Windowmaker tool updated!

[hercules]

Its pretty simple.

fill out the desired view angle and number of displys.
Than click calculate.

In P3d load a flight and add three additional views.
Save that flight and open the related file in a text editor.

Let the formating signs alone and just copy the calculated data to the correct positions.
You will need only Camara 1 in each window part.
You can delete all other cams beteeen the windows.

For me in germany the comma in the zoom part must changed to a dot. It depends on the country and excel language.

Save the file and open it in p3d. The correct view only appears if you make a full screen in window mode or a real full-screen.

You will need to select "show all file extensions' to save the flight file.

Thomas

[ammarmalhas]

118

Yes Thomas, it could be just as simple as you describe BUT the problem remains in fully understanding what FOV and zoom really mean! One has to read a few articles and posts to grasp what these should be.

The Windowmaker tool, I believe, will not help if you are using cylindrical screens and projection that will need special warping and blending software! In such cases there will be view overlaps that will have to be accounted for.
Furthermore, is there anything within it that allows for the angles at which the monitors are setup? Is having two monitors straight different than having them placed at 30 or 45°? I am not sure if there is a difference but I am a bit confused with this.

Looking at the tool, on line B10 & B11 it states "If windows are wider than they are tall, set Wideviewaspect=FALSE", shouldn't this be the opposite?

Now, most of us out there are looking for settings that mimic reality and shows us what we should see out of a cockpit, so zooming IN/OUT and seeing more or less than we should (FOV), are means to achieve this but many of us do not really know what to expect or what should be achieved!

Why doesn't anyone just tell us simply what the FOV and zoom settings should be in different cases in which the distance between our eyes and the monitors/screens are taken into account? In real life when we come closer to a window we do not see the objects outside any closer (well we do but for objects away form the windows we can hardly tell they look any closer), but we do see more of the view! It we move away from a window we still see the objects at the same distance (really smaller but not noticeably so), we see less of the view out! This is not like the "ZOOM" we are using because such changes are hardly noticeable, maybe FOV, and what about the vertical part of the FOV?

Yes I have been confused about the views and what we should really be seeing, but my beliefs are that in a physical cockpit replica with a large screen and us looking out of a physical window structure at a large screen, we get that feeling of changing FOV when we move closer or away from the window. The views projected or displayed on large monitors (larger than the window we look from) are set up as close as what should be seen outside a cockpit where a pilot's eye-point is taken in consideration, I think!

I must add that in our usage and our flying we seldom move our heads more than a few centimeters forward/backwards which really means we never see any difference in what is projected on our monitors or screens, so if we set a zoom and FOV levels to show what we are supposed to see then we are really set and we can enjoy flying.

Anyway, Windowmaker is a good tool for monitors and is a good starting point which output can be tweaked by the user to fit his/her special set up.

I just wanted to go through the above to clarify things to myself by writing this down, and perhaps help clarify things for others (this is what we should be doing on the net, help each other understand and benefit from knowledge). Sorry if added to the confusion I did not mean to
163169

[wledzian]

Do you really need to know what all the numbers mean, or do you need a tool that gives you the numbers you need, given the input you provide?

Granted, windowmaker is not a complete tool, in that it only works fully for several windows assuming no bezel and no overlap. That doesn't mean it's not a useful tool for cylindrical or other displays, you just need to work within and around its limitations. For instance, I use it with my own collimated display with a 210° field of view. For example, I have it set up with 15° of overlap, so I did a little paperwork to figure out what I needed:

** There are two zones of 15° overlap, so I need to draw an extra 30° total, split between three projectors. With no overlap, each projector is responsible for 70°, so with the overlap extension, I now use 80° for each.
** The leftmost projector covers from -105° to -25°, so the rotation is centered between those values at -65°. Similar for the right projector. The center projector has no rotation.
** To get the zoom values, I enter info into Windowmaker as if I have three 80° windows, for a total of 240°, let it do its thing to generate zoom values, then manually correct the rotation for the left and right sides before copy-pasting into my saved flight file.

You'll still have to warp these projections to fit the cylindrical geometry of your screen, but this should get you to the correct point regarding source imagery within each window.


There is a difference between having two monitors straight and having them placed at an angle. With the monitors straight, you don't need multiple views to get a correct perspective, just use a single window across all the monitors, set Wideviewaspect = TRUE (more on that later), and set a zoom value based on your VERTICAL FOV instead of your horizontal FOV. For different angles, you need different views. Optimally, the monitors should be pointed directly at you.

Regarding Wideviewaspect, the statement is correct. Setting Wideviewaspect = TRUE causes FSX to clamp the FOV on the narrower dimension of the display; Wideviewaspect = FALSE clamps the FOV on the wider dimension. If you have a widescreen monitor and use a zoom value for 50° with Wideviewaspect=TRUE, you will have a 50° VERTICAL field of view. Unless you're projecting in portrait mode, each window will be wider than it is tall, and since we want to clamp the horizontal FOV, we want Wideviewaspect = FALSE.

[Flying_Fox]

Thanks Wayne!

Could you comment on the 3 view/ bent horizon issue which is currently discussed in this thread

Nick

[ammarmalhas]

Regarding Wideviewaspect, the statement is correct. Setting Wideviewaspect = TRUE causes FSX to clamp the FOV on the narrower dimension of the display; Wideviewaspect = FALSE clamps the FOV on the wider dimension. If you have a widescreen monitor and use a zoom value for 50° with Wideviewaspect=TRUE, you will have a 50° VERTICAL field of view. Unless you're projecting in portrait mode, each window will be wider than it is tall, and since we want to clamp the horizontal FOV, we want Wideviewaspect = FALSE.

Very nice explanation and guide on how to use Windowmaker with overlap.
But since for cylindrical screens we will need warping software and that usually exports the view settings we need for FSX and P3d i see no use for WM, in my case, hence my comment about its use.

As for the WideViewAspect I have read your comment several times but I still cannot understand what it really means!

Am I correct in understanding that if WVA is set to TRUE then the FOV becomes VERTICAL FOV and if set to FALSE then FOV is the HORIZONTAL FOV? Can we really separate Horizontal FOV from Vertical FOV? I am lost here

Maybe I need not understand it, but I know I have to set it to TRUE on my 3-projector 225° cylindrical screen (2.5m radius with my eye point as the center) which is almost 2m high and my zoom levels are around 0.45.

What are your thoughts on FOV and ZOOM? Are there any "standard' numbers that fit different situations? Say if I use 225° FOV (Horizontal) then my zoom must be somewhere around 0.45, what would zoom be if my FOV is only 180°? 145°? 90° and so on?

Thank you for taking the time and the effort to provide us with your helpful explanations.
357

[wledzian]

If you've got another tool that already gives you the numbers you need, then you don't need Windowmaker. When I made it, no such tools were available, and I wanted to see how far I could push it. Heck, if I had a way to get rid of the window borders, I'd suggest using more than three windows to get close to a native cylindrical projection as shown on my first post in this thread, where I had 27 views across a 1920x1080 display for a full 360° cylindrical projection (apparently the link doesn't work anymore; I'll have to see about fixing that Link fixed ).

WVA can be confusing, since it isn't specific to horizontal or vertical FOV, but rather to the FOV across the wide or narrow dimension of the window. For example, if you have a single image across a typical monitor in landscape mode, the image is wider than it is tall. If you have WVA=FALSE, FSX constrains the wide dimension, which is in this case the width. If you similarly use three windows across three displays, each will be wider than it is tall, so you'll want WVA=FALSE to constrain the width. On the other hand, if you want to test the alignment of three windows on a single monitor before you hook up your projectors, you'll have three tall and skinny windows, where the height is the wide dimension. As FSX will now constrain your vertical field of view, it will appear that the window edges don't align. If you then take each of the three windows and shrink them vertically so that they are again wider than they are tall, the edges will match.

It is entirely possible that the software you are using assumes that WVA=TRUE, and gives you a zoom value based on the vertical FOV that will result from the desired horizontal FOV and the known aspect ratio of your display. Neither way is wrong, just different. As a check, I'll assume 15° overlap, for 85° per projector, which results in a 55.24° vertical FOV at the native image center of a 16x9 display, for an FSX zoom value of 0.57. With no overlap assumed, I get a vertical FOV of 47.26°, for an FSX zoom value of 0.68. I'm guessing the values provided to you for an assumed WVA=TRUE are somewhere between those two values. For WVA=FALSE, I get zoom = 0.388 for no overlap, 0.324 for 15° overlap.

If you've got a zoom value of 0.45 with WVA=TRUE, I'm guessing you've got almost 35° of overlap between each projector. Is that about right?

As for "standard" numbers, not so much, as they are dependent on the width of the overlap zones.

[ammarmalhas]

25

Sorry i had no idea i was discussing Windowmaker with its author
I commend you on a well written software that proved to be very useful to many people. The fact that people are still using the software and we are discussing this many YEARS after you wrote it is evidence of it immense success Enjoy it sir, well deserved.

I use Fly Elsie Calibration Pro, mainly for warping and blending and I get the FLT views output settings as an extra from the software. However i always tweak and change the settings I get (the rotation of the views) to get exact alignment of the three views i use.
My setup is 225° cylindrical screen 2.5m radius, 2m height using 3 Optoma 1080 GT projectors, the resultant settings i use in my FLT file with minor tweaking done by me is as follows:

/////////////

[Window.1] <--- Main Top-Down view hidden behind the three other views zoomed out to the max.
Order=5
Active=False
Undocked=False
Maximized=True
ScreenUniCoords=4, 4, 1, 1
UndocCoords=0, 0, 0, 0
CurrentCamera={A2849229-938A-448F-8AC6-01EF2291C171}

[Camera.1.1] <--- Not sure why this is here?
Guid={B1386D92-4782-4682-A137-738E25D1BAB5}
Zoom=1
Translation=0, 0, 0
Rotation=-90, 0, 0

