Much obliged Sir for your time, effort & the wealth of knowledge, your channel has its own vibe, your editing is top notch, background tunes or of the hook, credits are a cool touch & loved the voice filters & loved how all voices where acted out from real individuals. Wish you all the best in your endeavors, God bless you and your family.
Thank you, sir! This really works, and it was definitely worth the wait. I still need to add the buzzle-free kit, but honestly, it doesn't matter anymore. The feeling and feedback I'm getting are just spot on and the density setting just made everything looks and feel better. Keep up the great work, and thank you again!"
I just set my rig up with your method. I just want to say thank you. It's absolutely brilliant. You don't know what you are missing until you do this and see the difference. Sensational!
Thanks to you and the community members that put in the work to test and test and test. I found your previous videos when looking for FOV adjustments for iRacing after feeling like something was off and not feeling right, and this is the video that I've been waiting for. I spent the weekend setting up and testing this and wow, does it make a difference! I feel much more "inside" the car, my lap times are improving and feel a lot more natural to complete. Great job on finding and figuring out all this information, putting things to the test and making it available to everyone. This is what we need in the community. THANK YOU!
This is insanely helpful, I used your last video and now this one, I am using 32” curved monitors so I need to mess with the radius a bit but I feel confident in getting it right. Thankyou for the video and let me know if I can help you with testing
@@sense-of-speeddidn’t realize I wrote my comment in a reply of someone else’s comment, sorry bout that, but I still need to change the angle of my monitors from 56 to 60-65 because that might solve the issue I’m having, just didn’t have enough time last night to mess with it, but will later today
This is a great watch, not only the content but also the way you done it. Love the little jokes you put in and how you play around with your voice, the music in the background and so on. Am quite impressed, this is top notch stuff!
Oh man, you just made my day! As long as i,m iracing, a couple of years now, i always kept messing around with the fov of most cars and never was really satisfied with them. Always looking for new vids on how to get it to my liking. I,m stoked to finally found my answers i,ve been looking for for so long! Finally can stop tweeking around and get into some serious racecraft improvement. Thank you so much!!! 🤩
@@sense-of-speed Conversely, I appreciate where your voice sits in the mix, and my comment would be that the word is PER IF ER AL not PER IF EE AL And then there's me with a Yaw2VR motion rig that makes Monitors "right out" and my inner monologue is going "Awesome. Now do VR...." 5:29 to 5:58 VR users are not presented a rectangular, two dimensional image with linear perspective and we *can* see INTO the monitor...
Thanks. I can not believe I mispelled it for as many times as I went over the damn video. Unreal. VR does render better. Unfortunately, it's not in the cards for me.
@@sense-of-speed Yes I used 660 and then replaced it with 12, but you before doing this via the fov keys go to adjust it at minute 31:29 bring the distance eyes of the fov close to your real distance.
WOW!!! Thank you so so much for your incredible work. I have been iRacing for about 8 years now and using 32” triples for about 4 years but have never felt quite right with my setup. Now I feel immersed inside the car and it feels amazing to drive. Like a whole new sim! You are an asset to the Sim Racing world and iRacing!
The best feedback I can give a guy like you is that after carefully going through your instructions, I felt like I could control my car the way I do when I used to throw my Type R around at the actual track. I'm out of practice on iRacing so I was surprised to see, after implementing your calibrations, that my time deltas for each sector of Laguna were all within hundredths over the previous lap (I've only ever hit a 1600-1800 rating before i.e. not great) My jaw is still dragging on the floor. The fun factor is 10x now and I can't wait to dive in to the rest of your videos. Thank you for your caring and meticulousness. You're a gift to the sport but also to the world. I'm running triple G8 Neos with anti-bezel and ended up setting them at around 72 degrees (at the arm) if you can believe that. They're spaced off the monitor around 8 mm at the top and around 2 mm on the outside bottoms, with the inside bottom flush. Screen is around 650 mm from my eyeball. Slight distortion on diagonals where the lens sits off the screen a bit (a-pillar, etc), but my brain is too stimulated to notice anymore. You're the ultimate anti-bezel kit.
Wow great job man! Watched it once and now i am getting in the rig and re watching it while trying this out. Thats alot of work we can tell. Can`t thank you enough
Thank you so much for this instructions. I just adjusted my settings and it's a while since I have had such a smile while driving. This is a game changer on my triples. Cars and track never looked so right and felt so good. Wow! Would you recommend an angle of 60 degrees for flat 27" triples? Currently they are about 40 degrees and a FOV of about 184, wich feels nice, but has some "broken interior" from one screen to the other. And since I use the curved setting, I can't adjust the angle between the screens anymore in the iracing settings.
Thank you for the support. I do recommend 60-degree angles. This creates a more natural environment for our vision. If you didn't want to change angles, you can try using your actual measurement divided by two for the radius, but others who have gone to 60 degrees report better results.
Finally it feels right! Im also an ex pro-driver within motorsports, and ever since I got my trippel screen setup with quite agressive angles, because of space limitations, I've never got the FOV right. Always felt that I was off somehow, felt "zoomed in" and also the passanger side A-pillar was way too far back... It actually came to the point were I lost interest in the rig for some time! Saved this vid when it came out, just to give it a try when the energy was back so I could jump down the rig. And wow, it really feels better and my need for speed is back again! Thanks again SOS, and if you need more (ex) real life drivers to test out with, I'd be glad to assist! Cheers!
I spent half a day trying to figure out what you did, why it works, what iracing does......drawing your setup, mesuring. I get the Radius and monitor size setting (adding changing the two digits). You basically forced the rendering to render like it was a huge curved monitor, like the expensive simulator you started with. But what I don't understand is the effect of the viewing distance (or better, lack off effect). If I drew correctly, virtually you are looking at 3 1210mm wide monitors, placed on a radius of 1260 mm, on my drawing, with the screen distance 635 mm, you would get 228° vision..close to your initial drawing of the human vision going up to 220. But in my drawing, with your 32 inches at 65 degrees, eye distance 635mm, the monitors physically cut off at 182°. Does it feel off? or does our peripheral vision just ignores it? Trying to figure this stuff out and translate it to 27 inch flat screens. Excellent work, and thanks for the efforts!!! With the 60°mid peripheral vision limit I found out where the 540mm eye distance legend come from. The crossing of two lines drawn at 60° from a 618 wide milimeter monitor is 540 mm. Problem for normal posture people...we never can put that monitor 540mm from our eyes, because the monitor would be on top of the wheel....where we usally put it as close as possible, often right above the base. I am stuck at 590mm, resting my wrist on the top of the wheel my fist touches the screen. My screen angle is 51°. How did I come to this? Well I measured the eye distance I could reach (used to be 550mm), added 9 cm (our eyes are about that distance from our balance center, and center of rotation of our head). So whenever I turned my head I was looking at the center of the screen, perpendicular to it. So I got less fov in the fov calculators. I feel this gives a good result for the smaller monitors up to 27 inches, that will never wrap the full 180 degrees because of rig acces. (Unless you drop in your simrig from the top like a jet fighter pilot). I am going to test with the radius and so on. Will get back to you for the 27 inch and smaller monitors. (Damn I knew I should have saved for 32's)
At my eye distance of 635 creates the most natural position of my body to being in the car at the values I use and I believe 32's to be the minimum size for triples. In regards to vision I'm not concerned with the ending fov number of 186 as the base. I am more concerned about the information 150 degrees and below. Anything beyond that our vision only perceives as visual ques and detail starts to fall off. In the end it is all about the relationship between my body, the front spindles of the car, and the track surface. As we move forward with this past the beta I actually have different values for radius, monitor width, laser scan, and horizon line for every car I drive that all equate to whether or not I can hit my pb on any track and translate what the ffb is trying to communicate to me. It is a rabbit hole but the results have been very interesting.
@@sense-of-speed Did the changes, did a race in the V8 supercars on Fuji...gained more than 1 second!!! Much better view, feels natural..and finally getting that wheel and dashboard where it should be. For the 27 inch flat screen users among us. Follow the steps to the letter!! It works! only thing I changed back was my X seat position. Always keep the last found FOV value before puttin the 12 digit in. My trick is in camera, putting FOV temporarily to 179, scooting the seat back until I just don't see the ears of the seat (normal seats, not the super long ears like in some cars). Then put back that original FOV number. Works like a charm. My V8 Supercar cockpit never looked so realistic. Sense of speed cracked the code on how to get a better rendering of the environment.
@@ivanbaumans1687 Hey ivan but im kinda lost with your first comment, I have also 27's, what distance shouldI I put the monitors to then? and the degrees?
Wow thank you very much. You’ll got no idea on how much you have just helped me After 3 years I could never get it right. This just makes so much sense 💪🔥🔥🔥 Thanks I will be resetting my sim rig doing your step to step 💯💪🙏🏽🔥🔥🔥
Thanks for this video. I’ve been struggling a bit off the pace and this has made everything so much better. It’s amazing how changing the visuals makes you feel the car so much more 👍
What is the point of doing the calculation @29:37 if we arent even using that number (measuring distance between side monitors? Or the better quesiton...at what point DO we use that number?
Lots of great information and I appreciate the in depth explanations as to why you are changing certain settings. With that said, a written guide would be very helpful and save lots of time when going in and making changes. Just a thought for future videos as I was often confused and had to rewind to know what settings you were tweaking. It was also unclear in some of the “tweak to personal preference” settings what I was aiming for and how to change those settings
YES! Written form would be so much better and to be honest much more professional. A good guide with drawings, good formatting and proper editing always trumps a video. thats why there are very few videos about technical topics in professional education.
thanks for the info. this has helped a ton even on my meager single 27 setup. i agree with a written guide, possibly github? maybe a bit more detail on what to adjust and look for with different setups. id like to know what kind of numbers were looking for in the frame meter.
I think the author should charge for a written guide. He is just a hobbyist like the rest of us and think people forget that. He doesn't owe any of us.
Just to make people watching this video aware, the Laser Scan changes make absolutely ZERO difference to 99% of the iRacing experience. The only track where it will have an effect is New Jersey Motorsports Park, an unfinished Tech Track, as the point sizes refer to the literal reference points from the scan data, which are used to actually model the environment, nothing to do with the surface of the track, FFB or anything like that.
