Using a predefined res. to display the WB properly when in window mode -RTG'd WB only

[NewDeli]

Concerning matching resolutions...
I won't manage to explain it with ClassicWB because the screen modes to choose from within the prefs. are too limited.

Let's say I wish to have my OS 3.9 WB in full-screen (Host desktop completely hidden, it doesn't need to be an actual full screen being displayed, I am thinking Full-window mode here), while retaining the 1:25 aspect ratio (the difference with Kitty being I wouldn't mind for lateral black borders).

In the display tab of WinUAE, I would set the Full Screen resolution to my PC desktop resolution (1600x1200), and the resolution from within the emulated OS (in Prefs/ScreenModes) to 1280x1024, in order to retain the above mentioned aspect ratio.

Without filters, I don't believe the default ratio resolution ("compliant" with 640x512) could easily be obtained without some black borders, on a typical 1,33 ratio bearing monitor (aka 4:3 TFTs or CRTs).
So, in kitty's case, it might even be worse (in terms of black borders) because her preferred resolution is something like 1600x1050 (I presume) with a whoopy 1,52 ratio.

[NewDeli]

...With RTG set (and that's the closing of my explanation, I promise), WinUAE window won't be let to be displayed into silly modes (e.g. 720x568).

Now, here comes the tricky part take a deep breath :
Whatever you input in WinUAE Display tab / window resolution
the window won't be resized beneath
what the resolution (the "correct" non-distorting resolution in my case -aka 1280x1024)
previously set (and tested OK, admittedly) in WB ScreenMode was.









So when you switch away from full-screen, which, as just said R-N, in most scenarios can be forcefully adjusted to completely cover your screen space, you will be presented a window with your WB, correct both in size and in proportion (at least similarly to how it looks in full-screen), even if your WinUAE Host settings in window mode are wild guesses.

And then all the games (minus the ones using RTG) will run in their own screenmode in a transparent manner. The beauty of this being you can safely turn full-screen on (thus in Parameters/native mode, instant benefit : lowered CPU usage), since there is no real point in doing the alt+tab windows juggling while playing a game.

That's simply not feasible with WB 3.1 or any of its variants.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Deleauvive

In the display tab of WinUAE, I would set the Full Screen resolution to my PC desktop resolution (1600x1200), and the resolution from within the emulated OS (in Prefs/ScreenModes) to 1280x1024, in order to retain the above mentioned aspect ratio.

Just like to mention that 1600x1200 = 4:3 and 1280x1024 = 5:4. So I don't really get the point about retaining the aspect ratio. Can you explain that?

[NewDeli]

Do you mind black borders when you display the WB full-screen ?

Because if you don't (and please R-N, I am aware it can be fixed in ClassicWB with overscan and manual adjustments made to the monitor settings; it's just that I need to take this mismatch proportion issue as a starting point for the discussion)

if you don't then, you might retain the 5:4 ratio in your monitor running at any 4:3 or even 16:10 resolution (1600x1200, 800x600, 1600x1050...) by doing just that :
-> Set a 5:4 resolution in Prefs./ScreenMode while keeping the 4:3 or 16:10 resolution in Host settings (which should be identical to the resolution your monitor is running, of course e.g. 1600x1200 in Display tab/Full screen <-> 1600x1200 as the actual resolution)

Nothing new, but RTG goes further, it is also idiotproof !
First, may I ask you to setup OS 3.9 to reproduce (it won't work with a non RTG'd WB)
The easiest way I guess is to load AmigaOS CD ISO instead of WB 3.1 ADFs in AmigaSYS at prompt.
It shouldn't take any longer than 10 minutes.

The purpose of this tutorial is to illustrate the benefit of running the RTG'd WB in one mode (windowed or full-window, for convenient alt+tabbing) and the games in another (full screen, for lowered CPU usage).

With only native mode at one's disposal, I noticed bad things would happen if one switches to window while setting wrong numbers in Display tab/windowed, even if the WB would display fine in full-screen mode. The second best reason to use RTG'd WB (or may be the first, for newcomers).

Why ? Because WinUAE doesn't give any indication of the resolution in which you should display your WB window, so some people input various number that seem "cool" to them : 800x600, 640x512...
and expect their WB to look exactly the same as in full-screen mode (smaller obviously, but perfectly scaled).

in NATIVE MODE : If you're running the WB full screen at say 1280x1024 it WILL look distorted @800x600

in RTG MODE : This won't happen, because the uaegfx driver will override the "cool" settings evocked above


For example : if the selected ScreenMode in AmigaOS is uae 1280x1024, inputting 720x568 (I should say I suggested that wrong setting to kitty ) in Display tab/window size of WinUAE will simply be ignored when switching from full-screen to window mode. The actual window size will be indeed 1280x1024 (whatever value was set in the emulated OS prefs).