[Camera.1.2]
Guid={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078} <--- Not sure why I use this VC GUID when what I see is the Currentcamera defined above and the Top-Down.
Zoom=255 <--- maximum zoom assuming small Earth will not impact fps
Translation=0, 0, 0
Rotation=0, 0, 0


[Window.2] <--- Left view tweaked
Order=0
Active=False
Undocked=False
Maximized=False
ScreenUniCoords=0, 0, 2731, 6144
UndocCoords=0, 0, 0, 0
CurrentCamera={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078} <--- Virtual Cockpit view

[Camera.2.1] <--- Again not sure why this is here
Guid={B1386D92-4782-4682-A137-738E25D1BAB5}
Zoom=1
Translation=0, 0, 0
Rotation=0, 0, 0

[Camera.2.2]
Guid={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078}
Zoom=0.46500000357627869 <--- Zoom calculated and outputted by the Fly Elise software
Translation=0, 0, -0
Rotation=1.3500000238418579, -73, 0.60000002384185791 <--- tweaked slightly by me

[Window.3] <--- center view
Order=1
Active=False
Undocked=False
Maximized=False
ScreenUniCoords=2736, 0, 2736, 6145
UndocCoords=0, 0, 0, 0
CurrentCamera={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078} <--- Virtual Cockpit

[Camera.3.1] <--- Again not sure why this is here
Guid={B1386D92-4782-4682-A137-738E25D1BAB5}
Zoom=1
Translation=0, 0, 0
Rotation=0, 0, 0

[Camera.3.2]
Guid={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078}
Zoom=0.43924799561500549 <--- Zoom calculated and outputted by the Fly Elise software
Translation=0, 0, -0
Rotation=0.90000003576278687, 1.7000000476837158, 0


[Window.4] <--- right view
Order=2
Active=False
Undocked=False
Maximized=False
ScreenUniCoords=5461, 0, 2731, 6144
UndocCoords=0, 0, 0, 0
CurrentCamera={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078} <--- Virtual Cockpit

[Camera.4.1]
Guid={B1386D92-4782-4682-A137-738E25D1BAB5}
Zoom=1
Translation=0, 0, 0
Rotation=0, 0, 0

[Camera.4.2]
Guid={C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078}
Zoom=0.45610100030899048 <--- Zoom calculated and outputted by the Fly Elise software
Translation=0, 0, -0
Rotation=0.41499999165534973, 72.575004577636719, 0.15000000596046448 <--- tweaked slightly by me

//////////////


As you see the zoom levels are around 0.43-0.46.
I know that what I see outside my cockpit window is what I should be seeing because i measured the closest point on the runway that I am supposed to see in front of the 737 nose (11.5m out) ( check out this very helpful page http://www.flying-the-winglets.de/Vi...ck_Perspective ) and I get that much.
i have never been inside a 737 cockpit to take photos and know for sure what the visuals should be.

As you also note from above that my screen is roughly 225° wide and my views are centered about -73/0/+73°. I have a measured overlap between the Center/Left and the Center/Right views close to 20% each side. The Center view is actually overlapped by the sides with around 40% of its projection area. I do not know what the FOV of each view is exactly, but it is logically around 86.5.
This is the result of the physical placement of the projectors and their throw ratio. To get less overlap i will have to move the projectors closer to the screen or turn them farther left and right resulting in even larger horizontal FOV! I am using the recommendation of Fly Elsie to have an overlap at least 15% to get better blending.

I am not sure where i am going with this, i am satisfied with the output I am getting, I wish for better blending but nothing is perfect.
It is just interesting to learn more about things we take for granted.
3546

[wledzian]

FlyingFox:

I'll take a look at that thread a bit more when I have some time, but just from the page you linked, it looks like others have provided the same input that I would, including some quotes from past posts of mine.


Ammarmalhas:

Initially, I was confused about the non-symmetric zoom values and rotations, but if I understand FlyElise correctly, it does camera-based autocalibration, and so likely provides you with the values based on that.

[ammarmalhas]

Initially, I was confused about the non-symmetric zoom values and rotations, but if I understand FlyElise correctly, it does camera-based autocalibration, and so likely provides you with the values based on that.

Yes they have camera-based calibration and also no-camera calibration, which is much easier. I have used both and the results are VERY close.

72

[BHawthorne]

Yes they have camera-based calibration and also no-camera calibration, which is much easier. I have used both and the results are VERY close.72

Just a note, I always recommend all Nthusim users continue to use WindowMaker and I have been recommending it ever since it was first posted here. While that competing product is a viable alternative, Window Maker sure is more cost effective for what it does. I consider Window Maker to be a critical tool for Nthsim users in the past, present and future. There is something that can be said for using something like Window Maker, because using it you actually get to understand the mechanics better than having something do it for you. I realize that is arbitrary preference, but it's always good to have more than one way to do something when simpit building. Options are a good thing. Don't write off Windows Maker just because someone else came up with an alternative method.