I agree. After feeling like something was off after this whole process (multiple attempts), I went with standard calculations for 3 flats, distance, and the correct angles for that distance, my view is much much better. I have 55's at 33" from my eyes, set at 72 degrees for a massive 215-degree FOV. The biggest difference maker in iRacing is adjusting your cockpit camera after setting the proper FOV. When you exit the car, bring up the camera menu, and adjust there. You can move forward and back without affecting fov through the windshield. Also, where your monitors meet, adjust the vanishing Y so any lines (top of walls, paint on the road etc) look straight. This is the warping on the side monitors that you hear about. Vanishing Y corrects that.
From what I am aware he only speaks about differences in files between him and others … But not really saying to change them … For me what worked really good is the worldnearplane value from 10 to 30 And his FOV method that works incredibly well in terms of feeling and what you see For reference I ma on triple 32 g5 1000r curve
All I can say is one really big "thank you" from the bottom of my heart. After 4 years in iRacing I was close to quitting because ( although I am fast and I have good win ratio ) I never felt "in the car" no matter what I changed regarding FOV & camera. I never felt kerbs are where my brain were expecting them to be. Because of this, I had many months of breaks from driving. All I wanted is to seat into my rig and enjoy, but I couldn't. Then I came across your video and after few days of adjustments I was blown away. I'm kissing the kerbs, sliding around them, I'm able to carry exact amount of speed through the corners. I, finally , driving my cars , not opposite ! I'm so sure in what I'm doing that I can look around the track while driving to see so many details I never saw before. I'm achieving my best lap times in more than 15 °C more than before without extra effort. Thank you, man and all the best !
Here is an idea for a project or video... I never did track days, never was in a gt3, i cannot tell what feels "right" all that well. You could try to explain to me (us), how to train our senses in a simulator (iRacing). My eyes are mostly focused on the middle screen, and thats where i get 95% of the ques from. When i look around, i nofice my general awareness go slightly up, but id have no idea how to maximize it, as im too focused on the middle screen.
I ended roughly at that eye distance level and what worked for me was: Monitor width 610 (as shown in the video), with the 60 degree angle my Radius is 600. After clicking done, i've put in the black box 194 (before I was in 174). My actual distance is not exact to the FOV (10 cm less in reality) but as said in the video, it doesnt have to fit to the mm. After a full week of racing in gt4 at watkings glenn I was able to shove 4tenths of my lap time and I can say I trained a lot before making the changes and it was really natural adapting. My trail brake is much more defined with this change. I still havnt changed the values on the directx11 app file but so far its a game changer.
If you follow the instructions in the video you can dial in your eye distance and fov using the bracket keys just like I did on 32's. With good results although I think 540 is a little too close. 600 is usually the sweet spot for 22's
Same question here - I think most of the science falls apart at the point where things aren’t going past your eyes/head but I still got a lot of great takeaways from this as a 49” user
for 49 screen those are my calculations: use monitor width: 1080mm radius of curvature: 1130mm make sure render screen in 3 projections is OFF for single screen (it makes some weird lines spliting the screen in 3). I'm not sure that the final calculations are correct. This is the Base Line.
in regards to the Laser Scan values ,this is what David Tucker at iRacing staff says : "These have to do with the pre-release tracks we have pushed out from time to time. These are tracks with just the racing surface completed. The rest of the world is represented as a point cloud of dots from the raw laser scan data (this is a distilled down set of dots, the raw data is many hundreds of gigabytes). You can tweak these values to make the dots more or less visible. I don't think we have any pre-release tracks out right now, the big one was long beach and I believe we finished it." so these values only effects "pre-release tracks" ,should do nothing at every other track.....
I hate to break it to you but I'm a game graphics programmer and this makes sense. Directx just doesn't work the way you think it does whereas what David says does.
Respectfully a simple back to back test of extreme values would negate the argument. Also considering the graphics configuration tool manipulates the values based on the system is a hint that it has other effects. A very large part of the testing involved the scan and the results are there. Thousands of laps on different cars, tracks, the only tech track available now, and 6 other drivers. Visually you can slightly see the effect by comparing screenshots , mostly in the spread of the trees but, the major differences are only apparent when driving.
@@sense-of-speed So this changes what we feel through FFB too? Out of curiosity, I looked at GPU and CPU usage as well as FPS that's outputted by iracing in Motec, and there is absolutely zero change in these values. If changing these values makes a noticeable difference, should we not expect some effect on our system? In fact, isn't that what you state in the video? I'd be interested in how this was tested and what data supports your hypothesis, not just the naked eye check. Very interesting nonetheless.
If you do not see any negative changes in frame rate or CPU/GPU usage you are in good shape. We are looking for negative effects from load on the system by increasing the density memory to determine how much density we can use. When I started working on the scan last year the first change I made from calculated fov numbers was maxing the density and it was very noticeable in ffb and depth on track. All other testing has been as follows. We used a CSLDD Pro, Simucube Pro2, and DD2. We also had 4 other drivers with other hardware doing comparisons towards the end. For conditions everything has been controlled from start to finish. Same weather, 50 percent rubber, Stock car setups. Proof testing was done on tracks the drivers drove in real life then other tracks. Primary cars for testing were the 296, 992, 963, SR10, and the Indy open wheeler. As I developed and tested values I would make my observations then have the other drivers change values without sharing my thoughts to see if there observations aligned with mine. In almost every instance they did. At the very beginning of the video I say to Ken, "We'll see if you see what I see" That was the first time I introduced him to the near plane adjustment. I'll admit the changes to the scan are hard to quantify with hard data but by changing density we increase the information to pull from as we travel on track. The time we spent developing safe values and learning what we could do is absurd but needed to be because I don't want to give out bad information and you can imagine the combination of numbers we can derive from those 4 values. Typically driving a batch of settings across multiple cars and tracks for days before making changes. As far as data the only related indicator we noticed was the auto FFB. Whenever we started to provide more detail by changing values the auto ffb always wanted to increase the value. By detail I mean sidewall of the tire, texture, curbs more like real life and not so harsh, more mechanical feel in the steering, Gradual build up of tire time temp and gaining back traction once we greased them up. More natural compression of the suspension, and so on. In the end the baseline values are pretty safe and I will get into tuning in the next video. As far as density is concerned I hover between 600 and 680 depending on the car and the size values in the video have worked very well when comparing track relative scale with the drivers on the real tracks they drive. Reaper tends to like 768mb but he is limited to 8nm where the max density adds more weight to the wheel, especially in GT3. Ken is at 680. If you venture into experimenting we can go too far. Especially with the min and max. I don't suggest messing with those too much.
I must say this all sounded a bit pseudo-sciencey at first but I quickly realized what a difference it made for me. Don't get me wrong I was trying to stay open-minded to your ideas, but I was still skeptical becaused I spent sooooo many hours fiddling with the settings and I could never find an FOV setting that felt right, both in terms of scale and me feeling connected with the with the vehicle in my seating position. The baseline changes you suggested absolutely solve my issues, and I'm not even running tripples (I have a 49" super ultrawide 1800R curvature). One other suggestion I'm not sure you covered here is disabling G-Sync. While it does provide extra smoothness it's absolutely not needed if you can maintain 120+ fps and it adds some input lag which despite not being as bad as standard V-Sync you can absolutely feel it and turning it off in your monitor's OSD settings will ensure better latency. Either way, whoever did that testemonial is 100% right in saying this makes the driving experience so much more enjoyable. I always found a lot of joy in improving my racecraft and results but the driving itself always left a lot to be desired and sometimes even dosed me off, but not anymore. Sorry if I'm making some of you even more skeptical than I was but this is an absolute gamechanger for me. Thank you for making this video.
I'm glad you got something from it. I can see your initial point. The science behind our perception of 2d images spans decades while drawing correlation to our hobby is something that would be met with skepticism. That's why I worked with other real-life drivers to see if we could improve the experience and validate my theory based on my art education. In regards to Gsync. I agree. Although it isn't in the video, we did a lot of testing, and I also do not run any fancy monitor settings. Thanks for watching, man.
Turning of Gsync, gives me tearing in sharp corners on some tracks even tho i run a highend pc with plenty headroom in settings (believe me, i have spent many many hours on testing graphics and monitor settings). So Gsync ON is pretty much a must for me.. 13900/4090, triple 32´´1440p, 144hz capped at 141fps. RGT runs at like 2-5ms, monitors are fast, specced at 1-2ms 144hz. The tearing and minor stutters feels so annoying, it bothers me alot more than a minor lag. You guys dont notice any tearing or stuttering? Especially in trees and general far away objects, in sharp corners.
Could you outline which baseline changes you are referring to? I'm on a 49" as well, but I couldn't clearly tell a difference, so I'm afraid I did something wrong. To be sure: the things I altered were the pixel density settings and nearplace distance. I set them to the values shown in the video. Perhaps it has to do with me being 900mm away from the screen? Will retry the comparison later this week.
Felt a huge difference with your defaults as we have similar monitors, wheel base, and distances. Loving it now, and feeling faster already. Can't wait for the next vids.
I thought this was a scientology video after a while. Very little cohesion between points, and they are being made just to immediately drop into something unrelated, then brought back without any connection to anything. iRacing renders perspective poorly is the only outtake I can gather, and all the hacky values are just to deal with that and have nothing to do with FOV, perspective or rendering
@@Bender-is-Great69 If you are not a "fool", you should be able to summarize the "method" and coherently link it to FOV/perspecive rendering in a few sentences here. Can you?
As long as the video is, it doesn't explain the most important changes in any way. You keep referring to the near plane distance and talk about setting a baseline of 30 and playing around with it but never talk about how a value of 30 (3 meters) correlates to the screen size/radius and overall FoV. Also, you say we should change the size/radius to have 12 in front with no explanation of what that accomplishes!? That makes no sense on its own. It's not a multiplier being applied evenly to each value and doesn't seem to have any relationship to the near plane adjustment. I'm not saying these changes don't "work" or that they aren't worth trying, but I do expect a 45 min video to give more than a "trust me bro" explanation of what works and why. I'll keep an eye out for the next video, which I hope goes into actual detail of how these changes work and how they address the issues described here.