Now, none of us three has a similar display to kitty's. 4:3 is not very far from 5:4. Adjustements are still possible, as R-N pointed out, but with 16:10, it can become tricky... and she doesn't want any black border, if I remember well.

Then the solution would be to choose a uaegfx mode compatible with this display e.g. 740x480 (3:2). The WB would appear stretched when loaded at this resolution on a standard monitor, but on her display in should be just fine BOTH IN FULL SCREEN (while covering the whole avalaible screen space) AND IN WINDOW MODE.


I am not saying 800x600 is "wrong", but I can say for sure it doesn't "help" to display the WB properly in window mode for someone dealing with a 3:2 type monitor, because it is from the same family as the other 4:3 resolutions.

[TCD]

Why not run it in 4:3 (and even 1600x1200 since it's available in your screenshot) and 32 bit then?

[NewDeli]

Simply because RTG'd WB ScreenModes won't offer it after WinUAE being initialized with a non 4:3 display.

On my laptop, which preferred resolution is 1280x800 (16:10), I can reproduce the idiotproof effect when the WB resolution is set to 640x400.
setting very low numbers in Windowed e.g. 99x99
RTG mode > Windowed
-> Windowed overrides it with 160x128

And why it may not be desirable to put the highest value in Prefs/ScreenMode ?
Because if you often switch to Windowed mode, the following error msg will eventually pop-up

"The selected screen mode can't be displayed in a window, because the desktop is too small for the specified window size"
should the resolution set in Windowed be any bigger than 1280x800.


So in either case you're bound to do it the right way, forgetting altogether about switching to window mode (which full-window is a top notch remedy for, once you have mentally put the puzzle elements together)
or
having a low enough value in Windowed for the display to be resized proportionally to your WB resolution (but it won't be guaranteed to stay that way, as these values get rewritten quite often).

Now for that idiotproof "feature" to be of some use, "Always scale in windowed mode" must be deactivated (of course, I am not inventing anything, Toni had it all sorted out in Expansions tab)

[TCD]

So you say that running a 5:4 resolution on a 4:3 display doesn't stretch?
Forget it, you're talking about windowed mode, which should just be set accordingly to your WB res (or make it autoscale). Not really get the point that you're trying to convey here tbh.

[NewDeli]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

windowed mode, which should just be set accordingly to your WB res.

If you do that, how much left of the screen will be left to click on your desktop icons in this mode ?
I just took the case of Kitty a bit further, nothing more.
When she's switching away from Full-screen mode, it's because she needs to be doing things with the PC icons and programs, had she told me. WinUAE remains in a window which in any case is smaller than her desktop resolution.

She doesn't seem to be aware yet about the benefits of full-window, so let's assume at least she wants this resized window to retain the 3:2 ratio she's using in Full-screen mode.
Instead of mentally calculating the scaled value to input in there (740x480) accordingly to my hypothesis, she could set this smaller value directly in Prefs/ScreenModes.

Sure the WB would not look as nice in full-screen mode but it would be "pixel perfect" in windowed Mode.

As I said, the resized window would retain the precise size and ratio (aka 740x480 & 3:2), half of what would be her monitor preferred res., and that "trick" would consistenly work, even if the values there would be completely erroneous (yet equal or smaller).

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

or make it autoscale

You mean Automatic Aspect Ratio AND "Always scale in windowed mode" set in Expansions ?
Precisely not the thing I would recommend to a newcomer INMHO,
because setting a ridiculously low value in Windowed would output a ridiculously small resized window of the WB
setting a ridiculously high value would ouput an error

Instead forcing WinUAE to always display the Window mode as it would have been set in the WB prefs. seems much more user-friendly to me.

[TCD]

I think I got it now. You propose to use a let's say a divided by 2 resolution of your monitors native resolution in WB. Now that would make sense. Not sure what the 1024x768 and 1600x1200 stuff has to do with it, but okay. I meant the null filter 'Automatic scaling' or 'Automatic resize' in none RTG modes, but since RTG has it's own way of fitting the window to the WB res it's not needed.

[NewDeli]

Good news !

Dividing by 2 would make the WB when in full-screen almost unusable, because of the magnifying of everything (icons, toolbars...).
I found 720x480 to fit exactly my need in that aspect (I can only presume it would also fit Kitty's) but of course I probably wouldn't use it in the long-term.

Did you have that OS 3.9 setup then ? Again, with the a 4:3 monitor, you may experiment with this "manual scaling" @1280x1024 set in WB settings, or any multiple of it.

The filters won't help, you're right about that.


Too bad R-N and/or some other "Die Hard" WinUAE folks wouldn't post here yet.

[TCD]

Divided by 2 would make it 'pixel perfect' (in theory) in full screen (just scaled times 2). Anyway, I get the idea of the correct ratio. I use a 1680x1050 display, so that would be 840x525 then, which should be rather convienient. I have a OS 3.9 setup, but you surely don't mind if I do it 'my way'

[Maccara]

Can someone confirm (or point to a reliable source) what were the pixel aspect ratios assumed for original hardware? (and in what cases?)

