24 replies to this topic

[StevOz]

I believe desktop versions should not use layback as by their nature they already have layback, also the Xscale:Yscale ratio for a WSDT should be 3:4.

 

Which means the Xscale = Yscale*0.75  for 16:9 ratio displays which are the most common displays these days for example 1920x1080 or 2560x1440...

For 16:10 displays such as 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 the Xscale should be set at Xscale = Yscale*0.833333.

For Scaling, Inclination and Field of view I start at Yscale = 1.2 and Xscale = 0.9 with Inclination/Field of view both set to 50. If this does not fill the screen top to bottom I increase the Xscale and Yscale whilst keeping them in ratio until it does fill the screen top to bottom or is slightly larger, likewise I reduce them if the table appears to be too large.

After this I then increase both the Inclination first and Field of view equally then after if need be until the table fits perfectly top to bottom, whilst not exceeding 54, adjusting the Y Offset to fit. If I exceed 54 then it means the Xscale and Yscale need to be reduced.

This I feel results in the best possible desktop view, filling the screen with as much table as possible whilst keeping it all in the correct aspect ratio so the ball will stay round without having to be adjusted via the VP options.

 

Whilst doing this often side rails will need to be lengthened in the editor to fit, usually just the upper ramp/rail, though on occasion the underlying side walls will also need to be adjusted.

 

Also of note: Never, I repeat never just paint the rails/side walls onto the backdrop image as this renders the table completely angle dependent and it cannot be adjusted without having to create a new backdrop image and adding those those elements via the editor.

Edited by StevOz, 09 December 2014 - 09:18 AM.

[kruge99]

I'm looking forward to the responses in this thread!

[Shooby Doo]

I just keep editing numbers until it looks right to me, no math involved.

[aggies11]

I do the Same as Shooby for the most part.  (I start at about 50Inc and 40FOV, as I saw that as a good starting recommendation a while back).  I'd be curious if there is a post/guide anywhere that actually explains in detail what all the specific settings do? (In terms of how each changes camera position, angle, table dimensions etc) as while I have a fairly general understanding of what is going on, there are some tables I tweak that turn out way better than others.

 

(For example. Are the table Dimensions (X-scale, Y-scale) absolute, or relative to the screen size/resolution of the display? (A 1x1 square table for example will stretch when VP's display resolutions/ratios are changed, or will there just be more black space on the sides?).   I generally know what I want (Set the angle of the table's slope/inclination, and then get the table to fill as much of the vertical screen real estate as possible, while keeping the ratios in line (nothing shrunk or stretched out of proportion), but again, without knowing the specifics some definitely turn out better then others (and look a bit off/funny).

Edited by aggies11, 09 December 2014 - 07:19 PM.

[jpsalas]

I agree with StevOz, that's how I have been setting up my tables. The only I did different were the starting values of the Inclination and Field of View which I used 54 and 34, and change them from there.

To me is also important to keep the aspect ratio of the Xscale and Yscale so the table don't get distorted.

Edited by jpsalas, 10 December 2014 - 06:56 PM.

[unclewilly]

Im glad you posted this steve as i dont really play much in this view.
I usually just change the rotation back to 0 from my fs versions and center it on the table.

At least this gives me a guid to go from so my desktop versions arent distorted.

[StevOz]

From my understanding of it...

 

Inclination refers to how the table view is inclined from front to back, where as FOV refers to how wide the table is viewed from front to back, both perform very similar functions, though are intrinsically sublimely different. This is why I try to keep both settings as equal as possible, inclination has a greater effect then FOV so I adjust inclination first and then use the FOV setting for the final tweaking to render the table as full screen as possible, whilst adjusting the Y offset as needed.

 

At the same time I keep both values between 50 and 54, as 50 seems to maximise the table view and when going over 54 the view is getting too wide at the front and too narrow at the top, thus the scale needs adjusting if inclination and FOV cannot be kept between those parameters.

Edited by StevOz, 13 December 2014 - 12:29 PM.

[kruge99]

After playing JPs (desktop) betas of AFM and TOTAN on VP9.9x on my 42" TV, I decided to experiment with those settings on High Speed & Medusa and I have to say, I'm liking that wide low look/feeling it gives to the older tables.  Yes, you have to fiddle with the x/y scale and the y offset a bit but the math isn't too difficult to maintain a 16:9 aspect ratio.  To keep it simple, I adjust both the x/y scale by the same number of units and check the aspect ratio on my calculator later. 

 

For the uninitiated, open the lastest beta of AFM or TOTAN and then open your favourite table and save it under a new name - like add MOD to the end of the filename so that you keep the original settings of the table author.  Next switch to the Backdrop view in VP and copy the Color and Format settings from AFM or TOTAN into your mod table.  Save it and press play!

 

It can be a bit difficult at first, but practice makes perfect as the school teachers used to say, right?

[kruge99]

After playing JPs (desktop) betas of AFM and TOTAN on VP9.9x on my 42" TV, I decided to experiment with those settings on High Speed & Medusa and I have to say, I'm liking that wide low look/feeling it gives to the older tables.  Yes, you have to fiddle with the x/y scale and the y offset a bit but the math isn't too difficult to maintain a 16:9 aspect ratio.  To keep it simple, I adjust both the x/y scale by the same number of units and check the aspect ratio on my calculator later. 

 

For the uninitiated, open the lastest beta of AFM or TOTAN and then open your favourite table and save it under a new name - like add MOD to the end of the filename so that you keep the original settings of the table author.  Next switch to the Backdrop view in VP and copy the Color and Format settings from AFM or TOTAN into your mod table.  Save it and press play!

 

It can be a bit difficult at first, but practice makes perfect as the school teachers used to say, right?

 

Point in fact, TAF by melon looks much better IMHO when the DT view is 'tweaked' using the settings from TOTAN as a starting point...

 

Best Regards,

Todd.

[StevOz]

Then again TOTAN looks a bit different here...

 

Edited by StevOz, 14 December 2014 - 03:01 PM.

[kruge99]

I see what you did there with TOTAN, but what do you think of these settings for your LOTR mod?

 

inc. 64

fov. 34

lay. 0

rot. 360

x-scale. 1.0

y-scale. 1.35

z-scale. 1.0

x-off. 0

y-off. 180

z-off. 0

 

Doesn't that bring you in a bit 'tighter' to the playfield?  It does for me because, I'm 5.8 (on a good day with platform shoes) and I tend to lean forward a bit when I play so on my big 42" TV, I sit rather close in my game room, and this feels a bit like what I see when I play real pins...

 

 

Best Regards,

Todd.

[baloo42]

This is probably the most fundamental rule for getting tables to look correct!

Much thanks SteveOz, and thank you for explaining it so clearly.

[Shockman]

For Scaling, Inclination and Field of view I start at Yscale = 1.2 and Xscale = 0.9 with Inclination/Field of view both set to 50. If this does not fill the screen top to bottom I increase the Xscale and Yscale whilst keeping them in ratio until it does fill the screen top to bottom or is slightly larger, likewise I reduce them if the table appears to be too large.

 

 

The way I see it is you can not change the aspect ratio of your display, but everything in it should be 1/1. If there is a .3 difference, aren't you maintaining an off ratio instead of keeping a correct one?

 

If everything was in one minute spot analyzing such a formula would not be necessary, and when it is spread across focal points it just doesn't work. The real life equivalent of inclination and fov is relative. In VP, if layback is not used it is noticeably not. Flippers are at the same settings as a back pop bumper where you would look down on flippers at over at pop bumpers. I have said from the start (VP3) that even in DT which is all there was, that if it was real, and the filppers could move, they would dig a ditch, getting deeper at the end of the swing. That has never changed. They are just off. They need a pivot function. Everything needs a pivot function, as long as it's in terms of the visual, and not the realm of physics.     

[baloo42]

I just wanted to come back and give SteveOz a big thanks again!

You really don't know just how MUCH sweat and tears you have saved me with this

This should honestly be the No'1 thread for table-builders on VpForums.

Edited by baloo42, 04 May 2015 - 05:33 PM.

[batch]

Big thanks to StevOz from a guy among so many who will never have a pinball cabinet

 

Sometimes I don't understand why very nice tables are so distorded that one can't see their beauty

 

And it seems to me that the Backdrops are not considered as important whereas for me they should

 

But it's another subject

[xenonph]

THANKS FOR DIRECTING ME TO THIS POST STEVOZ..THIS INFORMATION IS GREAT TO KNOW.