The 12 in front of the numbers messed up my center screen. No idea what that was supposed to accomplish. At first I was very excited about this video and the laser scan info may have been useful, but after watching this a few times while trying to set up my new triples (55''s!), I grew more and more frustrated with the "extra" information included and how long it was taking to get to a point. All that, and in the end the 12 at the beginning of the numbers did nothing but screw things up and my FOV is basically the same as if I were to have clicked the FOV setting in the black box to correspond to my viewing distance to begin with. Video was well done, though. Edit: After reading through the comments here, it seems like you should use curved even if you have flat monitors per SOS. I'll try that and see if it actually works for me. That needs to be more clear in the video. 2nd Edit: Ended up just going back and doing the traditional FOV calculations. This method did not feel right for me. Maybe it's because I'm using really large monitors?
@@Romad_20 You literally just gave me a link to the answer you want, in video with words to further explain, but assuming English isnt you first language i will try to explain. He didnt "put a 12 at the beginning" of his 710, that would have made it 12710. He changed the first digit from "7" to "12". making it 1210. Do the same with radius, and it works perfectly.
@StewartSanderson 🙄 I'm a native speaker and understand well what I sent you. I did exactly as said in the video. It's been a few months, so I misspoke in my comment. My criticism remains when the first digit was replaced with 12, it messed it up. I'm also not the only person who mentioned this. Also, no explanation and "this sounds a little weird but do it" doesn't inspire confidence. What's the meaning or significance of 12?
Question. During FOV changes I noticed you selected 3 curved option due to yourself having curved. I tried to watch it back 2/3times to see if you are suggesting everyone with triples flat or curve should run this setting or just if your running curved. I actually ended up writing up all the changes you suggested in word with notes as well. I’m currently running 3 32” triples that are flat, and I wanted to ensure I select the correct option. Thank you again for your detailed breakdown
Just WOW...I have been lazy and quickly settled my FOV on the triple 32 following calculators and I tough it was OK. I cannot believe the difference that this makes. THANK YOU!
@s6cks66 try and find someone else to give you this info and I promise you for 7 years I’ve seen video after video of people saying “best FOV settings” and NOT ONE got it right like this I’m over 1 second up on many tracks and sense of speed is greatly increased and world scale feels right and ffb feels more reactive. So carry on no one will miss you
This is amazing. It feels like I’m running a whole new sim or that I’ve completely upgraded my setup. Can’t thank you enough. Will absolutely be recommending this to others with triples that I know and you’ve earned a few coffees in my opinion with this one. Thank you.
27:32 bro you said it yourself this video is too long. this is a subject I wanted to learn more about but you lost me!!!!!! so much verbal garbage so much UNNECESSARY crap like the "please pause when the current task is completed" like also in the beginning I could barely hear you but breh at what point to you begin to describe your process?
I'd rather be able to look more naturally with my eyes and not have to focus them directly ahead all the time or get "blurry vision" if i glance sideways
VR -> more immersive (to feel like you're in a real car), triples -> more consistent (for sim competitions). There's no better option, just what you want (and can afford...)
Triples that wrap around enoght to givr you periphial vision are more immersive. Till vr has the full fov to not cut off your peripheral vision i will always argue otherwise. to anyone that's driven on track. We use our peripheral vision. And hans devices limit how much you can turn your head. The amount of head motion needed for vr more head movement than you need. Do what works for you. But if youve driven a real track day you understand what this guy is trying to do and say here.
Firstly thanks for a great tutorial, its taught me a LOT about FOV that i wasnt aware of and i am looking forward to getting home and playing with it on my 3x 272 1440P setup. One question though, i may have somehow missed it, but what is the measurement at 29:35 for? You ask us to measure the distance between the outer screens, and halve it, but dont seem to ever use that measurement for anything? Thanks in advance if you can clear that up. Regards, Stu.
Absolute perfection! I watched this video at least 6 times before attempting any changes. Enough info to understand the theory and reason for changes. But not so over my head that a casual sim racer could still make sense and put into play. Great work!! Thanks!!
@sense-of-speed made all of the changes & can 100% say it’s given better depth perception so thank you for that. One thing I am unsure about is the FFB settings as I run a Simagic Alpha so not 100% what to change on mine for the better, Am I meant to change the values to as follows, Line 145 enable ffb360hz =0 Line 149 FFBusesimpleminforce =0 (sharp) Line 160 loadsimagicAPI =0 Last question the near plane set to 30 are you saying to keep lowering it until everything feels in sync so to speak I mainly run oval?
Alpha user here. You want to set it like this to disable Simagic's 360Hz FFB: enableFFB360HzInterpolated=1 loadSimagicAPI=0 FFBUseSimpleMinForce=0 - This one is to your taste. I have it on 0.
I just read that the laser point settings do nothing except on tech tracks, and don't affect force feedback. Same on the shifter delay. The initial shift is immediate but it doesn't allow for another accidental shift in that allotted time. Where did you get the information on the laser scan settings from. There's so much conflicting info out there.
Having owned a serious triple rig for half a year and always intuitively feeling that my, and other rigs are somehow off with fov/perspective even after rigorous adjusting and measuring - finally with your work applied I feel the road flows similarly in the simulator, as it does in normal IRL street or track driving. So Much Better. Thank you
Soooo good. I just did a ringmeister after this setup and it is absolutely awesome on my flat triple 32s. I usually drive formula cars since the default setup is weird inside a car. This made the inside car view much better.
This is pretty exciting. I didnt think I will watch full video and I just got dragged into it. Now I think when do I find time for all of this, but it really does looks like worth time spending. When do Iracing makes visuals correspond to the current standards, this sim will become a one to go solution. Thank you for the great tutorial.
LOVE this video. I keep coming back to setup my new rigs. QQ though: @ 18:51, it references the Laser scan section. @ 20:41, it mentions changing this section to 120 point size, 8 min, 64 max, 512, and density. After you run a bit and adjustments are needed to help with a little stuttering that happens, what setting should be reduced? point size? Density? Not sure. Thanks!!!
so at the end you say remove the first number add 12 to your width and 12 to your radius , well my width is 1060.. if i remove the 1 its now 12060 does not work my radius is 1100 remove the 1 ad 12 its now 12100
Thank you very much for your work ! And for sharing this with the community! Please give me some advice: I have a 48" triples, 1050 mm width, 10 mm bezel, 920P radius (1840 mm between monitors), eye distance 700 mm, angle with side monitors 69 degrees, when I enter these parameters into iRacing I get a FOV of 207 degrees (with "eye dist 701mm"), but it seems to me that this is too big a value, for example 187 degrees looks closer to reality. Near play distance i set to 30, as you recommended. What do you think will be correct FOV in my case? Maybe I need to set a different FOV and increase the width and radius of the monitors in iRacing (by how much?) ?
Despite dedicated efforts for many years, I have always struggled with "that just ain't right" in FOV in iRacing. Your work here has fixed that. The cockpit displays as if you're actually sitting in it, apexes actually show up where my eyes say they are and competitor cars are dimensioned correctly as well (no more outrageously massive GT cars when viewed from a prototype cockpit). Running the side flat panels at 60 degrees certainly adds a better sense of position in time and space to my rig, and the ability to work with pixel density is amazing. Very humble hat tip to you. Folks who put in the effort to implement your approach will be far more accurate drivers, and cleaner as well. Quicker times, fewer track limit penalties when running at the limit and cleaner car handling when engaged in close racing will be the result. For those reticent about raising monitors, I fully agree with you and will add (with great sanctimony) that There Is No Way anyone can achieve an accurate simulation environment with the driver's head positioned at the mid-point of the monitor and/or the steering wheel in their lap. I encourage everyone to check the height of their steering gear in relation to their shoulders as well - if you are in an open wheel, formula car or a prototype, the display on the steering wheel should be clearly visible in the lower half of your track vision when driving. If you are in a sports car, the instrument cluster should be in the same place. Nuf table pounding... For the record, I'm running triple 27s on a 12 core AMD and an Nvidia 3090. I'd love to run 32s, but my space limitations are challenging. I am working through some framerate issues, but FOV is FINALLY SOLVED. I'm at 24.5" eye distance, side monitors set at 60 degrees, 188 degrees FOV. Monitor height has my eye level roughly at the mid-point of the lower 1/3 of the main monitor. In testing, I set the camera such that the horizontal dash surfaces are visually "flat" and adjusted the driver height to achieve a correct perspective of the track. Pushing hard at Le Mans in the new Cadillac prototype for several laps of testing, getting outside of track limits at nasty places like Tertre Rouge and Dunlop just stopped happening... Amazing.
That's what I like to hear, and thank you. Relative car scale between opponent cars was a big part of our issue as well and included in the baseline values. I am also super glad 27" guys are noticing an improvement. I was pretty worried. Now that I'm back driving I may have to head to Le Mans for a bit. I haven't been there in a while.
Per the iRacing staff in the forums directly replying about this video: "Mike DeTurck Posts: 30Staff › July 5, 2024 9:58AM @Rob Bedford as @Nir Navé stated this only changes the display of the point cloud that is visible on "Tech Tracks". (New Jersey) This has no bearing on force feedback effects or the display of any graphics on non-tech tracks."
Thanks heaps man, got triples around the time you were talking about this & been hanging out to setup your way.... Spent a few hours playing around this afternoon & what a difference!!!!
Thank you for this! I had paid for your tool file (didn't need it but why not) and I finally got your FOV concept in my racers brain to click, so I changed the files as per instructions and bam, I got even more detail with 1440P 32"triples and a 4070 Super!
@@allenqueen2314 Then why did he use 760 (50 above monitor width) instead of 656 (his measured distance)? This was not explained beyond 'setting a baseline'.
Love the video bro! I realized a lot of comments all have triples but I don’t have the room yet! I use a 34” curved. Hope these settings can work with it. Great work again
I got my first monitor, a 34" 1500R. Hope it can do some racing when I get a laptop up for the job. After, I think I'll be going dual 4K 57, although I might drive it at 1080P-1440P at first. Triples may be cool for dedicated rigs, but it seems avid racers can be happy with 49" and delighted with 57". I'll have the $$$$ screen do desk duty most of the time, and swivelled over to the side or back be my "rig". Can't wait for the first tries with the laptop when I get it. Loooove the 34" already for doing anything, watching some racing, etc.
