General Question Screen Resolutions (Survey)

[n72.75]

I use 1440x900 or 1024x768

 

[anemazoso]

1680x1050

 

[TonyZ2525]

1920 x 1080 67 in dlp tv

 

[tgep]

I run 1024 x 768 in full screen mode. Of course once I get married to my girlfriend, I'll be running Orbiter on a 32 inch wide screen flat panel HD monitor. The kids can have my old flat screen 19 inch CRT.

 

[ThatGuy]

1280x800

 

[Saturn V]

1440X900 runs most consistently with my PC's specs, so that's what I run.

 

[cr1]

1280x1024 is my monitor's max resolution.

 

[TSPenguin]

I run windowed at 1280x720, fullscreen at 1680x1050 and when I attach the television at 1920x1080.
So I am really happy about the XR panels.

 

[Calsir]

1440x900 here again .

 

[ex-orbinaut]

Excellent, thanks all for this sample!

I use 1920x1200 exclusively. You might want to create a poll to better organize results.

It is a good suggestion, and it did cross my mind, but decided that I did not want to "channel" the results into my preferences.

In addition to this survey, you might want to take a look at the main Orbiter site's viewer stats. [URL="http://extremetracking.com/open;sys?login=orbitsfs"]http://extremetracking.com/open;sys?login=orbitsfs[/URL]

Thank you for that lead...

...Is this for some Orbiter 2D panel?

Yes, 2D panels. The idea is based on the following;

I feel the Orbiter panel scale option is acceptable if you scale up (up to a factor of about 1.3 to 1.5, do we agree?), but scaling down turn the labels on the MFD's into hieroglyphics. What I intend to do here is find the range that you all use, identify the popular resolutions, and make a series of panels that are no more than a scale factor of 1.3 to 1.5 apart at most. To avoid you having to fiddle with the scale panel factor, the module will detect the resolution and scale it appropriately, untill it reaches the next panel, then it should use that one. No worry, if there are two very popular resolutions close together, there will be two panels embedded.

But with resolutions like this....

...Depending upon what I'm doing 1920x1200, 3840x1024, 5040x1050 or 7680x1200 is what I use.

...I am beginning to picture a very big module with all those embedded bmps!

Test version soon, standby! Thanks again...

 

[dansteph]

4 years ago there was only a few exotic screen res but now I think there is really too much different res including a lot of very specials. So On my side I don't think I'll do 2d panel anymore, I'll stick to VC. As each BMP add several Megabyte in module you might end with a 140 Mb module :lol:

My desktop is at 2560x1280 (dual screen), other computer is 1920x1200

Note Orbiter2006 can't run more than 2048 so I use full screen 2048x768 and windowed (for dev) 1100x825.

Dan

 

[Urwumpe]

I also don't think 2D panels will last long in Orbiter. VCs are better and technically only slightly more complex than making 2D panels. Many visual features are actually simpler in VCs, for example ADI balls. And as I experience everyday in the Space shuttle, the VC is much easier to navigate as a set of 2D bitmaps. The user interface for playing with VCs could be made better though, a joystick and/or keyboard shortcut for temporarily zooming in on the center of the view is often a needed feature.

I use 1280x1024 for full screen and 1024x768 for debugging.

 

[ex-orbinaut]

4 years ago there was only a few exotic screen res but now I think there is really too much different res including a lot of very specials. So On my side I don't think I'll do 2d panel anymore, I'll stick to VC. As each BMP add several Megabyte in module you might end with a 140 Mb module :lol:

...my latest worry, exactly.

My desktop is at 2560x1280 (dual screen), other computer is 1920x1200

Note Orbiter2006 can't run more than 2048 so I use full screen 2048x768 and windowed (for dev) 1100x825.

Dan

I also don't think 2D panels will last long in Orbiter. VCs are better and technically only slightly more complex than making 2D panels. Many visual features are actually simpler in VCs, for example ADI balls. And as I experience everyday in the Space shuttle, the VC is much easier to navigate as a set of 2D bitmaps. The user interface for playing with VCs could be made better though, a joystick and/or keyboard shortcut for temporarily zooming in on the center of the view is often a needed feature.

I use 1280x1024 for full screen and 1024x768 for debugging.

Thanks for that confirmation. You know, I do prefer VC's myself. Thought it was just me, as the most popular add ons all have 2D panels and I was sort of going with the flow. I will finish this endeavour, just the same, as I had already started.

What I did not know about was the resolution limitation, as I never run Orbiter higher than 1280 x 960 (and 1024 x 600 on the laptop). How do the simpit designers get it up to those resolutions mentioned in the first post after mine of this thread? I take it, then, it is not worth doing a five thousand what-have-you pixel wide panel?

All the best...

 

[ex-orbinaut]

The Results

...

 

[RisingFury]

1280x1024 in full screen...
1280x980? in windowed mode. Whatever makes the actual 4:3 resolution, to make circles real circles...