I NEVER KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT THESE SETTINGS UNTIL I TRIED ONE OF MFUEGEMANNS TABLES THAT ONLY SHOWED JUST THE UPPER CORNER OF THE TABLE PLAYFIELD WHEN PLAYED IN EDITOR.

SOMEWHERE IN A POST I READ THAT IF I CHANGED THESE NUMBERS IT WOULD SHOW CORRECTLY.

 

CHANGE X SCALE TO 1
CHANGE Y SCALE TO 1

CHANGE Z SCALE TO 1
CHANGE X OFFSET TO 0
CHANGE Y OFFSET TO 0

CHANGE Z OFFSET TO 0

 

AND THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME I HAD EVER ATTEMPTED CHANGING THESE NUMBERS.

IT WORKED GREAT!!

 

THEN I FOUND THIS POST...http://www.vpforums....?showtopic=4933

WHICH GAVE ME IDEA ON HOW TO CONVERT FS TO DT.

I TRULY AM JUST A BEGINNER, AND I AM JUST STARTING TO LEARN ABOUT ALL THESE SETTINGS IN VISUAL PINBALL.

MY TOPIC ON CONVERTING FS TO DT, WOULD BE A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR BEGINNERS I THINK, AND THEN THEY COULD ADJUST SETTINGS AS YOU EXPLAIN HERE IN THIS TOPIC. (I WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN KNOWN WHERE TO LOOK FOR THESE SETTINGS, IF NOT FOR MFUEGEMANNS TABLE NOT WORKING FOR ME.)

THANKS AGAIN FOR ALL YOUR HELP AND FOR MAKING THIS POST!

 

FOR ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHERE TO FIND THESE SETTINGS OR HOW TO GET TO THEM, COME CHECK MY POST HERE...http://www.vpforums....showtopic=32907

Edited by xenonph, 14 November 2015 - 09:51 PM.

[Brer Frog]

I believe desktop versions should not use layback as by their nature they already have layback, also the Xscale:Yscale ratio for a WSDT should be 3:4.

 

Which means the Xscale = Yscale*0.75  for 16:9 ratio displays which are the most common displays these days for example 1920x1080 or 2560x1440...

For 16:10 displays such as 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 the Xscale should be set at Xscale = Yscale*0.833333.

 

I'm just curious - where does the 3:4 ratio come from? When I see that usually it's usually referring to an older monitor. Obviously that's not the case since the topic is regarding wide screen displays. Same for the 16:10 displays & using Xscale = Yscale*0.833333.

 

How are those ratios determined? I'm not challenging the figures, I'm just curious.

 

Thanks.

[TNT2]

I have always done what SteveOz recommends. For whatever reason on VP9 tables (never played VP8) and physmod it's always X value = Y x .75 on a 16x9 widescreen monitor. 

 

On VP10 I have noticed it varies. Sometimes it's similar to the previous ratio while other times it's almost a 1:1 correlation. While other times it's in between. At least in my experience. Not sure what about VP10 makes it more variable. 

Edited by TNT2, 23 April 2016 - 03:00 AM.

[StevOz]

From my experimentation, a 1:1 X/Y ratio does indeed represent a equal 16:9 render in VPX. I now just use greater or is that lesser -Z scale values and a y offset to zoom the table view for desktop rendering, whilst keeping Field of View / Inclination equal form 46/46 to 52/52, using the higher values for deeper cabinets/tables with ramps. This usually for the most part works fine on almost all VPX tables without the need to adjust other table lighting elements. Also layback should always still be zero for all desktop renders as by it's very nature a desktop render is a lay backed render, layback is and always should only be used for full screen rendering.

Edited by StevOz, 23 April 2016 - 12:10 PM.

[BorgDog]

From my experimentation, a 1:1 X/Y ratio does indeed represent a equal 16:9 render in VPX. I now just use greater or is that lesser -Z scale values and a y offset to zoom the table view for desktop rendering, whilst keeping Field of View / Inclination equal form 46/46 to 52/52, using the higher values for deeper cabinets/tables with ramps. This usually for the most part works fine on almost all VPX tables without the need to adjust other table lighting elements. Also layback should always still be zero for all desktop renders as by it's very nature a desktop render is a lay backed render, layback is and always should only be used for full screen rendering.

 

I believe/hope you meant to say Z offset not Z scale, other than that I pretty much concur but for some reason keep finding myself drifting to 42/45  for Inclination/Field of View as my default settings