Fisheye/Image Warping

Homepage Forums General vorpX Discussion Fisheye/Image Warping

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
  • #13052

    Email sent.


    ok! I did a great deal more troubleshooting and tweaking, and have basically reduced the effect to be unnoticeable. However, how I did so is totally unreasonable. Here are my findings.

    – Ralf, you’ve suggested that VorpX works best at resolutions of 4:3 or 5:4. Although these resolutions certainly reduced the fisheye effect, and reduced the appearance of everything being stretched vertically, at 1280×1024 (5:4) the distortion was still present and greatly noticeable. However, a combination of carefully tweaking the image zoom, the game’s FOV, setting the “simple” aspect ratio correction, and tweaking the eye offset resulted in a greatly reduced fisheye effect. To me, this indicates that the distortion shader is not scaled or changed properly based on VorpX’s settings… unlike Vireio, Tridef and other stereo solutions out there.

    – Although a 4:3 resolution of 5:4 is suggested, I noticed that 5:4 was still less stretched and better than 4:3. This indicated that the more square the resolution, the better VorpX hadles it. Confirming my suspicion, I was able to add a custom GPU-scaled square resolution of 1280×1280 (1:1), which successfully eliminated the effect entirely. Hmmmm.

    Ralf, I urge you to please reconsider how you are implementing your image projection and applying your distortion shader. Neither Tridef nor Vireio have such issues with aspect ratio or image distortion. Neither Tridef nor Vireio require any sort of aspect ratio correction, and both work fine with not only 16:9 resolutions, but ANY resolution that you throw at them. The distortion shader is scaled properly no matter how the image is zoomed, what your FOV is, or what your stereo separation settings are. Requiring users to use 4:3 or 5:4 resolutions within a very thin margin of ‘correct’ stereo settings is a clear indicator that something is horribly broken in VorpX’s rendering. Since Vireio is open source, I really hope you can take a look at it’s implementation and apply your findings to VorpX. You clearly have a better sense of polish and product than Vireio… but despite the fact that I paid for it, I unfortunately find myself using Vireio more often simply because the rendering is vastly superior.


    Ralf, any response to my thoughts above? VorpX isn’t cheap, and I spent a GREAT deal of time tweaking to get an only barely acceptable result, so it would be nice to hear that the resolution scaling issues are being addressed. Thanks for your time.


    vorpX’s aspect ratio handling stems from the fact that it supports two different S3D modes. For Z-Buffer 3D to work across a wide range of games, the AR-correction is done the way it is done. This is not a bug. We might look into changing the way this is handled for Geometry 3D, but no promises when that might happen.

    If you want a 1:1 aspect ratio across the whole image, you can use the letterbox AR mode combined with a slightly too high vignette scale. However, there currently is a glitch that leads to the lens warp scaling with the vignette size, which shouldn’t be the case. For very high (or low) vignette scale settings this leads to a slightly wrong lens warp. This will be addressed in an future update. Might not be the next, but certainly before version 1.0.


    Thanks for the reply. I just want to add my 2 cents that VorpX is getting a reputation as “not real VR” – or even worse, that such drivers will ALWAYS be worse than native VR, since most people don’t understand the difference in 3D rendering techniques – they just notice that the sense of presence is worse than in the Oculus demos. The plain fact is that stereo perception and sense of presence happens most effectively on near-range scenes, which is where z-buffer rendering just fails miserably. I understand the benefit of the performance gains, and the necessity in games where effect shaders screw up geometry 3d too badly, but I would really like to emphasize the importance of having first-class working geometry 3D above all else, especially in games that fully support it. It’s disappointing to hear that you’ve sacrificed fidelity in geometry 3D to support your z-buffer rendering. I sincerely hope that you reconsider and put in some effort to fixing the scaling issues… they are a dealbreaker for me and many others, and are ruining injection drivers’ reputation within the community. Again, thanks for your reply – I really appreciate your activist approach to support and community outreach, it shows you really care about your product.

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Spread the word. Share this post!