Sandi_SLR all good but not comparing headset FOV with footage FOV, merely pointing out the difference between 220 and 180 not being worth all the hassle for a little extra FOV, the main action will always be generally 90 degrees directly infront. Also generally there is very little to gain on the edges anyways, most content has parallax issues in those regions anyways, specially if there is anything within a meter of distance. In my opinion 180FOV should be the industry standard, anything more is just giving you diminishing returns.

Did your team do testing and comparisons of scale with fisheye vs equirectangular? Your camera profile for fisheye was not very well optimized and even the footage out of the Canon vr utility looked much better, in part because it trims some of the edge making it more 180 than its original 190 or so FOV.

      spacepirate yes, no excuse for poor focus, production team dropped the ball on something basic like that. Harder to screw up with the k2 pro because you dont have a focus wheel on it like the canon lens, you have to unscrew using hex keys and then tighten back up haha I still prefer the canon system.

      Take a look at this scene someone else shared on another post, it was shot with the r5c and concerted to equirectangular. Not trying to ignore the IPD of the canon lens, but I want you to simply tell me if this looks better than the raw fisheye videos from the r5c?

      https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/that-happened-in-vegas-31111

          metichemsi I haven't looked at that video since it came out so I can look again. Everything in it looks too big to me if I remember correctly. I don't have it favored and I would if it looked halfway life like with Alex Coal.

          All FuckPass videos look very bad to me because I look like I'm 7 feet in the air with giant people all around me. Including this one.

          I think the camera you love sucks for VR porn. It has screwed up so many good studios with giantness. Now since they have bought them they wont let them die in a closet and go back to something that looks real. Only SLR is the only company smart enough to through in the towel.

          Maybe there is a way to make it work but I haven't seen it yet unless Czechvr is using it. If so then they have gotten the closest. Ill take real life sized people over a little better image any day.

              rerun119 To each their own i guess, but those scenes were very poorly shot, the camera is way too close to the talent and most of them shot in 30p and interpolated to 60p and rendered manually with mistika when there we no actual good presets for that camera. Since then, the canon VR utility that converts to equirectangular has been updated to support 60p and does a much better job at scaling than these manual corrections done on mistika or those old fisheye versions that SLR put out a while ago.

                metichemsi I am not aware if our team did this tests.
                I am still open to see your "solution", shoot something close that we can recognize its size, make a 5 second sample with equirectangular projection and send me the .crm so I prepare it like we do it and lets compare.

                    Sandi_SLR sounds good, i can do that. Let me know what exact distance the object should be from the lens and I will simply use a ruler for reference. If I can I will even use a partial greenscreen as a background over that object so a passthrough can be done to reference that object. If i still had a k2 pro I would do the same but I let that one go when I upgraded.

                        metichemsi Hey, just hold some known object like a can, the arm and can should be enough to judge the scale, no need for greenscreen.
                        For the distance, just have it close and move it away, we can pause.
                        Thanks!

                            Sandi_SLR sounds good, i'll work on this tonight when I get home from work. I'll have two versions, one converted to equirectangular on one in raw fisheye mode so you can also see the difference between basic conversion and the current r5c picture profile on the app.

                            What is the way to send you this? Is there an email or a direct message option with file attachments?

                              Sandi_SLR I think I finally figured out what is causing the scaling issue with the R5C footage. Your 8k canon scenes are all in 2:1 aspect ratio. The fisheye footage from the camera does not natively come out in that aspect ratio, its actually 256:135 or 8192x4320 resolution. Your scenes and even the canon utility spits out 2:1, this affects the scaling. One of the reasons I never noticed scaling issues is because I normally throw the raw fisheye footage on premiere and export it in its native resolution, when watching footage in that resolution and aspect ratio, even your r5c camera profile on deovr shows correct scaling. This alone made a significant difference and its why i did not notice scaling issues when I added my own canon footage as a background to your k2 pro footage, albeit, I did have to play with the zoom amount of my canon footage just due to the difference in resolution sizes between both video files. I have some sample canon footage if you still want it, just let me know how to best privately send it to you.

                                  Sandi_SLR files should be on their way. I dont know, but by the looks of it, it seems like the canon software might actually be cropping in more than 180 from its native 190 lens, which could explain the scaling for anyone using that software. I think you guys had already figured that out though because some of your 8k scenes with that camera were using your 190 profiles but you we also tweaking its aspect ratio back to 2:1, so i dont know how that combination would affect the final image.

                                  This scene for example, it has the 190 profile but the scale of the video was still edited to 2:1
                                  Would be curious to see this same scene but with its original aspect ratio instead. I imagine it would be something similar to using the 180 profile instead?
                                  https://www.sexlikereal.com/scenes/an-intimate-experience-with-xxlayna-marie-30902

                                  Anyways, take a look at the files and let me know if you notice anything interesting.

                                  Thanks

                                    metichemsi I watched it last night. It looks better because I was laying on my back the whole time in the video. I also had to zoom out a lot because it was shot to close for me. The zooming way out helped with the giantness but if you want to know if I think she or I (the male stunk cock) looked normal size to me. I answer is no. Maybe better but it don't look like real life. It's crazy to me that some 4 or 5 year old Wankz scenes look perfect in scaling and now 5 years later a lot look like trash. Scale vs clarity. If a scene visually looks great but everything is big then I turn it off in a matter of seconds. If the scene looks grainy but life like then I'll watch the whole thing.

                                        rerun119 Scale vs clarity. If a scene visually looks great but everything is big then I turn it off in a matter of seconds. If the scene looks grainy but life like then I'll watch the whole thing.

                                        Well, for me it's the other way round. If a scene is grainy I might turn it off in a matter of seconds. A scene with great visual clarity but "too big" girls is no issue for me though. 😉

                                          rerun119 It's crazy to me that some 4 or 5 year

                                          Funny thing, In passthrough sum of them old wankz videos look really tiny, I have to move the hos to the right to make models large

                                          Their new stuff, scale usually perfect in pt, no hos needed.

                                          Badoink too, you'd think a scale perfect but if you put it in pt you can see if it to small or to big. I seen a few badoinks scale where it was very small. 🤷‍♂️

                                            rerun119 thanks for following up on that scene. Would you be surprised if I told you that scene was also shot on a K2 Pro and not a Canon camera