People have reported good results using the configuration file settings and some prefer to check SMP and triple screen projection for a little more depth at the same FOV.
Just built my first rig from a desk mounted G29 to Moza R9. Literally have played under 10 AI races and the difference before to now is massive. Still tweaking however straight off the block this video is literally a game changer. From night to day…awesome!❤
Did you find a formula for the near plane distance? I am currently doing a bit more than 3 times the physical distance from the monitor (625cm rounded up to 7 x 3 = 21)
hi, thanks because all this is fantastic. I have a doubt though, why do we have to measure the distance between the side monitors when then it is enough to insert the width + 50?
@@sense-of-speed oh ok, i my case I have 3x flat 32" 1440 where the width of a monitor including bezels is 725 (710 just the panel) with an angle of 60 degrees. However the measurement of the edges gives me 1440 which divided by 2 is 720. You get about 650. In my case in the iracing settings should I put width 725 and curvature radius 720? Is this correct? or i have to put 775 as curvature?
@fedebe8977 My monitors are curved, hence the smaller radius. Reaper in the video is on flat at 60. 710 width and 760 radius should be fine for you as you are in the guidelines.
Gone through this a couple of times after just installing triples and it has completely changed my experience (and love) of simracing, so thank you (although my wife does not thank you!). One thing that has confused me in iRacing however is the cockpit camera tool. I have adjusted horizon, pitch, height etc. What do I do with the FOV slider in the tool? I just leave it alone correct? (For instance my says 106 from my single ultra wide, and I just do not want conflicting FOV that may screw things up...)
@marklongNH lol. Awesome, Mark. The camera slider for fov doesn't save or need to be touched. It doesn't effect the global fov adjustment and it only goes to 179. My condolences to your wife.
Saw this video about a week ago, just installed triples this week. got them set up to other tutorials, and the side monitors seemed weird, almost stretched. Just followed your video and it looks WAY better. thank you.
Great Job! So what do you do if you cant set your 27" Curved Triples 1800R @ 60 degrees? My setup is no where near 60, more like 40-45 degrees. My distance from left to right edges as measured is 1460mm.
I would start by using your actual monitor width of 610 and a radius of 730. Use the bracket key to dial in your eye distance and fov like in the video. If the side images look good change the first digits to 12 and away you go. If your side images don't look correct the radius needs adjustment. If the side image looks to far away increase the radius value, if they are too close decrease the value. Think of the radius value as the new angle adjustment.
I have to say i was skeptical on trying to change these setting you spoke in this video but i decided to try out. Wow what difference. I followed your video set by step and it was easier than i thought it would be. Thank you so much!!!
Not really. I did everything while watching this video on my phone and had zero issues. I did everything in mm even though I'm in u.s. where everything is done in inches. But it worked out perfectly. So if I can do it any one can 😂
Rock on, man. We worked hard to offer something that worked. FYI, if you want to use mm, you can change it in the UI. I'm US based, too, but mm is so much easier with this crap.
Hey mate, Im running top tier rig no expense spared, 48" Triples and trying to work out the slight distorted left and right screens. Any hot tips for me?
Excellent video! Even better knowledge and information! Your logic and theory can be applied to other Sims, not just iracing. I tried this with ACC on PC and man what a difference.... the optical flow is huge! Thank you so much! 👍💪👌👏
@DamianReed when you enter to drive the car press pause and goto view settings there you will find camera controls look for triples tab there you can enter the eye distance, side monitors and monitor angles. I even did the "12" in front of both values too and it helped a ton... so much better immersion and realism.
@Marintheguitarplayer so I sit 33 inches from monitor (eye distance) that's 839mm ... in ACC I put in 1239mm for distance and 1292 for the distance between the monitirs [about 58 inches) and worked a charm! 👌 I am running 3x 31.5 monitors....
Might attempt to apply some settings to my 49" ultrawide setup this evening, especially when it comes to the changes in FFB. Hitting the proper turn in point has always been a struggle for me, and hurts consistency.
@sense-of-speed just coming back to report that I have had great success on my 49" Ultrawide with the FOV settings, and FFB changes. Slowly dialing the World Plane Distance in
I froth on nerdy iRacing stuff, I’m always tinkering with my app.ini files and individually setting cockpit cams for each car so it’s set and forget. I was skeptical on trying this setup seeing as I had put so much time in the past to get it where it is now but I’m glad I did it cause your settings made it even better. I was skeptic about switching to 3 curved monitors even though I’m running flats but once I seen it I realised how good it is. Thanks for putting all that effort into the video and your voice pretty chill to listen to 😂🤙
Thanks again for your video. Are the settings in this video for ini file settings still the same after the latest iracing update to the shaders and all? Thanks!
dude. thank you so much. this really helped a lot. like, im doing top lap times in races, time trials, time attacks. the pros must be doing this too and just not telling anyone. this helped me with long turns like turn 10 at Zandvoort and the last turn at sebring. im able to tell that im using all of the track and wheel to wheel fighting is much more intuitive.
Thanks for ruining my Saturday.
Thanks for making my Sunday wayyyy better.
Lol. I aim to please.
I was just coming to say thanks for runing my evening haha 😂
🤣🤣🤣
Much obliged Sir for your time, effort & the wealth of knowledge, your channel has its own vibe, your editing is top notch, background tunes or of the hook, credits are a cool touch & loved the voice filters & loved how all voices where acted out from real individuals.
Wish you all the best in your endeavors, God bless you and your family.
Thank you very, very much. I'm glad you get my vibe and the details I put I to my work on this little channel.
Thank you, sir! This really works, and it was definitely worth the wait. I still need to add the buzzle-free kit, but honestly, it doesn't matter anymore. The feeling and feedback I'm getting are just spot on and the density setting just made everything looks and feel better. Keep up the great work, and thank you again!"
Excellent. Thank you very much for the support.
I just set my rig up with your method. I just want to say thank you. It's absolutely brilliant. You don't know what you are missing until you do this and see the difference. Sensational!
Thanks to you and the community members that put in the work to test and test and test. I found your previous videos when looking for FOV adjustments for iRacing after feeling like something was off and not feeling right, and this is the video that I've been waiting for. I spent the weekend setting up and testing this and wow, does it make a difference! I feel much more "inside" the car, my lap times are improving and feel a lot more natural to complete. Great job on finding and figuring out all this information, putting things to the test and making it available to everyone. This is what we need in the community. THANK YOU!
You're very welcome. It's good to see almost a year of work helping others.
This is insanely helpful, I used your last video and now this one, I am using 32” curved monitors so I need to mess with the radius a bit but I feel confident in getting it right. Thankyou for the video and let me know if I can help you with testing
@beyondtheapexracing Awesome. We will cover more about the radius in the next video as well. We can do neat stuff with curved monitors.
@@sense-of-speeddidn’t realize I wrote my comment in a reply of someone else’s comment, sorry bout that, but I still need to change the angle of my monitors from 56 to 60-65 because that might solve the issue I’m having, just didn’t have enough time last night to mess with it, but will later today
No worries. What radius are your monitors, and your eye distance?
This is a great watch, not only the content but also the way you done it. Love the little jokes you put in and how you play around with your voice, the music in the background and so on. Am quite impressed, this is top notch stuff!
Thank you very much and also for noticing. I tried to make it a little entertaining since I drone on for so long. Lol
I followed your video my display now looks awsome, best iv had it @sense-of-speed
Oh man, you just made my day!
As long as i,m iracing, a couple of years now, i always kept messing around with the fov of most cars and never was really satisfied with them.
Always looking for new vids on how to get it to my liking.
I,m stoked to finally found my answers i,ve been looking for for so long!
Finally can stop tweeking around and get into some serious racecraft improvement.
Thank you so much!!!
🤩
Good stuff, man. I'm glad it helped.
I wish the background music was a little bit tone down when narrating. But thanks for putting alot of effort on this! Superb content!!!
Noted, and thanks for watching.
@@sense-of-speed Conversely, I appreciate where your voice sits in the mix, and my comment would be that the word is PER IF ER AL not PER IF EE AL
And then there's me with a Yaw2VR motion rig that makes Monitors "right out" and my inner monologue is going "Awesome. Now do VR...."
5:29 to 5:58 VR users are not presented a rectangular, two dimensional image with linear perspective and we *can* see INTO the monitor...
Thanks. I can not believe I mispelled it for as many times as I went over the damn video. Unreal. VR does render better. Unfortunately, it's not in the cards for me.
@JonathonBarton Or I pronounced it wrong. It happens sometimes. I mess up words from time to time due to a panic disorder.
@@sense-of-speed Yes I used 660 and then replaced it with 12, but you before doing this via the fov keys go to adjust it at minute 31:29 bring the distance eyes of the fov close to your real distance.
WOW!!! Thank you so so much for your incredible work. I have been iRacing for about 8 years now and using 32” triples for about 4 years but have never felt quite right with my setup. Now I feel immersed inside the car and it feels amazing to drive. Like a whole new sim! You are an asset to the Sim Racing world and iRacing!
Thank you so much for all the work you've put in for this series.....this is exactly the type of help I needed to help get my FOV dialed in.
Good stuff, man. Thanks for watching!
The best feedback I can give a guy like you is that after carefully going through your instructions, I felt like I could control my car the way I do when I used to throw my Type R around at the actual track. I'm out of practice on iRacing so I was surprised to see, after implementing your calibrations, that my time deltas for each sector of Laguna were all within hundredths over the previous lap (I've only ever hit a 1600-1800 rating before i.e. not great) My jaw is still dragging on the floor. The fun factor is 10x now and I can't wait to dive in to the rest of your videos. Thank you for your caring and meticulousness. You're a gift to the sport but also to the world.
I'm running triple G8 Neos with anti-bezel and ended up setting them at around 72 degrees (at the arm) if you can believe that. They're spaced off the monitor around 8 mm at the top and around 2 mm on the outside bottoms, with the inside bottom flush. Screen is around 650 mm from my eyeball. Slight distortion on diagonals where the lens sits off the screen a bit (a-pillar, etc), but my brain is too stimulated to notice anymore. You're the ultimate anti-bezel kit.
