Main > Main Forum
Interesting article on making LCDs look like fuzzy CRTs
RandyT:
--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on May 03, 2009, 07:05:31 pm --- Ray is correct... and being a game artists, he has more weight to his argument than
NON ARTISTS.
--- End quote ---
Except for the one point that was pointed out. Proof of this can be seen on handhelds like GameBoy Color, which uses an LCD screen (no chance for "blurring") and employs pixel dithering to great extent simply for differentiation due to it's limited color capabilities.
Don't assume you know everyone's backgrounds here, Steve.
RandyT
Xiaou2:
There are many games which use very little to no dithering.
Dithering is an artistic choice... and one can tell a picture drawn by a Good
artist.. and a person who tries to simulate an effect.
Dithering when done on an LCD -vs- an old CRT are very different situations.
On arcade crts, dithered patterns can appear translucent and or mix colors.
That is Not true of modern LCD / pc displays.
And being that we were discussing the reason why people would want to simulate
arcade related displays... your argument had little place.
The pics that ray has shown show, are good examples of an artist who has designed
his works around a standard res tv. You could take some of those moden handheld
games, display their images on a tv.. and see that the effects would mess their
image up. Basically, they are not designed to be viewed on a standard tv, and the
results will be completely different than what you may expect... which is EXACTLY
why graphics are designed around the display tech they are going to be displayed on.
RandyT:
--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on May 04, 2009, 01:10:39 am ---
There are many games which use very little to no dithering.
Dithering is an artistic choice... and one can tell a picture drawn by a Good
artist.. and a person who tries to simulate an effect.
Dithering when done on an LCD -vs- an old CRT are very different situations.
On arcade crts, dithered patterns can appear translucent and or mix colors.
That is Not true of modern LCD / pc displays.
And being that we were discussing the reason why people would want to simulate
arcade related displays... your argument had little place.
The pics that ray has shown show, are good examples of an artist who has designed
his works around a standard res tv. You could take some of those moden handheld
games, display their images on a tv.. and see that the effects would mess their
image up. Basically, they are not designed to be viewed on a standard tv, and the
results will be completely different than what you may expect... which is EXACTLY
why graphics are designed around the display tech they are going to be displayed on.
--- End quote ---
No one is arguing (most of) these things. Do I really need to upload my C-64 graphics so you feel better?
The point is, that the reasons graphics are dithered are really the same regardless of the efficacy of the result. Limited color palettes required the artists to do things they wouldn't otherwise do, even if the attempt was only somewhat successful. Making a blanket statement like "if so and so displays didn't do X, designers never would have done Y" is patently false, demonstrably even, and therefore indicates a religious zeal which ultimately hurts the position.
I know very well that graphics were designed with the final display in mind and tweaked to better take advantage of the traits inherent to them. I am not arguing that working to make the way these early programs appear on modern displays, as close as possible to the displays used originally, is a move in the wrong direction. I am just stating that making weak arguments results in a weak position and should be avoided, especially when there is evidence everywhere to the contrary.
And BTW, if you are going to make statements like "There are many games which use very little to no dithering." it would help to provide examples. Games for systems with very limited color palettes which do not employ this technique look absolutely horrible and are a sure sign of a rushed port to a less capable system, not an "artistic choice".
RandyT
Malenko:
--- Quote from: Todd H on May 03, 2009, 09:38:25 am ---Not again...
--- End quote ---
exactly. You cant argue opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs, from ChadTower to Genesism.
move along, nothing to see here......
RayB:
Randy, my point was that I as an artist in those days, I made concious choices about things like that based on how the end result would look on a television. I KNOW some artists still used the technique on games for a variety of other types of displays, but most of the time it still looked like a checkerboard and therefore looked like sh!t. Those were just bad choices on the part of those artists. (For example, you don't dither red with yellow expecting the illusion of "orange". The contrast is just too great and the results don't blend.)
Another good example is that I never used the technique on NES games. At my very first job, coming off of C64 graphics, another artist already experienced with NES showed me what happened if you use checkerboard dithering in NES games. The outputed graphics would do this weird "shimmering" when the graphics scrolled. Now that doesn't mean some artists at other companies didn't do it anyways, but we made the decision we wouldn't, since it looked like ass due to the way the NES displayed it on a tv.
PS: I'm not arguing for either "side" of the argument but just throwing wrench into things for the sake of "just sayin". ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version