Triple monitor weirdness
-
Well it looks and is ok.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
But it isn’t and mathematically can’t be. How can an image be dimensionally changed and still be the same?
Another way to think of bezel correction vs non is two windows next to each other. Bezel Correction would be the frame between the two windows blocking some of your view, whereas no correction would show no outside view blocked by the frame and the view magically being perfectly stitched together from one window to another. Of course this isn’t physically possible so your a outside view would look funny.
I really can’t get this across well enough in words and I’m not good enough with photoshop etc. You’ll jjst have to take my word that bezel correction is a thing and exists if you want your image to be correct, but live with the downside of losing part of the image ‘behind’ the bezel.
Watch this video, see how everything still lines up nicely, desite the iamge not being displayed where the bezels are? How could the GPU ‘know’ to offset the image because of a physical property? Easy, Bezel Correction.
Here’s my crude explanation.
Image 1: Sorry for the blurred photo.This is what the GPU produces at 5760x1080. Visually, it’s correct, but the rendered image is virtual and doesn’t ‘know’ about bezels that will break the image up.
Image 2: Here, the rendered image is on 3 displays; still the same 5760x1080 res, but it has been split apart by the bezels so you get weird steps in the curved canopy frame. Let’s assume the screens are really old and the bezel accounts for 10% of the horizontal dimension
Image 3: crude bezel correction applied. You increase the x dimension by 10% to account for the bezels, so now our resolution is 6336x1080. The image is then shifted accordingly meaning that you’re still only displaying 1920x1080 on each screen, but the remaining pixels are wasted as they’re where the bezels are. The GPU has to do the work still, but the VDU doesn’t show them.
You can’t simply shift the centre page up; yes the cockpit curve would line up, but you’re stretching the overall image without actually adjusting the contents of the image accordingly. Cut a pencil in half, and shift the halves apart 2 inches. Yes they ‘line up’, but is the pencil still the same length visually? No.Put the pencil back together and put a 2" book mark on top and you’ve not changed the pencil but have accounted for the bezels.
As said above, what would bother you more; the visual mismatch, or loosing objects ‘behind’ the bezels (watch the blue bins etc in that video).
I hope this makes more sense.
-
Going back to the OP’s question, not sure why it’s doing it, but many will recommend full screen windowed mode anyway. You won’t notice any difference to true fullscreen and it’ll probably be more compatible with windows nuisances and allow you to alt tab safely.
-
How am I stretching an unstreched Image by physically just moving the middle monitor just a notch up?
I don’t loose any pixels from the image.
As you say u stretch the image and at the same time you loose displayed pixels.In the example used the pit has a metal frame. In our most common situation the F16 c doesn’t have anything just glass.
So at the bottom line as said in previous post with the bezel correction you might not see targets in the mfd Wich is a major pita for your sa. Though having the mfd display on the bezel correction gap I find it hard to happen as the zoom and view angle ain’t the usual.
Without bezel correction there is no way to loose targets from the mfd, the worst case could be some pixels to be on one monitor and the rest on the other.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
How am I stretching an unstreched Image by physically just moving the middle monitor just a notch up?
I don’t loose any pixels from the image.
As you say u stretch the image and at the same time you loose displayed pixels.In the example used the pit has a metal frame. In our most common situation the F16 c doesn’t have anything just glass.
So at the bottom line as said in previous post with the bezel correction you might not see targets in the mfd Wich is a major pita for your sa. Though having the mfd display on the bezel correction gap I find it hard to happen as the zoom and view angle ain’t the usual.
Without bezel correction there is no way to loose targets from the mfd, the worst case could be some pixels to be on one monitor and the rest on the other.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
The easiest solution to cure the problem is have zero bezel screens. By moving the centre screen up you’re actually adding disalignment to the Y axis also. If you don’t believe me, watch a target fly across left to right in front of you. You’ll see him instantly jump up across the middle screen, then down again when he enters the right screen.
The only way to have a ‘correctly’ mapped image across screens with bezels is to use correction, however you have to be preparred to lose objects behind the bezel. With the correction, you can correctly consider the three screens as one, with the bezels lying on top of the image instead of incorrectly splitting the image. Or just don’t use correction, and understand that the image you’re seeing on the three screens doesn’t line up perfectly with what your eyes ‘should’ see. Like with anything, it’s never going to be perfect when attempting to display a 3D world on 2D screens. Bezel correction, like FOV adjustments, is just another tool to improve it.
