English Amiga Board - View Single Post

Photon · 13 November 2009, 03:50

Argh, I'll soon run out of oomph

I thought I made it ultra clear that this thread is/should stay on the topic of a poll of opinions? And that I like Scanlines but respect those who like Doubled?

"Pixels aren't doubled." I've explained how it's impossible to escape this without a WinUAE window the size of a HOL screenshot. Don't take my word for it, if you think I make shit up just check it.

On the topic of making shit up, why invent imaginary VGA LCDs with pixel elements the size of shirt buttons? They don't exist. If they did, ofc square shirt buttons would look square.

Why involve LCD TVs if you don't know how 5 different resolutions from 4 different consoles and a DVD/Bluray player magically fill the screen? It's scaled and filtered in the TV. Does the filter in your LCD TV have a checkbox that says "scanlines"? No? Then wth does it have to do with the word in the topic?

PC LCDs and CRTs have no native 320x256 or similar resolutions. The lowest you can go doubles up the pixels in hardware.

So. These two monitor types double the pixels. That makes them look square/pixeled. On an Amiga monitor, this doesn't happen, thus it doesn't look blocky. Shit, even with a 19" monitor it doesn't!

Only on LCD in native resolution are pixels perfectly square. On Amiga or PC CRTs, pixels are pillow-shaped with a little glow around them. They are rounder and melt together nicely. But on the VGA CRT, they are doubled up and become a square of 4 dots. Enable scanlines and they look less square (since the two dots on the same line melt together nicely), with the penalty of a more washed-out impression.

This is what is relevant to scanlines and the reason for its existence at all in WinUAE. "On PC, it doesn't look as it does on a real Amiga connected to an RGB CRT." If you say you PREFER blocky pixels, that's fine with me. If you say they're NOT blocky you're sitting 40 feet from the PC LCD

You can also use fullscreen bilinear with or without scanlines, if you like that. Or PAL filter or...

Some people could say I have a tendency to overanalyse and atomize to the point where I might make someone angry. It's only to find a common base of facts to agree on, to go from, and not to tell someone easy basic facts that they ofc already know.

Meh. Anyway.

I jumped in and tested Maren's squeezed mode and took some pictures of "how good scanlines can look". Then apparently I had to explain why I like scanlines. I hope I did.

Knowing more about expected results on 3 monitor types won't make someone like that result if they don't. And poll votes won't make anyone like something they don't either.

But for the sweet son of god christ jesus on Es and GHB (am I damned to hell yet?)

, don't say doubled pixels aren't blocky on VGA screens!!

13 November 2009, 03:50	#371
Photon Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Eksjö / Sweden Posts: 5,643	Argh, I'll soon run out of oomph I thought I made it ultra clear that this thread is/should stay on the topic of a poll of opinions? And that I like Scanlines but respect those who like Doubled? "Pixels aren't doubled." I've explained how it's impossible to escape this without a WinUAE window the size of a HOL screenshot. Don't take my word for it, if you think I make shit up just check it. On the topic of making shit up, why invent imaginary VGA LCDs with pixel elements the size of shirt buttons? They don't exist. If they did, ofc square shirt buttons would look square. Why involve LCD TVs if you don't know how 5 different resolutions from 4 different consoles and a DVD/Bluray player magically fill the screen? It's scaled and filtered in the TV. Does the filter in your LCD TV have a checkbox that says "scanlines"? No? Then wth does it have to do with the word in the topic? PC LCDs and CRTs have no native 320x256 or similar resolutions. The lowest you can go doubles up the pixels in hardware. So. These two monitor types double the pixels. That makes them look square/pixeled. On an Amiga monitor, this doesn't happen, thus it doesn't look blocky. Shit, even with a 19" monitor it doesn't! Only on LCD in native resolution are pixels perfectly square. On Amiga or PC CRTs, pixels are pillow-shaped with a little glow around them. They are rounder and melt together nicely. But on the VGA CRT, they are doubled up and become a square of 4 dots. Enable scanlines and they look less square (since the two dots on the same line melt together nicely), with the penalty of a more washed-out impression. This is what is relevant to scanlines and the reason for its existence at all in WinUAE. "On PC, it doesn't look as it does on a real Amiga connected to an RGB CRT." If you say you PREFER blocky pixels, that's fine with me. If you say they're NOT blocky you're sitting 40 feet from the PC LCD You can also use fullscreen bilinear with or without scanlines, if you like that. Or PAL filter or... Some people could say I have a tendency to overanalyse and atomize to the point where I might make someone angry. It's only to find a common base of facts to agree on, to go from, and not to tell someone easy basic facts that they ofc already know. Meh. Anyway. I jumped in and tested Maren's squeezed mode and took some pictures of "how good scanlines can look". Then apparently I had to explain why I like scanlines. I hope I did. Knowing more about expected results on 3 monitor types won't make someone like that result if they don't. And poll votes won't make anyone like something they don't either. But for the sweet son of god christ jesus on Es and GHB (am I damned to hell yet?) , don't say doubled pixels aren't blocky on VGA screens!!