thinking about going triple screen

[Noir]

Hey there,

As said in the title I'm looking into the possibility to upgrade to a triple screen setup....I will get a powerful enough ATI card with enough outputs for the task and go with eyeinfinity. This should be easy enough. My problem is the screen.

I currently own a Ilyama ProLite E2607WS which is a 26' 16:10 1920*1200 screen. I don't want to get 2 other screens that big and I want to keep my current screen as main. I was thinking about getting 2 smaller 4:3 or 16:9 screens and rotate them 90 degrees, my problem is to find a screen with a width matching the height of my current screen. I almost went crazy on the maths, can anyone help?

Thanks  

[Skuzzy]

Your problem is not matching the physical height.  When you rotate a display, you have not altered the actual pixle/row counts.

As an example.

Your primary screen has a row height of 1200.  In order for the outer two rotated monitors to match, they will need a column width of 1200 rows.  If the row count of the outer two displays is 1980, then the bottom parts of the displays will be black and the images across the bottom of the displays will stairstep.

[prono]

Is that triple screen worth it ? Frame bars, extra power usage etc. I would rather go for big screen LCD TV. I was playing on 42" TV in the living room until my wife kicked me out. 

[Noir]

mmmh ok so my only solution is to find a 1600*1200 screen, and to not rotate it, except if eyefinity is able to cheat the screen limitations.

a 4:3 screen with enough height to match my 26' would be close to 21' according to my measurements...game over

[Noir]

Is that triple screen worth it ? Frame bars, extra power usage etc. I would rather go for big screen LCD TV. I was playing on 42" TV in the living room until my wife kicked me out. 

I dislike TV screens, they are pretty bad compared to pc screens. I would like to have a very wide angle of view, which should be very immersive 

[FLS]

The wide view is nice but keep in mind that you'll probably cut your vertical angle of view in half.

[Skuzzy]

Todays LCD HD televisions are really no different than the computer LCD, except they use 16:9 (1920x1080) aspect ratios, rather than the computers 16:10 (1920x1200) aspect ratio.

The bigger the screen, the more noticeable aliasing is.

[Noir]

The wide view is nice but keep in mind that you'll probably cut your vertical angle of view in half.

I'm pretty sure that if I keep my 1200 pixels height on all 3 screens the vertical angle of view will not change....anyway it looks like it can't be done, as a 21' 1600*1200 screen is prehistoric.

[Skuzzy]

The wide view is nice but keep in mind that you'll probably cut your vertical angle of view in half.

That should not happen if the field of view is set correctly.  The vertical view should stay the same.

[Noir]

Todays LCD HD televisions are really no different than the computer LCD, except they use 16:9 (1920x1080) aspect ratios, rather than the computers 16:10 (1920x1200) aspect ratio.

The bigger the screen, the more noticeable aliasing is.

I chose my display for its reactivity, I doubt I can find a zero frame large TV! Anyway it is not what I want, I guess I'll have to save money for an all in one triple screen  

EDIT: the all in one triple screen is like 1500€  I'd rather pay 3 new screens

[FLS]

I'm pretty sure that if I keep my 1200 pixels height on all 3 screens the vertical angle of view will not change....

I thought the same thing until I set up triple monitors. 

....anyway it looks like it can't be done, as a 21' 1600*1200 screen is prehistoric.

You can mix aspect ratios and resolutions for multiple separate monitors but I don't think you can mix them for a triple screen. Last time I checked the aspect and resolution have to match for AMD.

That should not happen if the field of view is set correctly.  The vertical view should stay the same.

I'm curious why we disagree about this. It seems like simple math. 

[Skuzzy]

The problem is the game is limiting the field of view to 145, which is not quite enough for a 16:9 aspect ratio, 3 screen configuration.

It was enough for a 16:10 configuration.  I have addressed this with HiTech.

[FLS]

I appreciate your efforts Skuzzy although it looks like there will have to be vertical clipping even with the view angle increased.

My math may be off but here's what I get for the current view angle settings.


Resolution     Default view    Vertical view      Ratio

1600x1200           90                 67.5      .75
    
1920x1200          100                62.5       .625

1920x1080          106                 59.6      .56

         
5760x1200          145                 30      .208

5760x1080          145               27      .187   

6080x1080          145                25.6      .177


6080 is typical bezel compensation added to 5760.

Even with 16:10 it seems you lose half the vertical view.

[Skuzzy]

16:10 aspect ratio and a 145 degree horizontal field of view, works out to be 90.625 degrees vertical, which is pretty much spot on.

At 16:9, it is 81.9 degrees, which will chop the vertical a bit.   The field of view we need to be at when the 3 screen resolution is 151 degrees and that should get all of the vertical display.

Here is the code:

Normal Horizon FOV = 45 degrees
Tangent of the normal vertical FOV = .75
Normal Vertical FOV = (36.86) arc tangent 0f 0.75
Depth = Height / .75

Horizontal FOV = arc tangent (Width / Depth)


Just plug in your numbers and let her rip.

[FLS]

I'm confused by your use of the single monitor aspect ratio with the triple monitor view angle.


This is the default head position at 6048x1080 and 145 degrees horizontal view.