If you still won’t knowledge that this is a something that exists and can be accounted for (if one wishes to) with all the videos and articles out there, I’m not sure how else I can explain it better. Just enjoy some beers and flying
-
If you still won’t acknowledge that this is a something that exists and can be accounted for (if one wishes to) with all the videos and articles out there, I’m not sure how else I can explain it better.)
Ding Ding Ding, you head the nail on the head!!! You’re wasting your time, he’ll never acknowledge it. He’s right and all his stuff is correct!!! He doesn’t have the time to post a pic, but has time to argue that you’re wrong, so that’s proof enough it’s not worth your time!!!
But thanks for the information for all the others that will heed the info and enjoy multiple monitor use to the fullest that they can.
Cheers,
C9
-
C9 once again the same.
So since u want to put the finger on the wound. For the whole week I’m participating as an exhibitor in the Thessaloniki international fair. So my day is full from when I wake up till 23:00 when I finally return home. The fair ends today.
Tommorow morning though I’ll be extremely tired I’ll fire up my PC an take a photo. Then I’ll post it.
So an apology from you is in order in this case I believe from your childish and immature Post.
I never said I know all I never said I’m always right.
Many times I apologised in this forum cause I was wrong, and you only see half of the picture.
The reason I’m persistent on this matter is cause I have 3 monitors, I see it almost every day. So either I’m blind or stupid enough to understand it.
Also numbers wise as I said the split on 3 monitors doesn’t hide pixels, the bezzel correction does, so…Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
The reason I’m persistent on this matter is cause I have 3 monitors, I see it almost every day. So either I’m blind or stupid enough to understand it.
Also numbers wise as I said the split on 3 monitors doesn’t hide pixels, the bezzel correction does, so…Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Yup, correct. As I have said, without BC no pixels are wasted or hidden, but you will have an image that is supposed to be 36" wide that becomes 38" say. Take a photo in the A10/F-15 pit, something that has a front canopy frame and I will show you what I mean. You can’t separate an image into 3 different images (screens), separate them (bezels), and then have the same image in the same space, it just doesn’t work. Go take a panoramic photo of your favourite river and birdge. Print it off, split it into three separate photo frames, and notice how the image no longer lines up correctly. Even if you shift the centre image up slightly, arcs and curves may align but horizontals will not.
Whether it bothers you or not is entirely up to you, but accounting for bezels is something that is a legitimate thing to do with multiple displays; it is like saying you don’t notice screen tearing without VSync. Just because you don’t notice it doesn’t mean it’s not there.
-
ok unfortunately this morning bms didn’t want to enter in 3d. it stayed in the first pie forever. I was trying some staff for external touch monitors and I must fubared the d3d dll.
I hope in the evening to be able to make it work, though i’m tired as hell.The only thing I could capture was this in the loading screen which I believe is the worst example:
I see the point in BC and in a way as you describe looks and sounds logical but the fact that loosing pixels and at the same time increase the resolution and actually stretching the image in my personal opinion seems unreasonable, and kinda like an eye kandy than an actual useful practice. U actually don’t gain in respect to the displayed image but in the general feeling - experience of the image.
-
ok unfortunately this morning bms didn’t want to enter in 3d. it stayed in the first pie forever. I was trying some staff for external touch monitors and I must fubared the d3d dll.
I hope in the evening to be able to make it work, though i’m tired as hell.The only thing I could capture was this in the loading screen which I believe is the worst example:
https://i.postimg.cc/CKMSZgft/IMG_20180917_102348.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/zfd5KcCf/IMG_20180917_102434.jpg
I see the point in BC and in a way as you describe looks and sounds logical but the fact that loosing pixels and at the same time increase the resolution and actually stretching the image in my personal opinion seems unreasonable, and kinda like an eye kandy than an actual useful practice. U actually don’t gain in respect to the displayed image but in the general feeling - experience of the image.
Yes. Well I think we’ve been mixed up in each other’s points. I totally understand the negatives of bezel correction especially for flight sims when #1 2nm away could easily stay hidden behind a bezel - we’d need new brevity “2 bezel blind on 1, 14’000”
For racing etc, I can totally see the benefits of it.
-
with 3 screens and a trackir you never lose a target behind a bezel.
If you do, you have the SA of a peanut just joking, no really
Bezel correction is the way to go to get the image nice alligned and creating some fake canopy bezels
3x 1980x1200 => 5940x1200 => 5925x1200 bezel correction in Nvidia Surrond
You also have to select this resolution in BMS setup
when using this resolution to fly i have my FOV => set g_fDefaultFOV 120 -
with 3 screens and a trackir you never lose a target behind a bezel.
If you do, you have the SA of a peanut just joking, no really
Bezel correction is the way to go to get the image nice alligned and creating some fake canopy bezels
3 x 1980x1200 => 5940x1200 => 5925x1200 bezel correction in Nvidia Surrond
You also have to select this resolution in BMS setup
when using this resolution to fly i have my FOV => set g_fDefaultFOV 120Yup, that’s just it. I wasn’t saying that bezel correction is how one must have it, but I just needed to get it across that it exists for a reason. One has to decide which is more preferable; a ‘correct’ image or not losing objects ‘behind’ bezels.
-
So C9 terribly sorry for the delay. I’ll go and whip my self later on.
But I just found the time and after 2 hours of continues restarts and manual uninstall of the two daemons for the display extraction Falcon did worked as it should…So photos:
[url[url=https://postimg.cc/DmK8fRxx]://postimg.cc/DmK8fRxx]
results are yours.
On is on purpose for the left MFD on the bezels where the minus symbol is visible on both screens. Edit: (unfortunately I had to reduce the image resolution of the photo and the minus symbol doesn’t show that good on the left screen)
Can you post a similar one with bezel correction were the minus symbol will be visible on both but split in half? -
So C9 terribly sorry for the delay. I’ll go and whip my self later on.
But I just found the time and after 2 hours of continues restarts and manual uninstall of the two daemons for the display extraction Falcon did worked as it should…So photos:
https://i.postimg.cc/MHSs7pHx/IMG_20180921_212423.jpg
[url[url=https://postimg.cc/DmK8fRxx]https://i.postimg.cc/05zmnsD1/IMG_20180921_212458.jpg://postimg.cc/DmK8fRxx]https://i.postimg.cc/05zmnsD1/IMG_20180921_212458.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/hjxyQdSp/IMG_20180921_212613.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/rp7ZpJLD/IMG_20180921_212624.jpg
results are yours.
On is on purpose for the left MFD on the bezels where the minus symbol is visible on both screens. Edit: (unfortunately I had to reduce the image resolution of the photo and the minus symbol doesn’t show that good on the left screen)
Can you post a similar one with bezel correction were the minus symbol will be visible on both but split in half?I haven’t got triple monitors, but can you see on your left MFD, where the bezel intersects the buttons? With correction enabled, the MFD wouldn’t physically resemble a rectangle as per your photo. Instead, the image would be adjust so that the MFD (when lying over two monitors) is shifted ‘under’ the bezel. This means that in the view above, you’d only see 3 or 4 of the 5 buttons, but the image wouldn’t be distorted as it is in your image.
As before, I know I’d prefer to see all the buttons even if the MFDs appear rectangular like in your photo, but my point all along is that to have a ‘true’ image across more than one screen, you either have to correct for bezels or have zero bezel displays.
Here’s a very simple mockup using paint.
Here’s your image, showing you can see all MFD info. Notice the yellow lines showing the MFD shape and green showing you can see all buttons.
And bezel corrected. MFD is much nearer what the GPU is producing as the correct image (what a single display would show. Notice however, that the MFD buttons in red are rendered off screen, ‘behind’ the bezzle.
-
Thanks for going to the trouble to explain it.
U r right and I was wrong on how I thought of bezel correction.
Cloud9 read the previous sentence please.
But, I usually fly as u see in the first pictures and not zoomed in as the last.
In those the bezzel correction is kind of pointless.
Sure it looks better with bezzel correction but loosing all that area where it shouldn’t I believe not on mfd but in a DF you could loose sight of a target.
I prefer mine as is to tell u the truth.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
U r right and I was wrong on how I thought of bezel correction.
Cloud9 read the previous sentence please.Yeah, now there’s really hope for the world!!!
C9
-
Thanks for going to the trouble to explain it.
U r right and I was wrong on how I thought of bezel correction.
Cloud9 read the previous sentence please.
But, I usually fly as u see in the first pictures and not zoomed in as the last.
In those the bezzel correction is kind of pointless.
Sure it looks better with bezzel correction but loosing all that area where it shouldn’t I believe not on mfd but in a DF you could loose sight of a target.
I prefer mine as is to tell u the truth.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Yeah that was exactly my point. I was merely trying to get across that it exists and can be fixed, but like you, I would advise against it for flight sims, as you’d very easily pose targets or flight members behind the bezels. Great for racing or the likes of GTA etc. though.