Wow great job man! Watched it once and now i am getting in the rig and re watching it while trying this out. Thats alot of work we can tell. Can`t thank you enough
Thanks! I race dirt Big Block modifieds in real-life, and this information has just opened up a whole new world of possibilities!
Thank you very much, kind sir!
Just built my triple curved monitor build, 32in 1000r 4k’s and I haven’t felt like anything was correct with my sim rig yet. Thank you boss!
Awesome. Thanks for watching.
Which monitors are these?
32" AOC 1500R
@@sense-of-speed Thanks for the quick reply. In Germany there are two different models, do you happen to know which ones they are? Best regards
@AmokCQP You're welcome. They are the c32g2s
Thank you so much for this instructions. I just adjusted my settings and it's a while since I have had such a smile while driving. This is a game changer on my triples. Cars and track never looked so right and felt so good. Wow!
Would you recommend an angle of 60 degrees for flat 27" triples? Currently they are about 40 degrees and a FOV of about 184, wich feels nice, but has some "broken interior" from one screen to the other. And since I use the curved setting, I can't adjust the angle between the screens anymore in the iracing settings.
Thank you for the support. I do recommend 60-degree angles. This creates a more natural environment for our vision. If you didn't want to change angles, you can try using your actual measurement divided by two for the radius, but others who have gone to 60 degrees report better results.
Excellent video as usual. I swear you are the one of the only youtube'rs that feels my pain. I can't wait for more. So much good info.
That's why I do it buddy. Glad you get something out of my little channel.
Finally it feels right!
Im also an ex pro-driver within motorsports, and ever since I got my trippel screen setup with quite agressive angles, because of space limitations, I've never got the FOV right. Always felt that I was off somehow, felt "zoomed in" and also the passanger side A-pillar was way too far back... It actually came to the point were I lost interest in the rig for some time! Saved this vid when it came out, just to give it a try when the energy was back so I could jump down the rig. And wow, it really feels better and my need for speed is back again! Thanks again SOS, and if you need more (ex) real life drivers to test out with, I'd be glad to assist!
Cheers!
Awesome. I'm glad you are back in the rig. I may take you up on testing and will let you know.
I spent half a day trying to figure out what you did, why it works, what iracing does......drawing your setup, mesuring. I get the Radius and monitor size setting (adding changing the two digits).
You basically forced the rendering to render like it was a huge curved monitor, like the expensive simulator you started with.
But what I don't understand is the effect of the viewing distance (or better, lack off effect). If I drew correctly, virtually you are looking at 3 1210mm wide monitors, placed on a radius of 1260 mm, on my drawing, with the screen distance 635 mm, you would get 228° vision..close to your initial drawing of the human vision going up to 220.
But in my drawing, with your 32 inches at 65 degrees, eye distance 635mm, the monitors physically cut off at 182°. Does it feel off? or does our peripheral vision just ignores it?
Trying to figure this stuff out and translate it to 27 inch flat screens.
Excellent work, and thanks for the efforts!!!
With the 60°mid peripheral vision limit I found out where the 540mm eye distance legend come from. The crossing of two lines drawn at 60° from a 618 wide milimeter monitor is 540 mm.
Problem for normal posture people...we never can put that monitor 540mm from our eyes, because the monitor would be on top of the wheel....where we usally put it as close as possible, often right above the base. I am stuck at 590mm, resting my wrist on the top of the wheel my fist touches the screen.
My screen angle is 51°. How did I come to this? Well I measured the eye distance I could reach (used to be 550mm), added 9 cm (our eyes are about that distance from our balance center, and center of rotation of our head). So whenever I turned my head I was looking at the center of the screen, perpendicular to it. So I got less fov in the fov calculators.
I feel this gives a good result for the smaller monitors up to 27 inches, that will never wrap the full 180 degrees because of rig acces. (Unless you drop in your simrig from the top like a jet fighter pilot).
I am going to test with the radius and so on. Will get back to you for the 27 inch and smaller monitors. (Damn I knew I should have saved for 32's)
lol, I bought a VR headset with DisplayPort connection and never had to worry about any of this ❤
At my eye distance of 635 creates the most natural position of my body to being in the car at the values I use and I believe 32's to be the minimum size for triples. In regards to vision I'm not concerned with the ending fov number of 186 as the base. I am more concerned about the information 150 degrees and below. Anything beyond that our vision only perceives as visual ques and detail starts to fall off. In the end it is all about the relationship between my body, the front spindles of the car, and the track surface.
As we move forward with this past the beta I actually have different values for radius, monitor width, laser scan, and horizon line for every car I drive that all equate to whether or not I can hit my pb on any track and translate what the ffb is trying to communicate to me. It is a rabbit hole but the results have been very interesting.
@@thijsazerty692 I have a VR headset......but It does not give the same feeling.....never getting the right perspective......
@@sense-of-speed Did the changes, did a race in the V8 supercars on Fuji...gained more than 1 second!!! Much better view, feels natural..and finally getting that wheel and dashboard where it should be. For the 27 inch flat screen users among us. Follow the steps to the letter!! It works! only thing I changed back was my X seat position. Always keep the last found FOV value before puttin the 12 digit in.
My trick is in camera, putting FOV temporarily to 179, scooting the seat back until I just don't see the ears of the seat (normal seats, not the super long ears like in some cars). Then put back that original FOV number. Works like a charm. My V8 Supercar cockpit never looked so realistic.
Sense of speed cracked the code on how to get a better rendering of the environment.
@@ivanbaumans1687 Hey ivan but im kinda lost with your first comment, I have also 27's, what distance shouldI I put the monitors to then? and the degrees?
Thanks! Amazing stuff!
FOV
Thank you very much, Mike.
Wow thank you very much. You’ll got no idea on how much you have just helped me
After 3 years I could never get it right.
This just makes so much sense 💪🔥🔥🔥
Thanks I will be resetting my sim rig doing your step to step 💯💪🙏🏽🔥🔥🔥
Glad I could help!
Thanks for this video. I’ve been struggling a bit off the pace and this has made everything so much better. It’s amazing how changing the visuals makes you feel the car so much more 👍
Thank you for this.... I am finally able to feel like there's enough space on track!.... Brake points, Turn-in and passing are so much better!!!....
You're very welcome. You are seeing exactly what the other see.
What is the point of doing the calculation @29:37 if we arent even using that number (measuring distance between side monitors? Or the better quesiton...at what point DO we use that number?
My thoughts exactly. We meassured but never used that number.
I can only assume it is a way of calculating eye distance
@Sense of Speed Can u answer this?
Im wondering as well.
It’s the number used for eye distance.
Lots of great information and I appreciate the in depth explanations as to why you are changing certain settings. With that said, a written guide would be very helpful and save lots of time when going in and making changes. Just a thought for future videos as I was often confused and had to rewind to know what settings you were tweaking. It was also unclear in some of the “tweak to personal preference” settings what I was aiming for and how to change those settings
I'll see what I can do. In this video we are creating a baseline. I will discuss more on what to look for in the next video.
YES!
Written form would be so much better and to be honest much more professional.
A good guide with drawings, good formatting and proper editing always trumps a video.
thats why there are very few videos about technical topics in professional education.
thanks for the info. this has helped a ton even on my meager single 27 setup. i agree with a written guide, possibly github? maybe a bit more detail on what to adjust and look for with different setups.
id like to know what kind of numbers were looking for in the frame meter.
I think the author should charge for a written guide. He is just a hobbyist like the rest of us and think people forget that. He doesn't owe any of us.
Thanks
Thank you very much!
Just to make people watching this video aware, the Laser Scan changes make absolutely ZERO difference to 99% of the iRacing experience. The only track where it will have an effect is New Jersey Motorsports Park, an unfinished Tech Track, as the point sizes refer to the literal reference points from the scan data, which are used to actually model the environment, nothing to do with the surface of the track, FFB or anything like that.
thank you, I was wasting my time hard trying to notice the difference lol
This needs to go up top. I applaud the effort that went into this video, but it did not work for me at all.
I agree. After feeling like something was off after this whole process (multiple attempts), I went with standard calculations for 3 flats, distance, and the correct angles for that distance, my view is much much better. I have 55's at 33" from my eyes, set at 72 degrees for a massive 215-degree FOV. The biggest difference maker in iRacing is adjusting your cockpit camera after setting the proper FOV. When you exit the car, bring up the camera menu, and adjust there. You can move forward and back without affecting fov through the windshield. Also, where your monitors meet, adjust the vanishing Y so any lines (top of walls, paint on the road etc) look straight. This is the warping on the side monitors that you hear about. Vanishing Y corrects that.
From what I am aware he only speaks about differences in files between him and others …
But not really saying to change them …
For me what worked really good is the worldnearplane value from 10 to 30
And his FOV method that works incredibly well in terms of feeling and what you see
For reference I ma on triple 32 g5 1000r curve
@@Romad_20100% correct.
All I can say is one really big "thank you" from the bottom of my heart. After 4 years in iRacing I was close to quitting because ( although I am fast and I have good win ratio ) I never felt "in the car" no matter what I changed regarding FOV & camera. I never felt kerbs are where my brain were expecting them to be. Because of this, I had many months of breaks from driving. All I wanted is to seat into my rig and enjoy, but I couldn't. Then I came across your video and after few days of adjustments I was blown away. I'm kissing the kerbs, sliding around them, I'm able to carry exact amount of speed through the corners. I, finally , driving my cars , not opposite ! I'm so sure in what I'm doing that I can look around the track while driving to see so many details I never saw before. I'm achieving my best lap times in more than 15 °C more than before without extra effort. Thank you, man and all the best !
You're very welcome, Norman. Thanks for the feedback, and I'm glad I can get you more in the car!
This video could be edited way tighter with proper timestamps and less empty air.
lots of very good info though
Thanks!
Thank you very much.
Here is an idea for a project or video...
I never did track days, never was in a gt3, i cannot tell what feels "right" all that well.
You could try to explain to me (us), how to train our senses in a simulator (iRacing).
