Main Restorations Software Audio/Jukebox/MP3 Everything Else Buy/Sell/Trade
Project Announcements Monitor/Video GroovyMAME Merit/JVL Touchscreen Meet Up Retail Vendors
Driving & Racing Woodworking Software Support Forums Consoles Project Arcade Reviews
Automated Projects Artwork Frontend Support Forums Pinball Forum Discussion Old Boards
Raspberry Pi & Dev Board controls.dat Linux Miscellaneous Arcade Wiki Discussion Old Archives
Lightguns Arcade1Up Try the site in https mode Site News

Unread posts | New Replies | Recent posts | Rules | Chatroom | Wiki | File Repository | RSS | Submit news

  

Author Topic: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.  (Read 24844 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

genesim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 810
  • Last login:April 12, 2010, 08:18:42 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #160 on: April 26, 2009, 09:30:43 am »
Quote
LCD is devoid of this because it uses a filter to get the effect.  No electron excitement is taken place.   Now if what you are saying is the back lit phosphor coating on the actual bulb, then there you got me...but of course what is coming out of the light is not.   Get my meaning?  Or am I wrong on this?   Just trying to understand. 

What I am getting at is the back light isn't integral to the actual intensity...it is the liquid crystal that does the blocking...hence each pixel is its own entity.   

So what happened is you quoted me saying this and said I am PLAIN WRONG!

So in essense haven't you just went against what you said earlier?   If you are implying that because they do use phosphor coated bulbs then that is what makes it so important....uh then yeah.    You really think I didn't understand this?   You really think that I thought the bulb was back there for decoration?

Apparently people like Xoaou2 do.

I have always argued about color bleeding and its effects.    Like I said, READ then criticize, then you won't have to eat humble pie with a nice dose of crow on the side.


genesim

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 810
  • Last login:April 12, 2010, 08:18:42 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #161 on: April 26, 2009, 10:13:48 am »
Clok,

I want to tell you, I appreciate you taking a nice unbiased approach.    There is no set answer and some of the artist interpretation is obviously there.    At the same time many of your points are very sound and you are a beakon of light(along with a few others) to the whole open minded arcade community.

It is accepting new ideas(or actually acknowledging some common knowledge one) that will help the preservation of arcades move forward.   

« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 09:02:53 pm by saint »

saint

  • turned to the Dark Side
  • Supreme Chancellor
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6144
  • Last login:March 17, 2024, 07:49:54 am
  • I only work in cyberspace...
    • Build Your Own Arcade Controls
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #162 on: April 28, 2009, 09:07:22 pm »
OK - I've resurrected this thread minus some of the last arguing. Everyone please tone it down a bit. Thanks!

-- saint
--- John St.Clair
     Build Your Own Arcade Controls FAQ
     http://www.arcadecontrols.com/
     Project Arcade 2!
     http://www.projectarcade2.com/
     saint@arcadecontrols.com

Ginsu Victim

  • Yeah, owning a MAME cab only leads to owning real ones. MAME just isn't good enough. It's a gateway drug.
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10093
  • Last login:May 08, 2023, 02:40:58 pm
  • Comanche, OK -- USA
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #163 on: April 28, 2009, 10:58:12 pm »

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Jack Burton

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1384
  • Last login:August 26, 2023, 11:32:31 pm
  • .
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #165 on: April 30, 2009, 06:04:28 pm »
Can we get back to the original discussion, which I rather enjoyed.

Using what is CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AND POSSIBLE, what are your opinions and advice about original vs. improved graphics?


bboysnj

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
  • Last login:November 05, 2021, 01:57:25 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #166 on: May 01, 2009, 07:24:09 pm »
bboysnj -

 Ohh bboy... you really hurt my feelings.  Im going to have to
write a book about how cool you are now.  Cause you really are my hero.
Everybody should think that too!   I better spread the word so the Whole World
does not miss out on such golden comments as these.   The literary loss
to the generations would be both an academic, and poetic tragedy, to be missed...

 Please Great BBoy, make fun of me some more.   Show the others how
Lame they are in comparison to your almighty greatness...

 Ohh BBoy, dont let us down.  Show us how COOL you really are!


Wow.  I thought the  ;) was indicative of me busting your collective kiwis. lol.  Ya'll created the drama, I was just enjoying it, that's all.  Everyone's a critic bro.  That said:

http://www.wickedretarded.com/~crapmame/6.html




Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #167 on: May 02, 2009, 03:59:31 pm »
Can we get back to the original discussion, which I rather enjoyed.

Using what is CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AND POSSIBLE, what are your opinions and advice about original vs. improved graphics?



I thought it was pretty done.
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

DJ_Izumi

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1098
  • Last login:November 04, 2023, 04:19:22 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #168 on: May 02, 2009, 10:23:07 pm »
On the topic of resizing, I came across something simply stupid but effective in keeping the 'crisp pixely goodness' when resizing up and not making me blurry.  Since this is so utterly simple, I presume that someone MUST have come up with this long before me, but I'd like to hear the comments on it.

I took a Metal Slug screen shot at it's native resolution.  I then scaled it up 8x using nearest neighbour, it looked the same just huge, as 8x just turns each pixel into a 8x8 pixel grid.  I then scaled it down using bilinier to 1024x768, the results were lovely!  It filled was sharp and pixely like you'd expect, but didn't have the 'odd shaped lines' you get when resizing up without exact multiples with nearest neighbour.  It used sharp gradiants as it scaled down and generally looked pretty spiffy.

You can see an example here:

Original: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Mslug103.png
After scaling up 800% nearest neighbour and scaling back down to 1024x768: http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh100/AshleyAshes2/MSNew.png

If you zoom in you can see how it smootly resized the image without bluring it and maintaining that 'crispness' that a sprite game like this has.

Now, I agree that a CRT rendering out the native resolution would probably be ideal but LCDs have their advantages and will come into the main stream.  As LCDs only have a single native resolution available resizing becomes necessary.  Don't you think that this offers a nice simple result that would be pleasently viewed on an LCD without 'warping' specialized filters and or the blurring of bilinier or similar upscale methods?  Surely someone could impliment such a resize method into emulators without major difficulty or CPU cost?

Blanka

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2248
  • Last login:January 25, 2018, 03:19:28 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #169 on: May 03, 2009, 01:07:21 am »
What do you think about this:

DJ_Izumi

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1098
  • Last login:November 04, 2023, 04:19:22 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #170 on: May 03, 2009, 01:09:39 am »
I always thought that faux scanlines add unreasonable darkness to the image.  Also I'm seeing a pattern in your image, I can see the scanlines in groups, probably related to the scaling, I find it distracting.

Blanka

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2248
  • Last login:January 25, 2018, 03:19:28 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #171 on: May 03, 2009, 07:12:16 am »
Have you clicked it to see the full image? The embedded one has line grouping because of the smaller displaying.
Actually, this one has the full brightness. That's the fun thing about the filter I made, it keeps the colours and brightness the same.

Here is another one, but now at 1200x1600 for those big 21 inch 4:3 LCD's:
« Last Edit: May 03, 2009, 07:15:21 am by Blanka »

DJ_Izumi

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1098
  • Last login:November 04, 2023, 04:19:22 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #172 on: May 03, 2009, 07:32:06 am »
My bad, I was looking at it scaled down.

Anyway, I find it distracting to the eye.  I'm on my laptop with a 14" 1024x768 LCD display.  I full screen that so it's the full view on the monitor and the lines actually sorta bother my eyes.

FrizzleFried

  • no one listens to me anyway.
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5144
  • Last login:May 30, 2023, 01:14:24 pm
    • Idaho Garagecade
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #173 on: May 03, 2009, 12:08:58 pm »
I've yet to find a "fake" scan line filter that looks accurate.   They all look like ass IMHO.
Visit my arcade blog at: www.idahogaragecade.com (Updated 10-28-21)

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #174 on: May 04, 2009, 06:30:55 pm »
My bad, I was looking at it scaled down.

Anyway, I find it distracting to the eye.  I'm on my laptop with a 14" 1024x768 LCD display.  I full screen that so it's the full view on the monitor and the lines actually sorta bother my eyes.

I would bet you're not used to original 25"/27" CGA monitors. There's a depth and texture element (as well as brightness factor at lower scan rates) in such a native situation that can be an acquired taste, but a preferred one once realised.


I've yet to find a "fake" scan line filter that looks accurate.   They all look like ass IMHO.

Actually, the original scanline effects were true to form, at least with regard to native res on 25 and 27" monitors. They just dimmed the overall image, and affected the color slightly (of which can happen with the newer format, too). Blanka's looks good, but that's becaue that effect fits that res (320x224), but may not fit lower res games (ie: 256x224, or perhaps 256x240 (a different vertical number) ).

I just re-tried 'scanrez 2' on my hi-res PC CRT, and it gives a great old-style look. (Some games it doesn't do that well at, like 292x240.) Then it's a matter of how defined you want it, and set the prescale accordingly. On that note, I can't see scaling images up and all that weird ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- to get defined graphics. Just leave mame stock except for the prescale, of which '2' is usually quite adequate.

Here's a nice one of Gyruss - scanrez2 in vert mode, prescale at 1 ( '0' actually), screen contrast at 1.4 . Remember to click inside it to see it's true quality.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2009, 09:31:16 pm by Ummon »
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #175 on: May 04, 2009, 06:49:33 pm »
Or, if you want horizontal lines:
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #176 on: May 04, 2009, 07:02:33 pm »
But for Congo Bongo, for example, 1.4 contrast is too much as you can see the explorer dude is a little washed out in the first image. The second image is set to 1.1 .
« Last Edit: May 05, 2009, 01:36:48 am by Ummon »
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #177 on: May 04, 2009, 07:09:42 pm »
Again in Black Tiger this is evident in the first image, whereas in the second, 1.2 is better. So anything with a graphic-saturated image is better at a lower contrast value, but not '1.0' .  The good things about using screen contrast are that it doesn't affect color too much, doesn't over-saturate as easily as gamma, and doesn't affect the black parts of the screen until high values, far beyond where you'd want it anyhow. In some cases brightness works better, but only with values below 1.1 or even 1.05, as it too easily affects black areas of the image.

