Main > Main Forum
New arcade vga on pc monitor pics, Not impressed at all.
Kremmit:
--- Quote ---The difference is akin to HD-TV against conventional. HD looks great with the right kind of source but with a poor source, lower definition might be better for some people.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make with this analogy. The PC monitor is the "HD-TV" and the arcade graphics (all low-res arcade graphics, in fact) would be considered the "poor source". A good HD TV will incorporate some rather impressive upscaling technology to smooth out a low-res source. It doesn't try to sharpen the blocky edges.
--- End quote ---
My dad recently bought a nice big HD Plasma, because I've been teasing him about his old 27" CRT. When he watches an HD channel, it looks really, really good. But when he watches a plain-jane 4:3 pic from a non-HD show, it looks la lot like trying to watch a Youtube video fullscreen- all pixelated due to the digital upscaling.
Low-Res is better than High-Res in such a case. "Hogan's Heroes" reruns will always look better on my 35" Standard-Definition CRT than they ever do on an HDTV Plasma or LCD, because they won't have all the digital artifacts on my tv.
Xiaou2:
NickG,
Thanks. Just remember, that Aperture grilles were not used in most arcade
machines.
Aperture grilles are the modern version of shadow mask... as Aperture grilles can
be made much smaller, and thus finer pixels.
Randy,
Ok scanline do exist as a term for the beam the rides each line by line
drawing.. however, this drawing is so fast, that its undetectable to the
eye. Ive not seen a black line in between the pixels. In fact, that would
be impossible, as the thing in between the RGB phosphors is the shadow mask.
My guess is that it is an optical illusion. If you can proove otherwise, Id be
interested to see. Show us a pic and point out the black like that is Not
the shadow mask.
Kremmit,
Digital is not really better.. its just that it saves space.
Analog can be a nearly infinite depth of range.. depending on the circumstances.
If you read a Pot with a multimeter.. you get a range from X to Y.. from a
whole number & fractions of that number. If your multimeter was set up to read
incredible detail.. its decimal placement reading would be huge... and the data able to
be collected from a single dial turn might be in the high megabyte ranges.
The problem with analog recording.. is that its typically prone to degradation over
time. Also, the cost of making analog equipment that is high enough bandwidth
and sensative may cost way too much to implement and institute.
Digital is a means to cut those readings down to managble sizes.. and maintain
non-degrading accuracy. Its much more afforable and practical.. but that doesnt
mean better. Digital could approach Analog, but then its data sizes would again
be insane. In the future, this might not be a problem.. but for now.. we see the
problem.
Once the displays advance in resolution, and the range of digital signal
its fed isnt the range the tv is capable of.. it shows its imperfections
because of the lack of "intermediate steps". "pixilization".
This can also be heard in music.. which is why many people still
prefer Records over Cds. Tho its much more noticible in display
technology, to most people.
Some Tvs use a method to try to scale an images digital range
by inserting newly created steps. However, these steps are not
always what the original data was.. and also, may be
constructed inproperly. Thus looking a bit odd and overly
blurry... and Many Details getting lost.
RandyT:
--- Quote from: Kremmit on September 16, 2006, 12:10:02 am ---My dad recently bought a nice big HD Plasma, because I've been teasing him about his old 27" CRT. When he watches an HD channel, it looks really, really good. But when he watches a plain-jane 4:3 pic from a non-HD show, it looks la lot like trying to watch a Youtube video fullscreen- all pixelated due to the digital upscaling.
--- End quote ---
I don't want to get too far off topic, but not all upscaling technology is created equal. I just recently got an HD converter from the cable company for my 2 year old Mitsubishi HD projection set. The internal upscaler in the set is pretty good and allows a number of intelligent ways to fill the screen. But the one upscaler available in the HD cable box is much, much better. The stuff from Farjouda used to be top of the line and it does a really nice job with my DLP projector as well. Not too long ago, one of the big cost differentiators of large screens used to be the quality of the technology used for the upscaling. How this affects things nowadays, I'm not as sure, but Hogan might look pretty good with a better upscaler.
RandyT
RandyT:
--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on September 16, 2006, 12:53:04 am --- Randy,
Ok scanline do exist as a term for the beam the rides each line by line
drawing.. however, this drawing is so fast, that its undetectable to the
eye. Ive not seen a black line in between the pixels. In fact, that would
be impossible, as the thing in between the RGB phosphors is the shadow mask.
--- End quote ---
Sweet jeebus, Steve, how do you come up with this stuff? Yes, the drawing is fast, but it's in exactly the same spot! Care to guess as to why interlaced video flickers? It's because every other image is placed in the blank spaces between the scanlines of the previous image and only one image can be shown at any given time.
--- Quote --- My guess is that it is an optical illusion. If you can proove otherwise, Id be
interested to see. Show us a pic and point out the black like that is Not
the shadow mask.
--- End quote ---
You should stop guessing. See the image below. The teeny tiny lines that are offset by by one half of the adjacent vertical rectangle belong to the shadow mask. They are hella small. The big black horizontal lines are the spaces between the scanlines you say are an illusion.
RandyT
Kremmit:
--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on September 16, 2006, 12:53:04 am ---
Kremmit,
Digital is not really better.. its just that it saves space.
Analog can be a nearly infinite depth of range.. depending on the circumstances.
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
--- End quote ---
Dude, I understand the difference between analog and digital. And the entire point of my post is that sometimes analog is better.
--- Quote from: RandyT on September 16, 2006, 01:03:30 am ---...but Hogan might look pretty good with a better upscaler.
--- End quote ---
Probably so. Now if they can just get my dad to stop stretching 4:3 pics to 16:9. Everybody's head looks like Ernie from Sesame Street!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version