I faced an other technical question:
does the Eye Distance Falloff effect cube map the same way than spherical map? where would the poles be in the cube map? in spherical i understand they are at the top an at the bottom poles of the sphere. am i right?
in my scene there are also quite some over head-objects... will they seem curved instead of straight with the standard setting of 0,3?
br.
mo
Eye Distance Falloff
Yes, it does.momade wrote:I faced an other technical question:
does the Eye Distance Falloff effect cube map the same way than spherical map?
The cube map has the faces in the order +X (right), -X (left), +Y (up), -Y (down), +Z (backward), -Z (forward) - all in camera space. This assignment is pretty much arbitrary, but OculusVR Photo requires this specific mapping.where would the poles be in the cube map?
-> The poles in the cube map would be in the center of the +Y and -Y faces.
Yes, that's correct.in spherical i understand they are at the top an at the bottom poles of the sphere. am i right?
The default settings has been changed to 1 in 2.23, which minimizes the eye strain looking at the poles. The disadvantage is that even plane surfaces (like a floor) are appearing a lot more curved than with an eye distance falloff of 0.3, which on the other hand causes some eye strain looking at the poles.in my scene there are also quite some over head-objects... will they seem curved instead of straight with the standard setting of 0,3?
br.
mo
This would be the eye distance falloff (from lat -90 .. +90) of 1 (black), 0.5 (red), 0.1 (green), 0.01 (blue):
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
thanks abstrax.
great in depth answer as always!
i guess there has to be some testing done by me...
the 3d-depth remains the same right? or does spatiality also gets reduced at the poles?
br.mo
great in depth answer as always!
i guess there has to be some testing done by me...
the 3d-depth remains the same right? or does spatiality also gets reduced at the poles?
br.mo
The actual distance is the same of course, but the perceived is gets larger, because the distance between the eyes becomes smaller and with that the parallax effect.momade wrote:thanks abstrax.
great in depth answer as always!
i guess there has to be some testing done by me...
the 3d-depth remains the same right? or does spatiality also gets reduced at the poles?
br.mo
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra