99 replies to this topic

[johnparker007]

May I suggest that we use two separate Lay Back names? E.g. RLB - Rawd Lay Back, and SLB - Scott Lay Back.
Just a suggestion.

I'm very curious how the two methods will compare on a full scale cab.

Nah.. I wouldn't want my name tied in with it, as none of these are really my settings. Dedrock has provided us with most of the settings so far (not to neglect the other posters).

In terms of this, as a "non-personal" way of defining them I agree with both points. I do think they are quite clearly two approaches to the perspective/layback style. One style (standard) affects the y axis only as we look up the playfield from the flippers, and one affects the x and y axis (Scott's).

So I'd be more inclined to divide the two (clearly seperate and classifiable) styles into something like:

2D ..................... 3D
Y ....................... XY
Foreshortened ..... Full
Shallow .............. Deep
Parallel .............. Converging

Crap names lol but you get the idea. As without screenshots, you'd be just copying numbers without knowing whether is was the (current) standard layback, or if it was Scott's new layback type until you ran the table.

Here is Scared Stiff:
Inc: 10
FOV 50
LB 80
x 1.31
y 1.93
y off -358
x off 250

I would like to try experimenting with the rear backboards to make them taller.
1. I need to see if it can be done without changing the shape of the entire game
2. If it does work, I need to get the table authors permission to make that change.

I noticed in most games the back wall on the playfield is considerabley taller further adding to the illusion of depth.
SS, Totan, and LOTR are great real life examples.

Hope you like, again values may seem extreme but if you compare them to the real game you will have a better understanding of the depth I am trying to achieve. Again MUCHO thanks to JP

Scott
Detroit Pinball

Really nice again Scott, I'm an instant convert to this approach

This will be going straight into my "cab" (by cab, we're talking 3 LCD TVs on a table balanced on random assorted books, hooked up to a fast PC, with a playstation pad for doing the flippers with the shoulder buttons!

[thewool]

My PF monitor is laying on top of my cab and I'm a total convert to the Scott's settings. Even with a small amount of lb, inc, FOV the tables still don't look realistic. This was made even more apparent after I played a marathon amount of real pinball a few weeks ago. Scott's approach to the settings bridges the gap. Even to the point where you can see the ball disappearing 'into' the playfield and actually around/behind/up/down objects. Amazing...

I agree these settings are most effective for machines which had a deep playfield, and they will probably reflect the progression of tables. I find that as EM tables were pretty much up to the PF glass, they work fine for me with default settings, then at the opposite end we have games with all the toys where aggresive settings work best.

I tried some rough settings for TOTAN based on Scott's method and the skill shot panel was raised out the playfield, you could see the side of the sabre launch ramp (never seen this before apart from the real machine) and when the ball was plunged it looked like it physically left the ramp and landed on the skill shot bed!!!! Just awesome! Before this was it appeared totally flat even using settings I've seen posted previously.

At the end of the day, these settings are going to be like flipper settings - each to suit their own tastes. Great discussion though chaps as understanding the degree of the effects helps us all

edit: as a general comment, the only thing that 'breaks' the layback settings on for me is the appearance of flashers on some tables when the new values are applied. Frankestein and Johnny Mnemonic come to mind, they look really skewed and odd. I wish there was an easy solution to correct this.

Edited by thewool, 23 August 2011 - 08:17 AM.

[DedRok_V]

I agree that with the higher toys and objects on newer tables that scotts view technique is the right approach.
I'm mainly converting alot of the older flatter tables and earlier versions 1st to get them closer to todays tables standards.

Rawd can keep listing them how he likes, but its easy enough to see the different values on each table.
I,ve done my own conversions of some that were posted but didnt duplicate them in the list.
It is only a quick start guide after all. Feel free to change to anything you like.

Thanks for maintaining all the settings list Rawd.

[scott-Detroit Pinball]

I agree that with the higher toys and objects on newer tables that scotts view technique is the right approach.
I'm mainly converting alot of the older flatter tables and earlier versions 1st to get them closer to todays tables standards.

Rawd can keep listing them how he likes, but its easy enough to see the different values on each table.
I,ve done my own conversions of some that were posted but didnt duplicate them in the list.
It is only a quick start guide after all. Feel free to change to anything you like.

Thanks for maintaining all the settings list Rawd.

I was extremely hesitent to post my values, and did so with no intentions to Trump anyone. I will post 2 more examples and stop.
I actually think its a good idea for people to start tinkering with these settings on their own.

The reason I did post was I still saw some confusion on how things can look, with some of the posts on this group recently--- see the thread on "stretching a table out" and also to generate interest for people to start pushing the envelope on what you can do with these settings. I think we all have gotten used to how FS tables should look like on Visual Pinball and understand that some of these values may take a couple looks to get used too.

