POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.newusers : "Accurate" "Normal" Field of View (FoV)? : Re: "Accurate" "Normal" Field of View (FoV)? Server Time
30 Jul 2024 02:17:41 EDT (-0400)
  Re: "Accurate" "Normal" Field of View (FoV)?  
From: Le Forgeron
Date: 3 Nov 2004 02:27:29
Message: <Xns9596560A3E6A0jgrimbertmeandmyself@203.29.75.35>


> I've been trying to figure out what the "best" factor to use is for
> the camera angle keyword. In the PovRay distribution (3.6.1), the
> scene files seem to imply that the authors favor "angle 35" to depict
> a "normal" view. I know its a complicated subject, not as simple as
> one might expect. I've been surfing for research. I can't find an
> answer that "I feel comfortable with". For one thing, humans percieve
> *binocular* vision (approaching a 190 degree field of view in the x-z
> plane *if you are young* and not a crusty old thing like me) - whereas
> when considering *just one eye* things are different (where is Popeye
> when you need him?). And the FoV in a 35mm camera using a 50mm
> "normal" lens (which actually approaches what I want to depict in
> PovRay - and even then a "normal" lens isn't really "normal") is 
> different then even just one human eye. 
> 
> Discussion?

My current view on this subject is: the final image should cover the
same angle when viewed.
So, let's imagine a render for your Windows/X/.. wallpaper.
You can measure the traditional distance between your nose/eyes/... and 
the display.
You can measure the width and height of the display.
Then you can do the maths for the "best" value..., at least one that 
would turn out to be believable for the perspective. (if the scene fits!)

And then, there is the artistic effect :-), using a fish eye, or any 
other camera..., or Out of scale objects...

-- 




l'habillement, les chaussures que le maquillage et les accessoires.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.