(Because all discussion in this thread seems to assume 1:1 PAR in general - certainly CRT TV sets do not use 1:1 PAR @ 704/720x576, for example)

[Retro-Nerd]

Sure, a TV uses a 4:3 aspect ratio.

http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~f76998/video/modes/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio

http://lurkertech.com/lg/pixelaspect/

[Maccara]

Originally Posted by Retro-Nerd

Sure, a TV uses a 4:3 aspect ratio.

Edit: Ah, you added some links. I'll review those and how they relate to Amiga.

Umm, thanks, but I know that. I asked about PAR, not DAR and what was assumed on Amiga, not TV (ITU specs about analogue signal conversion tell me all about TV's).

DAR = display aspect ratio (what you wrote above)
PAR = pixel aspect ratio (what info I'm looking for Amiga HW, is it always 1:1 then?)

For example, for TV 704x576(PAL) & 704x480(NTSC) BOTH have ~4:3 DAR but different PAR. Amiga connected to a TV probably does this correctly too, but how about 1084?

[Maccara]

Originally Posted by Retro-Nerd

http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~f76998/video/modes/

Thanks, this link tells me the Amiga pixel clocks.

Didn't yet go through the math yet myself, but seems Amiga 640x512 is not 5:4 DAR as is usually assumed (based on 1:1 PAR, and resolution suggestions for emulation given with that false premise), at least not on TV.

Hmm... I probably need to check how 1084, for example, behaved also...

Would you happen to know if WinUAE takes any of this into account in any of its scaling options?

[Retro-Nerd]

Originally Posted by Maccara

Would you happen to know if WinUAE takes any of this into account in any of its scaling options?

I have no clue. Toni should answer this.

[eLowar]

Originally Posted by Maccara

Didn't yet go through the math yet myself, but seems Amiga 640x512 is not 5:4 DAR as is usually assumed (based on 1:1 PAR, and resolution suggestions for emulation given with that false premise), at least not on TV.

I guess it had to come up at some point.

I think so, too, it's probably still 4:3, so line doubling 640x256 or displaying 640x512 as is on displays with square pixels, actually probably does cause a slight distortion (slight vertical elongation). I personally am not bothered by it at all, and I think that slight global distortion is much better than the irregular line-by-line distortions you'd get if you tried to correct the aspect ratio (didn't there use to be an option for that?).

[NewDeli]

Just to conclude on my little experiment (because I can't really obtain more than one Windowed res. from a given res. in WB prefs.) :
For this to work, in Expansions :

• "Always scale in windowed mode" should be disabled
• and it probably wouldn't hurt to have aspect ratio set to 16:10 (depends on your preferred res., Host side)

The "pixel-perfect" manual scaling would occur whether in 720x480 or in 640x400.
If I input a very low value in Windowed, no further change would be noticeable concerning WinUAE window size or ratio, but 160x128 (a 5:4 res., interestingly enough) would be set by WinUAE in Screen/Windowed "behind my back".


So for me, this HOWTO is ideally suited for those beginners who often switch to Windowed mode and don't want to calculate each time the best resolution to run WinUAE in this mode. Full-window is still superior INMHO, because with it, you don't have to worry for the area of screen space that would be occupied by WinUAE window. There are many "modern ways" to access the shortucts (docks, macros...) so after a while, switching away from full-screen just to be clicking on desktop icons might not appear as crucial as it seems.

And let's not forget that the Native + RTG mode gives people the possibility to obtain two setup in go. That would probably make Workenching + gaming more envoyable since each mode can have its own settings, at the cost of very little compatibilty losses.

[Maccara]

Yup, R-N link gave all the info I needed for PAL Amiga. Thanks!

Assuming PAL Amiga showed ~4:3 image on a PAL TV at 640x512 means Amiga has ~16:15 PAR and combining with information http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~f76998/video/conversion/ it is now easy to calculate what resolution matches Amiga on a 1:1 PAR display (640x512 ~= 682x512, or 640x480 on a 1:1 PAR 4:3 DAR display).

I.e., basically Amiga PAR (16:15) matches "Generic PAL 4:3 PAR (720x576 = 4:3 DAR = 16:15 PAR)" (does not conform exactly to ITU standards, which is not surprising).

Only question remains, was 1084 monitor handled differently and what was the NTSC pixel clock (can probably be derived with a couple of assumptions, and only needed for "completeness" sake)...

PS. WinUAE emulation may already account for some of this, of course (as there are some options in scaling), but needs confirmation.

PPS. And this is only for my own curiosity how Amiga was designed, not advocating that people should use some specific resolutions.

PPPS. This might be useful information for someone if they were designing graphics on a PC which would be shown on a real Amiga.

[TCD]

@Deleauvive
Not sure if you can compare windowed of full-windowed mode though. Full-window is almost the same as full-screen with a different technique to do it.