor is curved and if I put vfov 34 it will render horizotal view 95 degrees. But my real view should be 105 degrees. So I have correct vfov but incorrect hfov. In other words I am "loosing" 10 degrees horizontal view.

I think that it is more important to have matching (realistic) horizontal view than vertical.
So in order to force ACC to visualize horizontal real 105 degrees I calculate that vFOV in game should be 40 degrees.

What do you think is it correct?

Here are some screenshots/eyeview/photos
fov 34






fov 40





Edit: attaching my excel file for calculating curved fovs - fov.zip

 

Thanks for doing the math! I have the same monitor and spent the afternoon getting all my cars to vFOV 40. Had a lot of fun in the process

 

Have you tried the triple screen method? As in setting up the one monitor as three 400mm wide screens with 13 degree angle between them. That would fix the incorrect vertical fov problem I guess.

If not using the triple screen thing I think the lost accurate way would be to measure the distance from your eyes to the monitor like this. Sorry for super bad quality pics .

 

@ohjeah, yes in the past I have tried the triple screen option .. and yes in my opinion it is mathematically correct (the diff between real and curved view would be very very small and negligible). But there were two issues there - the border between screen is very noticeable - like the lighting on the center and side screen is different. The other problem, not so important, is that I am loosing some fps performance (may be 5% to 10%).

 

Setting post processing to low mostly fixes the lighting difference.

 

Thanks, may be tonight will experiment again with triple screen option

 

Based on you how to process vision.
"Need more information" or just "Need Everything are fit"

FOV means your how much degree you could see on your montier edge.
Game engine FOV standard always measure as mono eye camera in 4:3 or 16:9
However this not modify your eyes. your eye would always look around,

if limited like 40 degree, such as your head and eye is fixed by screw.
More than 65 are compress like fish eye.
Set 90 on your curve monitor is meansless.

If the FOV degree are small, would make thing "move slowly" since everything scale are "Zoomed in" in perspective.

So....

"Need more information"
Keep 55-65 is okay. remain screen left side could see the mirror, and just touch A-pillar.

"Need everything are fit"
If you need your steering wheel is fit your real sight and Game screen, move your screen physically and adjust in game seat position. if everything on position and still not same scale.
Means Screen Dpi is wrong, This moment edit FOV for zoom.

FOV in real actual acting like Magnifying glass or lens.
some tool for calculate FOV for fixed screen, this is fool, this never give you real feel and limited your view in small monitor. (when 22inch LCD screen and this 50cm far away from your eyes.)

Moreover, your curve monitor just such as two 1080p screen, the horizontal field never longer than tripe screen. This important.

 

Assuming Cockpit/Helmet view, your setting of 34 degrees is correct. Having a "wider field of view" may appear to give you a sense of speed, since in a real car it is your peripheral vision is telling you more how rapidly you are passing an object (if you are looking "straight ahead" concentrating on the road objects do appear to move rather slowly. Which is what true triple screens try to accomplish by having the side monitors end at 90 degrees either side of your head for 180 wrap around for you to look to. None of the "super-ultra-wide" monitor are large enough and curved enough to accomplish this (they are still basically "flat"). If you stop and think about how you drive in real life, in almost all cars, you cannot see your mirrors unless you turn your head/eyes to look (unless you are driving from the back seat). I would suggest if your not going to install "real triples" , then VR is your best bet if you can "stomach" some of its short comings. Otherwise, I would suggest adding TrackIR5 with a minimal vertical/ horizontal custom profile which will allow you control your look to dash, mirrors, and apex ( also sense of speed, it works better than a lot of people give credit for...as long as you're not a total "Bobblehead").

I currently run a single 34" 3440x1440 1900r @ 22" viewing distance 34 deg FOV with TrackIR5 (VR Oculus Rift S still gives me a headache and resolution is still too low for me personally)

 

Two years ago I had real triples 3 x 27". It was great, but they were taking too much space in my home Than I switched to VR (samsung odyssey +), it was great immersion. But I wear glasses, tried a couple of options with additional lens with my diopters specs, but it could not really work well, so I gave up and switched to the ultra wide.

Now on ACC I ended using triple screen option (on my single ultrawide display). In my opinion it gives the best and most realistic geometry and FOV. The issue with the lines between the virtual screens is almost negligible when postprocessing is set to low.

 

I tried the tripple monitor option for my Samsung wide screen but when it rains during a race I can clearly see the lines between the monitors. That is so irritating that I switched back to single screen settings. Would this be fixed with the post-processing setting to low, too? I'm unfortunately away from my rig, so I cannot try this now.

 

Thanks your FOV settings worked a treat for me

 

Just bought the G9 odyssey, how to set perspective properly?

 

Anyone have an idea on how set this r1000 curved monitor?

 

The ideal part of a curved screen is that hFoV = 2*atan(w/(2*d) ) where w is screen width in a straight line from edge to edge and d is the distance from the edges in the direction perpendicular to the edge-to-edge line.
In theory, the rest of the screen is perfect if your eyes are centered at the R number in mm.

 

My Samsung G9 just arrived today - and everything is a bit odd... Do you play with the distance and angle settings also? Does anybody can share theyre settings for a G9 please?

 

It's Samsung chg9, but same would apply to latest g9 I think.
Triple screen option enabled.

just adjust your distance to screen

 

Thank you for the fast reply. With tripple monitor enabled I get this 2 vertical lines?

Who do you get that right?

Post processing on low doesnt help here.

 

U may play witth scale option in grafix settings +/- 1 or 2, which how I solved mine.

 

@DaReaLDeviL now I saw that G9 has 1000R, curvature so my settings does not apply correct to you. In view settings side screen angle in your case should be 23 degrees.

 

@georgi iovchev Thank you - the fov with 23 looks perfekt. But I can't get the horizontal lines managed away by any setting? What was your magic that they dissapear?