My eyes are mostly focused on the middle screen, and thats where i get 95% of the ques from. When i look around, i nofice my general awareness go slightly up, but id have no idea how to maximize it, as im too focused on the middle screen.
Will do. Either in the next video or something on its own. We often hear people talk about detail but not in detail.
@@sense-of-speed exactly! And keep it up, awesome job
@@sense-of-speedthis comment is actually quite profound as it applies to nearly everything in life.
@@Lessenjr Very true. Personally I'm all about the details.
Bedankt
Thank you very much.
What about triple 27" with eye distance of 540mm and side monitors on 60 degrees angle?
following
I ended roughly at that eye distance level and what worked for me was: Monitor width 610 (as shown in the video), with the 60 degree angle my Radius is 600. After clicking done, i've put in the black box 194 (before I was in 174). My actual distance is not exact to the FOV (10 cm less in reality) but as said in the video, it doesnt have to fit to the mm.
After a full week of racing in gt4 at watkings glenn I was able to shove 4tenths of my lap time and I can say I trained a lot before making the changes and it was really natural adapting. My trail brake is much more defined with this change.
I still havnt changed the values on the directx11 app file but so far its a game changer.
Good to see it's working.
If you follow the instructions in the video you can dial in your eye distance and fov using the bracket keys just like I did on 32's. With good results although I think 540 is a little too close. 600 is usually the sweet spot for 22's
what a great guide. made me feel way more "in the car" than ever before, appreciate it
How do I make this work for single 49" screen?????
Same question here - I think most of the science falls apart at the point where things aren’t going past your eyes/head but I still got a lot of great takeaways from this as a 49” user
for 49 screen those are my calculations:
use monitor width: 1080mm
radius of curvature: 1130mm
make sure render screen in 3 projections is OFF for single screen (it makes some weird lines spliting the screen in 3).
I'm not sure that the final calculations are correct. This is the Base Line.
@@wipexx I will try this today, thanks
@@wipexxhow did u end up with these numbers ? I can’t figure out what values would be for a 34 inch curved monitor, could you help me?
@@djfgille4388what fov are you using with those settings? I tried it and 100 fov seams legit but not sure about it
Thank you so much for this. I’m running a 1800r 49” monitor but the responsiveness and turn in is much improved. I may have to switch to triples…
in regards to the Laser Scan values ,this is what David Tucker at iRacing staff says :
"These have to do with the pre-release tracks we have pushed out from time to time. These are tracks with just the racing surface completed. The rest of the world is represented as a point cloud of dots from the raw laser scan data (this is a distilled down set of dots, the raw data is many hundreds of gigabytes). You can tweak these values to make the dots more or less visible. I don't think we have any pre-release tracks out right now, the big one was long beach and I believe we finished it."
so these values only effects "pre-release tracks" ,should do nothing at every other track.....
That's old info and i saw it. We spent many, many hours testing it. The results are not placebo.
I hate to break it to you but I'm a game graphics programmer and this makes sense. Directx just doesn't work the way you think it does whereas what David says does.
Respectfully a simple back to back test of extreme values would negate the argument. Also considering the graphics configuration tool manipulates the values based on the system is a hint that it has other effects. A very large part of the testing involved the scan and the results are there. Thousands of laps on different cars, tracks, the only tech track available now, and 6 other drivers. Visually you can slightly see the effect by comparing screenshots , mostly in the spread of the trees but, the major differences are only apparent when driving.
@@sense-of-speed So this changes what we feel through FFB too? Out of curiosity, I looked at GPU and CPU usage as well as FPS that's outputted by iracing in Motec, and there is absolutely zero change in these values. If changing these values makes a noticeable difference, should we not expect some effect on our system? In fact, isn't that what you state in the video? I'd be interested in how this was tested and what data supports your hypothesis, not just the naked eye check. Very interesting nonetheless.
If you do not see any negative changes in frame rate or CPU/GPU usage you are in good shape. We are looking for negative effects from load on the system by increasing the density memory to determine how much density we can use.
When I started working on the scan last year the first change I made from calculated fov numbers was maxing the density and it was very noticeable in ffb and depth on track. All other testing has been as follows.
We used a CSLDD Pro, Simucube Pro2, and DD2. We also had 4 other drivers with other hardware doing comparisons towards the end.
For conditions everything has been controlled from start to finish. Same weather, 50 percent rubber, Stock car setups. Proof testing was done on tracks the drivers drove in real life then other tracks.
Primary cars for testing were the 296, 992, 963, SR10, and the Indy open wheeler.
As I developed and tested values I would make my observations then have the other drivers change values without sharing my thoughts to see if there observations aligned with mine. In almost every instance they did. At the very beginning of the video I say to Ken, "We'll see if you see what I see" That was the first time I introduced him to the near plane adjustment.
I'll admit the changes to the scan are hard to quantify with hard data but by changing density we increase the information to pull from as we travel on track. The time we spent developing safe values and learning what we could do is absurd but needed to be because I don't want to give out bad information and you can imagine the combination of numbers we can derive from those 4 values.
Typically driving a batch of settings across multiple cars and tracks for days before making changes. As far as data the only related indicator we noticed was the auto FFB. Whenever we started to provide more detail by changing values the auto ffb always wanted to increase the value. By detail I mean sidewall of the tire, texture, curbs more like real life and not so harsh, more mechanical feel in the steering, Gradual build up of tire time temp and gaining back traction once we greased them up. More natural compression of the suspension, and so on.
In the end the baseline values are pretty safe and I will get into tuning in the next video. As far as density is concerned I hover between 600 and 680 depending on the car and the size values in the video have worked very well when comparing track relative scale with the drivers on the real tracks they drive.
Reaper tends to like 768mb but he is limited to 8nm where the max density adds more weight to the wheel, especially in GT3. Ken is at 680.
If you venture into experimenting we can go too far. Especially with the min and max. I don't suggest messing with those too much.
Thanks for the work you guys put in , this took a minute but totally worth it!
been playing with the settings, but cant see any different when changing point size or near plane. Looks exactly the same
On a side note. Coolest user name ever. I'm watching it again with dinner. What monitor values are you using, and how did you test?
Cant wait to get my tripples setup with this, Thanks
I must say this all sounded a bit pseudo-sciencey at first but I quickly realized what a difference it made for me. Don't get me wrong I was trying to stay open-minded to your ideas, but I was still skeptical becaused I spent sooooo many hours fiddling with the settings and I could never find an FOV setting that felt right, both in terms of scale and me feeling connected with the with the vehicle in my seating position. The baseline changes you suggested absolutely solve my issues, and I'm not even running tripples (I have a 49" super ultrawide 1800R curvature). One other suggestion I'm not sure you covered here is disabling G-Sync. While it does provide extra smoothness it's absolutely not needed if you can maintain 120+ fps and it adds some input lag which despite not being as bad as standard V-Sync you can absolutely feel it and turning it off in your monitor's OSD settings will ensure better latency. Either way, whoever did that testemonial is 100% right in saying this makes the driving experience so much more enjoyable. I always found a lot of joy in improving my racecraft and results but the driving itself always left a lot to be desired and sometimes even dosed me off, but not anymore. Sorry if I'm making some of you even more skeptical than I was but this is an absolute gamechanger for me. Thank you for making this video.
I'm glad you got something from it. I can see your initial point. The science behind our perception of 2d images spans decades while drawing correlation to our hobby is something that would be met with skepticism.
That's why I worked with other real-life drivers to see if we could improve the experience and validate my theory based on my art education.
In regards to Gsync. I agree. Although it isn't in the video, we did a lot of testing, and I also do not run any fancy monitor settings.
Thanks for watching, man.
what setting did you change from the video regarding the 49"? I have one too but feel a bit lost what to change
Turning of Gsync, gives me tearing in sharp corners on some tracks even tho i run a highend pc with plenty headroom in settings (believe me, i have spent many many hours on testing graphics and monitor settings). So Gsync ON is pretty much a must for me.. 13900/4090, triple 32´´1440p, 144hz capped at 141fps. RGT runs at like 2-5ms, monitors are fast, specced at 1-2ms 144hz.
The tearing and minor stutters feels so annoying, it bothers me alot more than a minor lag.
You guys dont notice any tearing or stuttering? Especially in trees and general far away objects, in sharp corners.
I haven't had issues and Ken uses a 4090 with no issue. I wonder what's going on.
Could you outline which baseline changes you are referring to? I'm on a 49" as well, but I couldn't clearly tell a difference, so I'm afraid I did something wrong.
To be sure: the things I altered were the pixel density settings and nearplace distance. I set them to the values shown in the video.
Perhaps it has to do with me being 900mm away from the screen?
Will retry the comparison later this week.
Felt a huge difference with your defaults as we have similar monitors, wheel base, and distances. Loving it now, and feeling faster already. Can't wait for the next vids.
Good stuff, buddy. Glad it's working out for you. We have more stuff to learn for sure!
@@sense-of-speed I"m curious. What value between 0 & 30 did you end up leaving your "WorldNearPlaneDistance" at ?
Depends on the car. The sr10 and 296 are at 20. Prototype and open wheel are 28 at the moment.
I thought this was a scientology video after a while. Very little cohesion between points, and they are being made just to immediately drop into something unrelated, then brought back without any connection to anything. iRacing renders perspective poorly is the only outtake I can gather, and all the hacky values are just to deal with that and have nothing to do with FOV, perspective or rendering
it’s better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt
@@Bender-is-Great69 If you are not a "fool", you should be able to summarize the "method" and coherently link it to FOV/perspecive rendering in a few sentences here. Can you?
@@Aectanum what we have here is the minimal version of months of work that has been very successful to those who have obviously higher iq.
@@Bender-is-Great69 Or in other words, no, you can't possibly describe it
@@Bender-is-Great69my Dad had that saying in his office since I was 4yrs old. Has done me well to observe it. Cheers!
Just WOW!! What a difference!
As long as the video is, it doesn't explain the most important changes in any way. You keep referring to the near plane distance and talk about setting a baseline of 30 and playing around with it but never talk about how a value of 30 (3 meters) correlates to the screen size/radius and overall FoV. Also, you say we should change the size/radius to have 12 in front with no explanation of what that accomplishes!? That makes no sense on its own. It's not a multiplier being applied evenly to each value and doesn't seem to have any relationship to the near plane adjustment.