Good luck and I will just post 2 more over the next couple days, Totan and Fathom

thanks Rawd for creating this sticky, hopefully more people will discover some new and better ways to achieve the illusion of Depth and Distance, etc, etc
Scott
Detroit Pinball

[007]

Thanks to everybody involved! This is a great help to me, and I'm sure to many many others.

(I'm still going to call the Full/Deep/Converging method "Scott's Layback", though)

[DedRok_V]

I was extremely hesitent to post my values, and did so with no intentions to Trump anyone. I will post 2 more examples and stop.
I actually think its a good idea for people to start tinkering with these settings on their own.

The reason I did post was I still saw some confusion on how things can look, with some of the posts on this group recently--- see the thread on "stretching a table out" and also to generate interest for people to start pushing the envelope on what you can do with these settings. I think we all have gotten used to how FS tables should look like on Visual Pinball and understand that some of these values may take a couple looks to get used too.

Good luck and I will just post 2 more over the next couple days, Totan and Fathom

thanks Rawd for creating this sticky, hopefully more people will discover some new and better ways to achieve the illusion of Depth and Distance, etc, etc
Scott
Detroit Pinball

Dont be hesitant Scott
Post what you come up with, I,m keen to check some out, especially when you have the real ones right next to you to compare to.

Hopefully it does encourage everyone to fiddle with their settings.

Just dont see the need for separate lists.

Edited by DedRok_V, 24 August 2011 - 09:39 AM.

[scott-Detroit Pinball]

 V_Totan.JPG   702.96KB   279 downloads  Tales__original.JPG   613.14KB   179 downloads

TOTAN
Increased Depth Settings
Just an FYI the Genie alone is over 8 inches tall to give you an idea the depth of this game from the middle of the playfield towards the back. You can really see this by how much black side cabinet you see on the real game
By comparison an EM or early non ramp SS like Fathom-- from playfield glass to playfield is @ 2 inches.

to give a better illusion of depth and distance, I came up with these values
incl 11
fov 50
LB 75
x 1.25
y 1.83
y off -328
x off 225

thanks
Scott
Detroit Pinball

[superballs]

My first attempt at a conversion.

Indianapolis 500:
15,50,55,270,1.2,1.7,-300,205

JPSalas' Bow And Arrow:
1, 30, 60,270, 1.35, 2, -445, 25

I just saw on the OP that this one was already up there, my settings are pretty close actually so i guess i'm on the right track

Attached Files

•  Bow_And_Arrow.jpg   373.65KB   58 downloads

Edited by superballs, 29 August 2011 - 09:43 PM.

[GCS2000]

 V_Totan.JPG   702.96KB   279 downloads  Tales__original.JPG   613.14KB   179 downloads

TOTAN
Increased Depth Settings
Just an FYI the Genie alone is over 8 inches tall to give you an idea the depth of this game from the middle of the playfield towards the back. You can really see this by how much black side cabinet you see on the real game
By comparison an EM or early non ramp SS like Fathom-- from playfield glass to playfield is @ 2 inches.

to give a better illusion of depth and distance, I came up with these values
incl 11
fov 50
LB 75
x 1.25
y 1.83
y off -328
x off 225

thanks
Scott
Detroit Pinball

I'm liking the way that looks Scott. From memory of owning the game this is look a lot more true to life (dimensionally speaking of course) ... how does it play?

Greg

[007]

Elvira and the Party Monsters VP91x v1.1 (JPSalas)

(Scott's method)

10, 50, 80, 270, 1.28, 1.73, -412, 170

[DedRok_V]

Scott already discussed these veiws when layback first came out.

If you read thru the posts carefully you might notice that these views are already discussed and have been used
on some of the newer tables.

Rawd mainly wanted to go through the "old" FS tables that had the bad flipper angles so we could update them to look better.

By all means, post the newer tables with better looking settings, but at the moment,
I will continue going thru the older versions to update them to layback view first til they are all done.

BTW , this is not pointed towards anyone but just a general comment.

I am thinking of going through all of my tables and adding layback to them. Those 'old' FS flippers just look too strange to me after playing layback tables.

Airborne : 7,50,85,270,1.32,1.95,-1340,263

Cactus Canyon : 8,30,70,270,1.275,1.73,-410,175 (Flipper : ht 60, Rubber : w 26, off 18, th 6)

Frankenstein HR 1.03 : 12,28,60,270,1.335,2.035,-295,213 (Flipper : ht 56, Rubber : w 26, off 22, th 6) (Top Flipper : ht 52, Rubber : w 30, off 16, th 6)

Hard Body : 5,28,85,270,1.335,1.955,-1400,160 (Flipper : height 44,Rubber : width 22, offset 16) (Top Flipper : height 44,Rubber : width 22, offset 15) (also decals and lights at the top have to be moved)

Medieval Madness: 11,30,80,270,1.23,1.87,-274,285 (Flippers: 0.8,0.16,0.55,0,0.25,0,2,7.5)

Here are few examples, I have more of this, just first few.

