Angle may also play into it. The irl photos are taking from a higher vantage point where you can clearly see the two separate pieces of glass.
Here is a pic directly from max showing the model at orthographic state with no perspective.
As you can see the glare shield is tapered inwards, it’s the FOV playing tricks with the view, you can also notice in the DCS screenshot the MPCDs are wider at the top, which causes the wider look of the panel at the top, making it look more square.
Originally the layout was from technical drawings.
How can FOV alone play tricks as all it does it changes the viewing angle without altering the position of the view point and thus perspective?
For example let’s compare the 1st(DCS) and 2nd(RL) shots in my original post (RAZBAM AV-8B Harrier II): you can tell that the point of view is closer to the HUD in the first shot despite it apeering to be otherwise. How can you figure that? Knowing that the HUD image is collimated (one of it’s features is that it*s apparent size is always the same) you can actually judge that the FOV in the 2nd shot is narrower than in the 1st shot. Notice that the HUD symbology fits the HUD frame in 1st shot while it doesn’t in the 2nd shot. That implies that the 2nd shot was taken further away from the HUD glass than the 1st shot. So maybe the the cockpit model is correct but untill we can test it ourselves and compare it to RL pictures we wont know for sure.
Just to ilustrate my FOV point here are few shots from CAP2.
First two taken from the same position with different FOV (see over glare shield)
Now with view point closer to the cockpit (see under glare shield)
Between changing FOV you can’t change perspective to see under the glare shield.
I can’t say that the CAP2 cockpit is modelled properly either, you would have to laser scan the thing to be perfectly sure I guess. Even if you had technical drawings you can’t be sure you’ve put all the planes at correct angles in 3d space or was the documentation thorough enough so you may make that claim?
With all due respect to CAP2 creators, I come to trust Razbam a tad more when it comes to cockpit modeling.
As I said I didn’t wanted to compare the two because the CAP2 pit is not 100% correct either but that glare shield just stood out too much in RAZBAMs depiction compared to real life thing.
I don’t know, you decide …
Excellent choice of pictures.
Now look how the panel around the edges you highlighted looks so different.
In the top picture it looks like you’re watching the top-inside of a funnel.
In the bottom it’s the opposite.
The FOV changes everything.
Maybe I can see it that way because I worked with 3D Studio and Blender and it’s blazingly obvious what happens with 3D volumes rendered on 2D surfaces…
EDIT: think about those movies where the camera does that FOV shift as the movie charachter realzies he made a huge mistake or the reality of the situation hits him.
Here, let me show you.
I know what you mean, but the effect is not done by the change of FOV alone - to get it right you have to change the FOV (increase the angle) while MOVING the view point closer to the object so the object size appears constant while the backround “shrinks”. You can easily replicate this effect with your camera.
I’m aware of intricacies of projecting 3d objects on 2d planes myself btw.
My point was to ignore the “depth of the picture” and focus on the shape of the glare shield edge itself (the highlighted part) - in the upper shot you can see that the upper sides of a glare shield continue to run horizontally before they curve downwards while in the lower shot you can clearly see that they curve downwards right away. You can’t deny that.
I see damson’s point. That horizontal stretch of green next to the red is apparent in the RAZBAM picture. While the RL picture was taken at a higher POV (see position of collimated HUD symbology), horizontal should still be horizontal even when viewed from above. That is clearly not the case in the RL picture. Are we perhaps looking at version differences between AV-8B N/A and AB-8B+?
That RL picture is very interesting, because with aligning the HUD symbology to 2-3 fixed reference points (see orange below), it should be very easy to exactly replicate the same point of view in game. Then we can easily see if the RAZBAM cockpit matches up.
Yeah I also considered that maybe the difference between the versions but I couldn’t find a RL shot to check that assumption. I guess we will see when the module comes out.
Whether you believe the me, it’s no issue.
Calling the makers of the module liars it’s your own choice.
For what it matters, all of this bears no significance to me overall.
That was uncalled for, nobody called anyone a liar. All I see is a civil technical discussion.
If the guy who created the thing tells you that it’s to specific (blueprints at the hand), and shows you the thing flattened and that is your answer…
Sorry, I rest my case.
Hey I only asked if they had all the necessary 2d projections of their technical drawings from the cockpit to accuratelly replicate the pit in 3d. I never called them liars.
My criticism was ment to be contructive not negative.
And I just pointed out what clearly doesn’t seem to match.
I take your silly meme-comment as a “get out of here” message instead of “showing the proper way” message, as your counter arguments weren’t strong enough to convince me to your point.
Peace, I’m out.
Nope it wasn’t that- I seen it as Morpheus meant it: I can only point you at the things you should look at to understand why the cockpit seems off.
I can’t see them for you.
To me it looks like the outside of the glare shield is curving inwards towards the center on the real aircraft but projecting streight out on the razbam pit … Now on the real aircraft the glare screen may have warped a bit … I have no idea what the real one is made of …
FWIW - I think it looks fine. Is it perfect? I dunno. Lots of different camera angles, FOV, seat heights, etc. being used as reference, but in the end I don’t know that it really alters the experience whatsoever. Wasn’t there a 50 page thread once about the Fokke-Wulf’s gunsight glass or something once? I don’t think it’s worth even a sore feeling or angry word among us friends.
Man that thread was legendary.
AND totally meaningless.
Legendary in its pointlessness. Happy?