PC Engine AV mod

[Buster D]

Well, I think you're confusing a lot of what I was saying.  I never said a line-doubled 240p signal increased resolution.

I'm not talking about line doubling.  I'm saying that when a 240p signal is sent as 480i, the exact same video lines are still present and can be displayed as 240p with the proper equipment.  A 240p signal sent as 480i isn't quite the same as a 480p signal interlaced to 480i.

There is no flicker in a real 240p image n a CRT TV.

If it's an interlaced display and not a monitor or EDTV(480p) or HDTV, then yes, there will be flicker on a CRT.  That's how interlacing works.

Please post some pictures captured from s-video of Super Duper Castlevania IV with lots of floating hearts on the screen. 

I don't currently have a SFC, but I might be able to fill a request for a PCE game through S-Video.

Like I said, s-video is still limited to NTSC color space, which the entire world agrees isn't exactly the best.

Does this matter for the systems that output 240p?  Are there old video game systems that output colors that aren't in NTSC?

[Joe Redifer]

OK.  Please go find out more about NTSC technology.  Until then I will not debate with you on this issue here beyond this post.  But I will try to say some stuff one last time:

I'm not talking about line doubling.  I'm saying that when a 240p signal is sent as 480i, the exact same video lines are still present and can be displayed as 240p with the proper equipment.  A 240p signal sent as 480i isn't quite the same as a 480p signal interlaced to 480i.

I never said anything about a 480p signal.  Where did you get that? But for all intents and purposes, 240p sent as 480i looks much blockier than regular 240p, since the space between the scanlines is filled with the lines directly above it.

If it's an interlaced display and not a monitor or EDTV(480p) or HDTV, then yes, there will be flicker on a CRT.  That's how interlacing works.

And that's why it's called 240p.  The 'p' is for 'progressive'.  And yes, that means progressive scan on just about any regular SDTV in the entire world.  All NES, SMS, TG-16, Genesis ('cept the two-player mode in Sonic 2), SNES and most Saturn & PS1 games all run at 240p.  No interlacing.  None.  Zero.  Zip.  Are there any more synonyms I can use for "None"?  That's right, the SDTV is displaying a progressive image.  Notice the scanlines between each line?  Yup.  Notice the flicker?  Nope, you don't.  If you're seeing interlace flicker from the systems I just mentioned above (with the exception of several Saturn and PS1 games), then your TV is doing something wrong.  On many of the the Sega Ages collections in Japan, there is even a 240p option to play the games in the original resolution.  Why would this be there along with a 480i option if 240p was alwasy sent as an interlaced signal?  Answer:  Because 240p is not an interlaced signal, and if it were it wouldn't be 240p.  It is not officially recognized since it is not used in transmission of over-the-air signals (though it could be).

Does this matter for the systems that output 240p?  Are there old video game systems that output colors that aren't in NTSC?

It's not about "how many" colors NTSC can produce, it's about how well it produces those colors.  I could go into a long discussion about NTSC color bandwidth, and how it doesn't have much space.  But instead I'll just say that the luma (B&W) portion of the signal gets a lot more space than the combined red, green blue, etc get.  PAL has much better color space than NTSC and therefore the color looks much better.  Component video is free from all of this nonsense, but it has goofiness of it's own.  It does not transmit the color green.  But fortunately the way component video works, there is no theoretical loss from raw RGB.  If there is a loss, it is likely the monitor where it is being veiwed.  I have seen some Samsung and Sony SDTVs where component video looked absolutely horrible.

OK I'm done.

[Buster D]

I never said anything about a 480p signal.  Where did you get that?

I was making a comparison between the interlacing done on a 240p signal (each frame's 240 lines are simply sent as a 480i field, which is 240 lines of actual information) vs a 480p image interlaced to 480i, which looses information.

But for all intents and purposes, 240p sent as 480i looks much blockier than regular 240p, since the space between the scanlines is filled with the lines directly above it.

This does not apply to equipment such as a PC running DScaler in Old Game mode or a standalone deinterlacer that can properly create a 240p frame from a 480i field.

And that's why it's called 240p.  The 'p' is for 'progressive'.  And yes, that means progressive scan on just about any regular SDTV in the entire world.

I didn't know that TVs could recognize a 240p signal without confusing it for an 480i one (except maybe in Europe, but I don't know much about their situation), but I'll take your word for it. You have the RGB signal transcoded to YPbPr component, right?  What transcoder do you use?  What's the model of your TV?

On many of the the Sega Ages collections in Japan, there is even a 240p option to play the games in the original resolution. 

Which one?  I was thinking about getting some of them eventually, I can pick it up in Akihabara on the way home from work someday.