I'm not saying these changes don't "work" or that they aren't worth trying, but I do expect a 45 min video to give more than a "trust me bro" explanation of what works and why. I'll keep an eye out for the next video, which I hope goes into actual detail of how these changes work and how they address the issues described here.
The 12 in front of the numbers messed up my center screen. No idea what that was supposed to accomplish. At first I was very excited about this video and the laser scan info may have been useful, but after watching this a few times while trying to set up my new triples (55''s!), I grew more and more frustrated with the "extra" information included and how long it was taking to get to a point. All that, and in the end the 12 at the beginning of the numbers did nothing but screw things up and my FOV is basically the same as if I were to have clicked the FOV setting in the black box to correspond to my viewing distance to begin with. Video was well done, though. Edit: After reading through the comments here, it seems like you should use curved even if you have flat monitors per SOS. I'll try that and see if it actually works for me. That needs to be more clear in the video. 2nd Edit: Ended up just going back and doing the traditional FOV calculations. This method did not feel right for me. Maybe it's because I'm using really large monitors?
@@Romad_20 Maybe. They are huge! Or maybe its because he didnt say to put a "12 at the beginning of the numbers"?
@@StewartSanderson look at 32:37. Tell me what he says then??
@@Romad_20 You literally just gave me a link to the answer you want, in video with words to further explain, but assuming English isnt you first language i will try to explain.
He didnt "put a 12 at the beginning" of his 710, that would have made it 12710.
He changed the first digit from "7" to "12". making it 1210.
Do the same with radius, and it works perfectly.
@StewartSanderson 🙄 I'm a native speaker and understand well what I sent you. I did exactly as said in the video. It's been a few months, so I misspoke in my comment. My criticism remains when the first digit was replaced with 12, it messed it up. I'm also not the only person who mentioned this. Also, no explanation and "this sounds a little weird but do it" doesn't inspire confidence. What's the meaning or significance of 12?
Question. During FOV changes I noticed you selected 3 curved option due to yourself having curved. I tried to watch it back 2/3times to see if you are suggesting everyone with triples flat or curve should run this setting or just if your running curved.
I actually ended up writing up all the changes you suggested in word with notes as well.
I’m currently running 3 32” triples that are flat, and I wanted to ensure I select the correct option.
Thank you again for your detailed breakdown
Correct. Curved setting for flat as well and tested with real-world drivers.
@@sense-of-speedthank you! Keep up the amazing work! Keep it coming!
@SycoRoyoel3 you're welcome and will do.
The VR vs Monitor crowd…yeesh.
wow, those force feedback changes are exactly what my moza r9 needed. there's so much more detail and it feels snappier. thanks!
Good vid for what I could watch. The music just adds too much confusion. Wish you had not added that in.
Just WOW...I have been lazy and quickly settled my FOV on the triple 32 following calculators and I tough it was OK. I cannot believe the difference that this makes. THANK YOU!
TLDW:?
It’s worth watching dude
@s6cks66 try and find someone else to give you this info and I promise you for 7 years I’ve seen video after video of people saying “best FOV settings” and NOT ONE got it right like this I’m over 1 second up on many tracks and sense of speed is greatly increased and world scale feels right and ffb feels more reactive.
So carry on no one will miss you
This is amazing. It feels like I’m running a whole new sim or that I’ve completely upgraded my setup. Can’t thank you enough. Will absolutely be recommending this to others with triples that I know and you’ve earned a few coffees in my opinion with this one. Thank you.
Glad to hear. Thanks for watching.
27:32 bro you said it yourself this video is too long. this is a subject I wanted to learn more about but you lost me!!!!!! so much verbal garbage so much UNNECESSARY crap like the "please pause when the current task is completed" like also in the beginning I could barely hear you but breh at what point to you begin to describe your process?
I needed a change and this was beyond expectations. Only just getting into it and wow! TY
The better way is called VR. No longer have so worry about triple screen alignment or FOV. And it's way more immersive.
I'd rather be able to look more naturally with my eyes and not have to focus them directly ahead all the time or get "blurry vision" if i glance sideways
@@matta2738Edge to edge clairt with pancake lenses. It's not an issue for me.
VR -> more immersive (to feel like you're in a real car), triples -> more consistent (for sim competitions). There's no better option, just what you want (and can afford...)
@@matta2738guess you haven’t tried the quest 3 edge to edge clarity and you look with your eyes due to the new pancake lenses
Triples that wrap around enoght to givr you periphial vision are more immersive. Till vr has the full fov to not cut off your peripheral vision i will always argue otherwise.
to anyone that's driven on track. We use our peripheral vision. And hans devices limit how much you can turn your head. The amount of head motion needed for vr more head movement than you need.
Do what works for you. But if youve driven a real track day you understand what this guy is trying to do and say here.
Firstly thanks for a great tutorial, its taught me a LOT about FOV that i wasnt aware of and i am looking forward to getting home and playing with it on my 3x 272 1440P setup.
One question though, i may have somehow missed it, but what is the measurement at 29:35 for?
You ask us to measure the distance between the outer screens, and halve it, but dont seem to ever use that measurement for anything?
Thanks in advance if you can clear that up.
Regards,
Stu.
Absolute perfection! I watched this video at least 6 times before attempting any changes. Enough info to understand the theory and reason for changes. But not so over my head that a casual sim racer could still make sense and put into play. Great work!! Thanks!!
Excellent. Thanks for the kind words.
@sense-of-speed made all of the changes & can 100% say it’s given better depth perception so thank you for that. One thing I am unsure about is the FFB settings as I run a Simagic Alpha so not 100% what to change on mine for the better, Am I meant to change the values to as follows,
Line 145 enable ffb360hz =0
Line 149 FFBusesimpleminforce =0 (sharp)
Line 160 loadsimagicAPI =0
Last question the near plane set to 30 are you saying to keep lowering it until everything feels in sync so to speak I mainly run oval?
Alpha user here. You want to set it like this to disable Simagic's 360Hz FFB:
enableFFB360HzInterpolated=1
loadSimagicAPI=0
FFBUseSimpleMinForce=0 - This one is to your taste. I have it on 0.
Grazie.
Thank you very much.
@@sense-of-speed
You absolutely deserve it mate! (Reaper and those that helped you deserve it too, by the way 😉)
@@maxg.6467 I take care of them too.
I just read that the laser point settings do nothing except on tech tracks, and don't affect force feedback. Same on the shifter delay. The initial shift is immediate but it doesn't allow for another accidental shift in that allotted time. Where did you get the information on the laser scan settings from. There's so much conflicting info out there.
mate you transformed how i play/view iracing - i can actually see cars on my peripheral! chur
@@ApexSimRacingNZ Excellent. Thanks for the feedback.
This video is very well done. Things are explained in a way that they can be understood. I know how my weekend is going now.
Thank you, Dennis.
Hi. Could you provide a written instruction on how to apply your method to adjust a single flat monitor?
Remarkable video and instruction! Thank you for your hard work! Can't wait for the in car camera video!
Thanks for watching. The next video is in the works.
Having owned a serious triple rig for half a year and always intuitively feeling that my, and other rigs are somehow off with fov/perspective even after rigorous adjusting and measuring - finally with your work applied I feel the road flows similarly in the simulator, as it does in normal IRL street or track driving. So Much Better.
Thank you
You're very welcome. I'm glad I can put you more in the car!
Soooo good. I just did a ringmeister after this setup and it is absolutely awesome on my flat triple 32s. I usually drive formula cars since the default setup is weird inside a car. This made the inside car view much better.
Glad to hear, man. Thanks for watching.
This is pretty exciting.
I didnt think I will watch full video and I just got dragged into it. Now I think when do I find time for all of this, but it really does looks like worth time spending. When do Iracing makes visuals correspond to the current standards, this sim will become a one to go solution. Thank you for the great tutorial.
LOVE this video. I keep coming back to setup my new rigs. QQ though: @ 18:51, it references the Laser scan section. @ 20:41, it mentions changing this section to 120 point size, 8 min, 64 max, 512, and density. After you run a bit and adjustments are needed to help with a little stuttering that happens, what setting should be reduced? point size? Density? Not sure. Thanks!!!
Thanks. Density is what should be adjusted as it affects memory information.
@ thank you!!
Nice work I can’t wait to give it all a try. , I will need to lock out a few hours..
so at the end you say remove the first number add 12 to your width and 12 to your radius , well my width is 1060.. if i remove the 1 its now 12060 does not work my radius is 1100 remove the 1 ad 12 its now 12100
Thank you very much for your work ! And for sharing this with the community!
Please give me some advice: I have a 48" triples, 1050 mm width, 10 mm bezel, 920P radius (1840 mm between monitors), eye distance 700 mm, angle with side monitors 69 degrees, when I enter these parameters into iRacing I get a FOV of 207 degrees (with "eye dist 701mm"), but it seems to me that this is too big a value, for example 187 degrees looks closer to reality. Near play distance i set to 30, as you recommended.
What do you think will be correct FOV in my case?
Maybe I need to set a different FOV and increase the width and radius of the monitors in iRacing (by how much?) ?
bump I have a similar issue.
Despite dedicated efforts for many years, I have always struggled with "that just ain't right" in FOV in iRacing. Your work here has fixed that. The cockpit displays as if you're actually sitting in it, apexes actually show up where my eyes say they are and competitor cars are dimensioned correctly as well (no more outrageously massive GT cars when viewed from a prototype cockpit). Running the side flat panels at 60 degrees certainly adds a better sense of position in time and space to my rig, and the ability to work with pixel density is amazing. Very humble hat tip to you.
Folks who put in the effort to implement your approach will be far more accurate drivers, and cleaner as well. Quicker times, fewer track limit penalties when running at the limit and cleaner car handling when engaged in close racing will be the result.
For those reticent about raising monitors, I fully agree with you and will add (with great sanctimony) that There Is No Way anyone can achieve an accurate simulation environment with the driver's head positioned at the mid-point of the monitor and/or the steering wheel in their lap. I encourage everyone to check the height of their steering gear in relation to their shoulders as well - if you are in an open wheel, formula car or a prototype, the display on the steering wheel should be clearly visible in the lower half of your track vision when driving. If you are in a sports car, the instrument cluster should be in the same place. Nuf table pounding...