Addams Family, The (Bally) (1992) (melon) (1.00): 8 30 60 270 1.28 2 -340 100

Attack from Mars (Bally) (1995) (jpsalas) (2.3): 7 30 60 270 1.25 2.01 -342 140

Black Rose (Bally) (1992) (Lord Hiryu) (1.0.0): 8 30 60 270 1.41 1.8 -442 90

inclination is very important, i put it to 0 only for flat tables. but it table has some ramps or some figures you have to enlarge inclination enough so that you don't have objects with tops cutted off.

Very true, the old flat tables shouldnt need it, maybe a small amount if you cant get it right.
But ones with high ramps and toys definitely need it, had to set inc to 9 to get stuff to appear on Batman.

[DrJoeC]

This is a great idea. I was experimenting prior to this thread and wasn't sure of best settings but now it is much more clear. Thanks. Keep this thread alive with more updates

[hashman]

Wow. Just found this thread. Very interesting. Amazing some of the screenshots how good they look. Now I just have to get my head around how to actually change these values.

Edited by hashman, 16 September 2011 - 11:46 AM.

[epthegeek]

Thanks to everybody working these numbers out. Very handy!

[johnparker007]

I find them more more convincing to play with Scott's approach, I feel my aim is more true for getting the ball up ramps without hitting the side. Been playing soooo much Funhouse lol

[epthegeek]

I find them more more convincing to play with Scott's approach, I feel my aim is more true for getting the ball up ramps without hitting the side. Been playing soooo much Funhouse lol

This! 1000 times this. --^

Good lord, I just played some TOTAN with scott's settings and the difference is nothing short of amazing as far as making shots and such. With the non-layback way I always felt like I had to hit early to aim where I wanted, but this way feels totally natural.

Thanks!

[epthegeek]

I'm so in love with Scott's adjustments, I tried a few of my own. I picked the one he'd done that I thought was the closest on depth and then tweaked from there. Here's what I came up wtih, adjust as you see fit of course.

Roadshow
 rs.png   987.15KB   130 downloads

Settings Used in screenshot: 14,60,75,270,1.27,1.6,-420,260


Theatre of Magic
 tom.png   1.12MB   146 downloads

Settings Used in screenshot: 10,50,80,270,1.27,1.85,-364,215

Cirqus Voltaire
 cv.png   1.24MB   116 downloads

Settings Used in screenshot: 12,60,70,270,1.32,1.85,-512,200

Edited by epthegeek, 17 September 2011 - 03:59 AM.

[epthegeek]

I studied up and did some experimenting with exactly what the various view settings mean/do, and though these visual aids might be helpful for anybody who hadn't read into the details. Maybe not. Probably for a lot of you guys this stuff is old OLD news, but I never paid much attention to layback until checking out this thread the other day. I knew more recent builds were using it, but that was all.

All you have to do to implement layback on most tables (that don't make use of reels) is 1) Lower the inclination and 2) Increase the layback -- until you find numbers you're happy with. Inclination of 10 and Layback of 75 seems to be a good rough starting point.

Inclination has to do with the starting angle of the entire view. 0 Degrees is directly overhead, 90 Degrees would be staring at the end of the playfield.

Like so:
 incl.jpg   49.45KB   47 downloads

For cabinet tables, lower angles on inclination make the flippers look better because you're looking more straight down on them. Just as if playing a real pinball table, your 'angle of view' of the front of the table where the flippers are is pretty close to straight down (depending on how you stand of course).

Without layback, this makes the back of the table look really strange. In real life, your view angle to the back of the playfield is drastically different, because you're in front of the machine, the farther back something is, the greater the view angle on it becomes. Layback skews the angle the farther back you go to give you a similar visual effect. If you leave the layback at zero, the entire thing is at the same angle as the inclination (making the whole view top-down as if you were hovering over the machine) - if you increase layback, it's as if you're skewing the back wall away from you and stretching the playfield along with it.

Sort of like this:
 layback.jpg   58.03KB   46 downloads

Those of you with cabinets with a recessed display that angles away from the glass like a real table does (usually) may not need to do anything with the FOV setting -- but in my case, the LCD is right under the glass, and parallel. Using a lower FOV to 'pinch' the back end of the playfield makes it appear to be farther away, and gives you the illusion of seeing the inside walls of the cabinet as you would in a real game (or do on a recessed LCD). This really helps me with perception of shots and angles, but I might be alone there.

Big thanks to Scott for bringing that change up - it's a night and day difference for me.

[bodydump]

Wow. I agree with epthegeek. It's a night and day difference. Initially I didn't like the idea of not filling the screen but the tables look and play much more realistically with Scott's settings. Keep those numbers coming Thanks for all the time experimenting and getting this figured out.

[hashman]

Well I used my brain and found how to change the settings. WOW. Amazing difference for my "ghetto cab". Games like fish tales just play sooo much better.

Thank you everyone for your hard work and posting your settings here.