Why would this be there along with a 480i option if 240p was alwasy sent as an interlaced signal? 

I never said that it was.  However, the resolution lines when it's sent as 480i are exactly the same as 240p, because a 480i field has 240 active lines and they can be easily combined to make a 240p image, such as when using DScaler.  This software takes very little CPU processing in Old Game mode, and in addition has no detectable lag (unless introduced by the capture card), unlike many standalone deinterlacers and scalers in HDTVs.  I can perform moves in fighting games with exact precision.  I'm sure your setup has no lag either though.

It's not about "how many" colors NTSC can produce, it's about how well it produces those colors.  I could go into a long discussion about NTSC color bandwidth, and how it doesn't have much space.  But instead I'll just say that the luma (B&W) portion of the signal gets a lot more space than the combined red, green blue, etc get.  PAL has much better color space than NTSC and therefore the color looks much better.  Component video is free from all of this nonsense, but it has goofiness of it's own.  It does not transmit the color green.  But fortunately the way component video works, there is no theoretical loss from raw RGB.

Yes, RGB and component cables will give you slightly better color quality than S-Video, but it's not a huge improvement like the kind you get going from composite to S-Video (or better), especially since the human eye is much more sensitive to light/dark differences in video than color.

[Spector]

Are you using rgb with it?

Yeah, but to be fair, the photos are having a strange effect on the pictures, blurring them somehow, and it's hard to tell. The composite photos have good colour though in general, though not as much of it!
Guess again...   

[Joe Redifer]

each frame's 240 lines are simply sent as a 480i field, which is 240 lines of actual information

Very true, but it looks much worse when it is displayed as 480i instead of 240p.

You have the RGB signal transcoded to YPbPr component, right?  What transcoder do you use?  What's the model of your TV?

This one:

(Note that I added audio to it)

The TV that I use for SD games is a Toshiba 20"... I forget the exact model and am too lazy to walk downstairs and look.  But it's actually made by Sansui or something like that and they also make Panasonic's in the same size range, and they'll give you the same picture.  The reds are incredibly good and there are no vertical stripes in dithered screens (like some stuff from Ys on the SMS) like there are on the Sony TVs I tried (and took back).

Which one?

I believe that both Space Harrier and SDI do this.  Maybe Quartet but I'm not sure... I'd have to power it up and check.

Yes, RGB and component cables will give you slightly better color quality than S-Video...

Depends.  To a discerning eye, it is quite the improvement.  But the reason s-video seems so much better is simply because composite sucks so bad.  In Midnight Resistance for the Genesis, the text on the item/weapon containers between rounds is much more readable on component than it is in s-video, which itself is a hell of a lot more readable than composite.  I can take new comparison pictures of that part if you like.

[Buster D]

each frame's 240 lines are simply sent as a 480i field, which is 240 lines of actual information

Very true, but it looks much worse when it is displayed as 480i instead of 240p.

On what are you basing this opinion?  What specific setups have you seen 480i properly deinterlaced to the original 240p frames?  I play my systems regularly through this method on my 22" Mitsubishi CRT monitor from 2004, and there is no easily visible loss in quality compared to PS1 games played on my PS2 hooked up through component, nor do Dreamcast games played through VGA look significantly better.

 

But the reason s-video seems so much better is simply because composite sucks so bad.  In Midnight Resistance for the Genesis, the text on the item/weapon containers between rounds is much more readable on component than it is in s-video, which itself is a hell of a lot more readable than composite.  I can take new comparison pictures of that part if you like.

When you use S-Video, unlike what DScaler does your display isn't taking the 240 lines from each 480i field and displaying it as 240p, so comparison pictures from it wouldn't be of any use to this discussion.

[Michael Helgeson]

This is kind a a old argument,and the visual improvement of Component over S-Video is going to def depend from tv to tv. Some tvs produce great component AND great S-video,and some Tvs produce great Component and average S-video,and some produce horrible Component and great S-video. From this standpoint its pointless to argue about it. Almost everyones SDTV build quality is different.

[FM-77]

The quality differs, yes - but unless the tv is broken - component will always look better than s-video. Always.

[Spector]

With regards to the images I showed, pic A of Alien Crush and pic B of Victory Run are from the emulator.

[Michael Helgeson]

The quality differs, yes - but unless the tv is broken - component will always look better than s-video. Always.

Thats a completely untrue remark. Although rare there are tvs where the component is just horrible and the s-video it produces is better,because of poor design and parts used for the Component handling. And there are Tvs where the S-video is pretty much on par with Component. I think Jrok even addressed this issue somewhere once. If you messed with Superguns,and consolizing more you'd know this. Sony esp has been able to pump out alot of crap tvs that produce both S-video and Component and the Component was just done wrong and looked slightly worse when compared to its S-video or was perfect in Component and the S-video was horrible.