For the record, I'm running triple 27s on a 12 core AMD and an Nvidia 3090. I'd love to run 32s, but my space limitations are challenging. I am working through some framerate issues, but FOV is FINALLY SOLVED. I'm at 24.5" eye distance, side monitors set at 60 degrees, 188 degrees FOV. Monitor height has my eye level roughly at the mid-point of the lower 1/3 of the main monitor. In testing, I set the camera such that the horizontal dash surfaces are visually "flat" and adjusted the driver height to achieve a correct perspective of the track.
Pushing hard at Le Mans in the new Cadillac prototype for several laps of testing, getting outside of track limits at nasty places like Tertre Rouge and Dunlop just stopped happening...
Amazing.
That's what I like to hear, and thank you. Relative car scale between opponent cars was a big part of our issue as well and included in the baseline values. I am also super glad 27" guys are noticing an improvement. I was pretty worried. Now that I'm back driving I may have to head to Le Mans for a bit. I haven't been there in a while.
Takk!
Thank you very much, Ola!
@@sense-of-speed Well deserved! Hope to see you in a SR10 official server one day! (Ola Braaten)
Maybe! It is seriously one of my favorite cars. That lap at Laguna was fun!
Great video thanks. Question. Is PointSizeMM higher numper is harder on system or lower number is harder? Same for min max and density?
Per the iRacing staff in the forums directly replying about this video:
"Mike DeTurck Posts: 30Staff ›
July 5, 2024 9:58AM
@Rob Bedford as @Nir Navé stated this only changes the display of the point cloud that is visible on "Tech Tracks". (New Jersey) This has no bearing on force feedback effects or the display of any graphics on non-tech tracks."
Thanks. @@Romad_20
Thanks heaps man, got triples around the time you were talking about this & been hanging out to setup your way.... Spent a few hours playing around this afternoon & what a difference!!!!
Good stuff buddy! More info and tuning to come soon.
holy cow...this is crazy. thank so much
Thanks for your time .I have smashed my PBs and am a lot more consistent. Absolute game changer. Keep up the good work. 👌
Glad to hear, buddy. Keep on truckin.
Thank you for this! I had paid for your tool file (didn't need it but why not) and I finally got your FOV concept in my racers brain to click, so I changed the files as per instructions and bam, I got even more detail with 1440P 32"triples and a 4070 Super!
At 29:35. Dividing that measurement by 2. What do you do with that number?
What monitors do you have and what angle are they installed at?
It was used to determine the radius of your monitors for the curved setting.
@@sense-of-speed 27'' flat monitors with 57 angle. 560 distance atm.
@@allenqueen2314 Then why did he use 760 (50 above monitor width) instead of 656 (his measured distance)? This was not explained beyond 'setting a baseline'.
Love the video bro! I realized a lot of comments all have triples but I don’t have the room yet! I use a 34” curved. Hope these settings can work with it. Great work again
I got my first monitor, a 34" 1500R. Hope it can do some racing when I get a laptop up for the job. After, I think I'll be going dual 4K 57, although I might drive it at 1080P-1440P at first. Triples may be cool for dedicated rigs, but it seems avid racers can be happy with 49" and delighted with 57". I'll have the $$$$ screen do desk duty most of the time, and swivelled over to the side or back be my "rig". Can't wait for the first tries with the laptop when I get it. Loooove the 34" already for doing anything, watching some racing, etc.
@@Cloxxki yeah it’s good stuff. But I’m hoping what settings in this video can work for a single curved
People have reported good results using the configuration file settings and some prefer to check SMP and triple screen projection for a little more depth at the same FOV.
@@sense-of-speed would you even bother doing a video for single monitors?
Just built my first rig from a desk mounted G29 to Moza R9. Literally have played under 10 AI races and the difference before to now is massive. Still tweaking however straight off the block this video is literally a game changer. From night to day…awesome!❤
Did you find a formula for the near plane distance? I am currently doing a bit more than 3 times the physical distance from the monitor (625cm rounded up to 7 x 3 = 21)
You opened a new chapter into Sim Racing :) Many thanks
@MK_UTD Thanks for the kind words, buddy. I'm glad to help.
I was just checking the last vid for any updates yesterday. Diving in now!
absolute dynamite cheers dude!
hi, thanks because all this is fantastic. I have a doubt though, why do we have to measure the distance between the side monitors when then it is enough to insert the width + 50?
The measurement was for people with monitors, not at the recommended angles.
@@sense-of-speed oh ok, i my case I have 3x flat 32" 1440 where the width of a monitor including bezels is 725 (710 just the panel) with an angle of 60 degrees. However the measurement of the edges gives me 1440 which divided by 2 is 720. You get about 650. In my case in the iracing settings should I put width 725 and curvature radius 720? Is this correct? or i have to put 775 as curvature?
@fedebe8977 My monitors are curved, hence the smaller radius. Reaper in the video is on flat at 60. 710 width and 760 radius should be fine for you as you are in the guidelines.
That is awesome, i cannot wait to rewatch it while trying to configurate it, thank you a lot keep the good work !
You're welcome. Thanks for watching!
Gone through this a couple of times after just installing triples and it has completely changed my experience (and love) of simracing, so thank you (although my wife does not thank you!).
One thing that has confused me in iRacing however is the cockpit camera tool. I have adjusted horizon, pitch, height etc. What do I do with the FOV slider in the tool? I just leave it alone correct? (For instance my says 106 from my single ultra wide, and I just do not want conflicting FOV that may screw things up...)
@marklongNH lol. Awesome, Mark. The camera slider for fov doesn't save or need to be touched. It doesn't effect the global fov adjustment and it only goes to 179. My condolences to your wife.
Saw this video about a week ago, just installed triples this week. got them set up to other tutorials, and the side monitors seemed weird, almost stretched. Just followed your video and it looks WAY better. thank you.
Awesome. Thanks for watching, and I'm glad it helped.
Great Job! So what do you do if you cant set your 27" Curved Triples 1800R @ 60 degrees? My setup is no where near 60, more like 40-45 degrees. My distance from left to right edges as measured is 1460mm.
I would start by using your actual monitor width of 610 and a radius of 730. Use the bracket key to dial in your eye distance and fov like in the video. If the side images look good change the first digits to 12 and away you go.
If your side images don't look correct the radius needs adjustment. If the side image looks to far away increase the radius value, if they are too close decrease the value. Think of the radius value as the new angle adjustment.
I have to say i was skeptical on trying to change these setting you spoke in this video but i decided to try out. Wow what difference. I followed your video set by step and it was easier than i thought it would be. Thank you so much!!!
@davidbossmann2476 is there anything to watch out for like mistakes you made it may help me and others to be ready for them
Not really. I did everything while watching this video on my phone and had zero issues. I did everything in mm even though I'm in u.s. where everything is done in inches. But it worked out perfectly. So if I can do it any one can 😂
Rock on, man. We worked hard to offer something that worked. FYI, if you want to use mm, you can change it in the UI. I'm US based, too, but mm is so much easier with this crap.
Hey mate, Im running top tier rig no expense spared, 48" Triples and trying to work out the slight distorted left and right screens. Any hot tips for me?
Im siting in a full motion racing rig and sit about 1100MM from screen too
AMAZING video! I cannot wait to try this later today!
I rarely comment, but thanks for putting in the effort! Way more connected to the car and much better at hitting the apexes!
You're very welcome. Glad I could help.
Excellent video! Even better knowledge and information!
Your logic and theory can be applied to other Sims, not just iracing. I tried this with ACC on PC and man what a difference.... the optical flow is huge! Thank you so much! 👍💪👌👏
Good to know buddy, I'm glad it helped you!
How do you make the same changes in Acc?
@DamianReed when you enter to drive the car press pause and goto view settings there you will find camera controls look for triples tab there you can enter the eye distance, side monitors and monitor angles. I even did the "12" in front of both values too and it helped a ton... so much better immersion and realism.
Did you just add "12" in front of monitor size and eye distance in ACC or something else?
@Marintheguitarplayer so I sit 33 inches from monitor (eye distance) that's 839mm ... in ACC I put in 1239mm for distance and 1292 for the distance between the monitirs [about 58 inches) and worked a charm! 👌
I am running 3x 31.5 monitors....
Might attempt to apply some settings to my 49" ultrawide setup this evening, especially when it comes to the changes in FFB. Hitting the proper turn in point has always been a struggle for me, and hurts consistency.
Others are reporting good results on ultrawide or sure.
@sense-of-speed just coming back to report that I have had great success on my 49" Ultrawide with the FOV settings, and FFB changes. Slowly dialing the World Plane Distance in
@@03canadianf5 Hell yeah, man. Good stuff!
@@03canadianf5 what did you change to? would be interesting to hear your values
I froth on nerdy iRacing stuff, I’m always tinkering with my app.ini files and individually setting cockpit cams for each car so it’s set and forget. I was skeptical on trying this setup seeing as I had put so much time in the past to get it where it is now but I’m glad I did it cause your settings made it even better. I was skeptic about switching to 3 curved monitors even though I’m running flats but once I seen it I realised how good it is. Thanks for putting all that effort into the video and your voice pretty chill to listen to 😂🤙
Good stuff, man. I'm glad you tried it. Reaper was on flat's and we tested everything for months to make sure it worked.
qq, at 15:35, you mention values from your first video..... which video is that? can you link? just want to be sure im following from the beginning
@@vinniep6790 That video is gone. This info is much better and can be considered the new beginning.
I am very surprised that the point cloud would even be shipped with the game tracks
Thanks again for your video. Are the settings in this video for ini file settings still the same after the latest iracing update to the shaders and all? Thanks!
dude. thank you so much. this really helped a lot. like, im doing top lap times in races, time trials, time attacks. the pros must be doing this too and just not telling anyone. this helped me with long turns like turn 10 at Zandvoort and the last turn at sebring. im able to tell that im using all of the track and wheel to wheel fighting is much more intuitive.
Hell yeah, man. Glad to help.