By the way, this whole run was using MameUI .130.2 .   Desktop was at 1280x1024. I notice higher resolutions give scaling-like artifacts. Lower resolutions make the effect overlay too pronounced.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2009, 01:37:36 am by Ummon »
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #178 on: May 04, 2009, 10:41:15 pm »
Or take this Bubbles. I recant my caveat above about 292x240 not working. I accidentally had 'switchres' selected. This is what it's supposed to look like, and compliments the rest. By the way, no contrast or brightness adjustment needed on this one. (Hm. Need more than the single magnify that the windown allows, so not perfect, but the 'bubbles' looks good.)
« Last Edit: May 04, 2009, 10:42:57 pm by Ummon »
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #179 on: May 05, 2009, 12:08:21 am »
Then you have something like this. Notice the scan lines....except they're not. Notice sprites and text aren't affected. I asked over at MW, and Aaron said that it was a texturing thing or something, so code-related. Mm-hmmm.
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

Ummon

  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5244
  • Last login:June 09, 2010, 06:37:18 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #180 on: June 24, 2009, 08:04:20 pm »
I'm kinda partial to the type of 'scanlines' you see on 25" and 27" monitors. Recently I was messing around with D3D on pre-video re-write mame and came up with the following. (No pictures for obvious reasons, but you can try this yourself if you have the hardware.)

 
- pre-re-write mame + D3D
 
- texture management: perhaps on for horizontal games, on of off for vertical games, likely off for scrolling games in general.
 
- rotate effects "off", especially vertical games
 
- scanlines 50-25 percent, depending on the game and monitor used
 
- prescale: if using an SVGA/XGA 27" monitor, "2" or "none". PC monitor, generally, 'none'.

- advanced tab: up fullscreen brightness to at least 1.15, though higher for various vertical games; enabling D3D over-rides DD, but if you're worried about it you can turn off directdraw; fullscreen brightness still works, despite being grayed out.
 
 

Caveats:

- seems any desktop setting below 1280x1024 will artifact

- because of the integer stretch due to use of the 'scanlines' effect, most horizontal games (one exception I found was World Class Bowling), and 224x288 games displayed horizontally, will not fit the display area.

- this fluctuates per desktop resolution, though. At SXGA, the above is the case. However, in my testing at 1600x1200, most horizontal, and 224x288 games run horizontally, did fill the screen. 224x256 and 240x256 were reversed and didn't fit the screen. I tried the desktop at 2048x1536, but got overscan and a scrolling desktop (which, curiously, you can scroll with your mouse in-game).
« Last Edit: June 24, 2009, 09:53:47 pm by Ummon »
Yo. Chocolate.


"Theoretical physics has been the most successful and cost-effective in all of science."

Stephen Hawking


People often confuse expressed observations with complaint, ridicule, or - even worse - self-pity.

MrMikeZH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
  • Last login:March 21, 2021, 04:41:43 pm
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #181 on: July 02, 2009, 06:03:45 am »
wow just got through the thread, never ever have i seen such an ignorant victim like genesim. that guy has its own reallity and physics.

Epyx

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1961
  • Last login:December 25, 2023, 07:56:36 pm
  • "You're an oddity"
Re: Original graphics Vs. Improved graphics.
« Reply #182 on: July 02, 2009, 12:13:58 pm »
Very interesting thread. I don't think anyone can really dispute that game programmers worked around the "unique properties" of the CRT.     The CRT was even able to address technological deficiencies in older computer systems.

The Apple 2 was a classic example of this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_II_series):

Quote
Color on the Apple II series took advantage of a quirk of the NTSC television signal standard, which made color display relatively easy and inexpensive to implement. The original NTSC television signal specification was black-and-white. Color was tacked on later by adding a 3.58 MHz subcarrier signal that was partially ignored by B&W TV sets. Color is encoded based on the phase of this signal in relation to a reference color burst signal. The result is that the position, size, and intensity of a series of pulses define color information. These pulses can translate into pixels on the computer screen.

Play any random Apple 2 game on a modern LCD/Plasma etc and you will see something like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mystery_House_-_Apple_II_render_emulation_-_2.png

Quote
Showcases the Apple's weak graphic capabilities compared to modern PCs. The color white was represented by combining green and purple, which produced white in the middle, but bleeding of the other two colors on the edges.

Other computers like the Amiga and C64 took similar liberties with the CRT and many of the graphical wonders evidenced in the amazing graphical demos of the day exploited this interaction between the Graphical Processor and the CRT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_Amiga_chipset
http://www.studiostyle.sk/dmagic/gallery/gfxmodes.htm

This for me is the true nostalgia and meaning of using an original 15khz display...you are truly seeing the picture as the graphic artists wanted you to see it...it is the artists original interpretation, everything else is a "re-imagining".

Now with that said, I still use LCD's for gaming (bartop etc) and while the picture can be simulated to look good it isn't the same.





« Last Edit: July 02, 2009, 12:16:27 pm by Epyx »
Last Project



Epyx Tutorials:
Tutorials