I wonder if this might be an issue with the coating said to be on the vision housings? It might be an inconsistency in the process.
1 Like
Mine came with CK installed, blue version, 131FOV and no problems with tracking
Did you use Risaās Hmdq on your Artisan?
Yes, I already posted it on this thread;
āfov_totā: {
āfov_horā: 131.19010981777052,
āfov_verā: 102.96208463689638,
āfov_diagā: 130.64641180896032,
āoverlapā: 86.78584768977186
1 Like
Iāve got a clear day tomorrow so will download and run Risaās Hmdq tool - tied up for the rest of this evening/
2 Likes
Cool my bad must have missed it. It is curious as from what I have read of Artisan FoV threads here and reddit have reported between 120 and 126 on the horizontal.
However either way is considerably less than 140 wide.
1 Like
Would be interesting if the first thing we need to do when we get our devices, were to turn out to be to cut out little holes in the coating, in front of all the lighthouse sensors, so that they can see betterā¦ 
2 Likes
Yes, itās the same as normal FOV on 120hz in 5k+, good FOV for the price point, not the 140 advertised though, 120 is very bad FOV at this stage 
1 Like
Thatās really interesting that you had the problem as well. Itās only now that I have a headset without the problem that I realise what a pain it was - it was really putting me off the headset. Sometimes it could take 20 minutes or so to get started - Iād sit there and wait moving the headset around and then finally give up and re-boot everything and then it could do exactly the same thing.
Have you still got the 5K+ as well as the Artisan - so you can be very sure that your Artisan is close to the normal FOV of the 5K+?
I had a really good day today with the black case Artisan so am starting to really like it but itās annoying that I cancelled my 8KX order and went for the Artisan genuinely because I totally believed it has the same FOV as the normal FOV on the other headsets - so I presumed I was taking a hit on the resolution only.
1 Like
Yes I do, itās the same as the normal 120hz mode on 5k+; ~131Ā°
1 Like
The key he said 5k+ @120hz with FoV set to normal. Not say 90hz with FoV set set to normal.
I tested the FOV at 72Hz, 90Hz and 120Hz and it was always 122 degrees. Whatās the 5K+ at 90hz?
2 Likes
To JoJon - I doubt itās problem generally with the blue coating. If it was Iām sure we would have been hearing lots about it from the 8K+ owners!
1 Like
72Hz, 90Hz, 144Hz: 140
120Hz: 130
2 Likes
Making me wish I had got the 5K+ - I really would have done if I had known this. All I heard though was the that the Artisan FOV is about the same as the 5K+ on normal!
1 Like
@SweViver Martin, whatās your take on all this issue with the FOV. Correct me if Iām wrong but Iām sure you were one of the guys that was indicating that the FOV of the Artisan was about the same as the 5K+ on normal werenāt you?
1 Like
Yeah, thatās what I remember also. The source is the Pimax store advertised info. Itās supposed to be 140Ā° horizontal, not 122Ā°, as Mlkconcept noted:
2 Likes
I did lots of testing today comparing the FOV of my black case Artisan with my Blue case Artisan using both the hmdq tool and the ROV tool.
I got some strange results. I tested all combinations of Hz options with Parallel Projection on and off for both headsets. To summarise, they were basically identical apart from one observation. On the first run through (using 260 pitool) the FOV of both headsets was 124 degrees for all Hz options both with Parallel Projection and without. These values corresponded to the FOV observed in each case using the ROV test. However, this was with the exception of the black headset set to 120hz with Parallel Projection during the first run of tests where I got a FOV of 131 degrees - this is the actual output:
Recommended render target size: {3492, 3492}
Total FOV:
horizontal: 131.69 deg
vertical: 115.56 deg
diagonal: 139.85 deg
overlap: 86.79 deg
HOWEVER, completely bizarrely I couldnāt reproduce this result. This was one of the first tests I did and I then went back and went through every combination carefully to basically check where else this might occur and it didnāt anywhere else. Look at the target size - both values are the same!! This isnāt a typo as Iāve copied and pasted it directly from the output file. The strange thing was was that when I went to repeat it I didnāt get this result anymore, I got the following:
Recommended render target size: {3124, 3492}
Total FOV:
horizontal: 124.36 deg
vertical: 115.56 deg
diagonal: 135.95 deg
overlap: 86.79 deg
I tried for about an hour testing everything I could have possibly changed to try to replicate it but I couldnāt.
Now it gets even stranger. I then thought Iād go back and try 255 and 259 versions of Pitool and for these I got FOV values of 121 degrees (3 degrees less) for all combinations. Which incidentally was exactly what I could see using the ROV test for all combinations - so 3 real degrees lost from when using the 260 pitool. So that makes me wonder just how much flexibly there might be by adjusting the FOV in software?
And now the really really strange bit. After trying out version 255 and 259 of Pitool I thought Iād go back to version 260 but didnāt have the install file to hand so I re-downloaded it but when I ran it the FOV tests for both headsets were only giving me 121 degrees - I had lost the 124 degrees. Which makes me think that Pimax must have modified it in the last week since I last downloaded it!!
Anyone any ideas whatās going on?
Edit: I forgot to mention this testing took me about 5 hours (when it should have taken about 2) because for every change of settings for the blue headset it took anywhere between 2 and 15 minutes for the headset to re-acquire tracking.
7 Likes