[Joe Redifer]

On what are you basing this opinion?  What specific setups have you seen 480i properly deinterlaced to the original 240p frames?

My eyeballs.  I can see.  You seem to think that I have a huge array of scalers and whatnot.  I do not.  Why would I?  I play 480p and higher capable systems on my HDTV.  I play 240p-only systems on a TV that can properly show 240p without the BS.  When I plug my 240p systems into my capture device, it displays it as a 480i signal.  It looks much worse.  Same when I plug a 240p system into my HDTV.  There is no need for me to have a 240p-480i-240p setup when I can just play in the original unraped 240p to begin with.  You seem to think that having a scaler is the ONLY way to play these games.  Anything else in incomprehensible.

When you use S-Video, unlike what DScaler does your display isn't taking the 240 lines from each 480i field and displaying it as 240p, so comparison pictures from it wouldn't be of any use to this discussion.

The comparison pictures would show that S-video doesn't look as good as component.  I don't give a single living f*ck about your Dscaler.  I just know I have quality on my SDTV that s-video cannot match, period.  As I have said before I have seen SNES s-video displayed on many different (key word there, sparky) different televisions and they always have bleeding reds to some degree.  But then again you didn't even know what 240p really was, so how can I expect you to grasp this?

I agree with Mike H. about the recent Sony SDTVs.

[Michael Helgeson]

You know, could also have a tad to do with the chip used to produce the S-video on the Snes,or the red color line needing to be toned down before it is sent with green and blue to the encoder chip used. I also didn't really notice the red problem on Snes so much,but I didn't really play Snes enough in S-video. Also in a way Joe is lucky. Using a smaller screen for gaming is less problematic when it comes to SDTV's.

The larger the screen,the more problems you will see in the picture clarity and color alot of times. I tend to really despise anything past 25-27 inchs because of this. I should probably pick up a couple more SDTV sets for storage for when my current one I am using for games dies.

I also think Buster D can take Dscaler and stick it up his ass. I know he thinks hes being all techie and cool and leet by running his game systems into his computer,but honestly,its not leet,or cool,and its the poorest choice to run your favorite older game systems. And the difference between S-video and VGA on Dreamcast is night and day. The majority of software for Dreamcast was designed around Super VGA quality picture,not SDTV interlaced.  All the games that support VGA look way way better in VGA. The color is correct,the detail is all there,the picture is cleaner and worlds sharper.

I cant even believe it was suggested that DC Super VGA is not much better then S-video. Laughable.

[Joe Redifer]

Dreamcast in VGA is awesome.  I transcode my DC's VGA into component and play it in 480p and it looks great, but pure VGA still wins.  Unless you happen to playing certain Capcom fighters where the sprites are very low res compared to the BGs.

[Buster D]

On what are you basing this opinion?  What specific setups have you seen 480i properly deinterlaced to the original 240p frames?

My eyeballs.  I can see.  You seem to think that I have a huge array of scalers and whatnot.  I do not. 

If you're only comparing a 240p signal sent as-is to a 480i signal displayed as-is instead of back to 240p, then you aren't making a valid comparison. 

But I guess people would rather flame and swear at me than make the comparison for themselves.  Fair enough.

[Buster D]

I also think Buster D can take Dscaler and stick it up his ass. I know he thinks hes being all techie and cool and leet by running his game systems into his computer,but honestly,its not leet,or cool,and its the poorest choice to run your favorite older game systems.

Have you seen a console through S-Video using Old Game mode of DScaler for yourself, or are you basing this on others' opinions?  I don't really care what people think about me, but my setup is an easy solution for many, and is most likely easier for most than getting a secondary or new TV.  If people don't like it after trying it and want something better, that's fine, but I see little point in saying it's the worst way to display video games without giving any reason.

And the difference between S-video and VGA on Dreamcast is night and day. The majority of software for Dreamcast was designed around Super VGA quality picture,not SDTV interlaced.  All the games that support VGA look way way better in VGA. The color is correct,the detail is all there,the picture is cleaner and worlds sharper.

Naturally the details are all there and motion certianly looks better since it's a 640x480 uninterlaced image and not the same image sent as 480i and then deinterlaced.  I should've specified that I was just referring to the color quality, which isn't a massive step up from S-Video.

I cant even believe it was suggested that DC Super VGA is not much better then S-video. Laughable.

Dreamcast outputs 640x480 (or half that depending on the game IIRC).  Super VGA usually refers to 800x600 (edit: and 1078x768 as well I believe).