Crt-caligari with SPOT_HEIGHT set to 0.8
![Image](http://abload.de/img/retroarch-0209-23441726ud4.png)
Via Neogaf: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.ph ... count=1667
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
RetroArch has got that thing they call 'hard gpu sync' supposedly giving you the least possible lag when 'hard gpu sync frames' and 'frame delay' are set to '0'.Xan wrote:So how much lag do you get with this setup? Do you use VSync?
No, not really, or not by much. Haven't tried the new 4K with FALD myself though. ^^Xan wrote:Do you think that a higher end Sony model would give you better results?
There are options in retroArch to control internal resolution, scaling and overscan, but I have yet to figure how they work together.Xan wrote:The uneven scanlines is what I noticed right away and what irks me
Yeah it's to much, you can turn it off completely, but I think I've noticed a little bit of it can add to the actual spot bloom and participate to the 'shaping'.Xan wrote:but other than that it's pretty good for an emulator I suppose. The white bloom on the last picture looks quite obviously unnatural though.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
To me it looks slightly more blurry than an actual SNES via XRGB Mini, but that could also be caused by the slightly higher resolution of your screenshot.creamygarlicdip wrote:what this does is disable the feature the emulates a composite signal making it look like rgb. I read on a site that doing this makes it look alot like an upscaling job done by an xrgb mini. I dont own an xrgb mini but i can verify it looks great and very authentic.
You can't do V-Sync without adding at least a frame of latency.Xyga wrote:My old ATI gpu allows syncing at 0 frames under XP (is it really zero I don't know, but it's working without issues) and my current nVidia under Win 7 allows for 1 frame minimum (in fullscreen mode).
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
I'm really not clear on what Hard GPU Sync does, other than it is apparently very time-sensitive when set to '0', thus rather demanding on your hardware. Does it work for you if set to '1' instead?Xyga wrote:What I don't understand regarding Hard GPU Sync is that it's still syncing right @ '0' frames set in RA's video settings, though with difficulties as sometimes it just doesn't sync on the first try (have to press F repeatedly to switch to windowed and back to fullscreen).
The gpu is set to application preference so it's just expecting instructions.
This is a weird thing but surprisingly it makes everything very responsive, I don't quite get the theory maybe it's BS but libretro say something like using sound to sync the video, dunno.
I agree, I just thought it was worth mentioning that there are some additional benefits for emulation that people may not have realized, and pointing out that those are the true solution for latency.Xyga wrote:Regarding G-Free/Sync of course I'd like to own a compatible monitor but I just can't spend the asking prices right now and actually none of the few models available are satisfying-enough for me yet, I'm still lurking.
Until then using under-60Hz rates, well I've tried with the only monitor I have that's supposed to be able to handle those but in practice it didn't work.
I'm not sure what you mean by "out-of-bounds" resolutions. If you mean overscanning beyond the edge of the display, you can do that right now.Xyga wrote:First on integer: what RA needs is a way to do integer scaling with out-of-bounds resolutions, like it can be done with the Frame Meister or marq's DIY video digitizer & scandoubler project.
Well my point was that even with "large" borders (you can usually get them pretty close to the edge of your screen) the end result is typically much larger than any of the high-end CRTs.Xyga wrote:Otherwise in too many cases it is really too small, as someone who genuinely loathes to have huge borders all-round the picture the current integer scaling feature in RA is just unacceptable.
Also even for those who can deal with borders getting a bigger display is one thing, yes, but think about the huge number of users who probably can't do it in practice.
PixelsXyga wrote:Then on CRT shaders; I've tried the alternatives of course many are pleasing, but none get even close to what CRT-Royale is capable of.
Actually I'm quite surprised at all the hate this shader is getting (actually no; I hated it too in the beginning because it's just too tricky).
If people are giving up on it only because of the current impossibility to fix the scaling without the integer scaling option on, it's okay I understand (and I'm one of them).
But for everything in regards of realism I just can't believe what I'm reading in many places and to see the alternatives people propose and they think look better (sorry dude but you ESPrade scanlined screenshot just doesn't makes sense to me, that's definitely not what I'm aiming at).
I've never been able to get anything but a blurry picture out of CRT Royale and I get a headache from straining to focus on the image.Xyga wrote:If you check a few posts above you'll see I could achieve pretty awesome rendering on 1080 and 1200 displays, but with a lot of effort and consistently comparing directly with the two genuine 15KHz CRT RGB TV's I own.
I've been playing on such TV's + arcade cabs almost all my life and I know what it's supposed to look like, and even if CRT-Royale isn't quite exactly what it needs to be yet, it's still considerably more realistic than any other solution at the moment (though I have yet to dive into the fixed HLSL to compare, will probably do next week).
I've read many disappointed comments when it come to CRT-Royale (including mine), and there's one thing I've come to understand: every individual situation is different, and we cannot efficiently share settings, only knowledge about individual settings.
How do you do that ?Exidna wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by "out-of-bounds" resolutions. If you mean overscanning beyond the edge of the display, you can do that right now.Xyga wrote:First on integer: what RA needs is a way to do integer scaling with out-of-bounds resolutions, like it can be done with the Frame Meister or marq's DIY video digitizer & scandoubler project.
Well the fact that I cannot stand borders is one thing, getting an even smaller (I could never get close-enough to the edges) when I don't use a big TV is another, but more annoying is the fact that any CRT-Royle settings I use don't work well at all when Integer Scaling is on, it's too small/tight to work anything and I don't want that.Exidna wrote:Well my point was that even with "large" borders (you can usually get them pretty close to the edge of your screen) the end result is typically much larger than any of the high-end CRTs.Xyga wrote:Otherwise in too many cases it is really too small, as someone who genuinely loathes to have huge borders all-round the picture the current integer scaling feature in RA is just unacceptable.
Also even for those who can deal with borders getting a bigger display is one thing, yes, but think about the huge number of users who probably can't do it in practice.
Oh God no, don't take it the wrong way but what you're showing me doesn't look even close to my TV's and definitely not like the consumer Trinitron I'm basing my settings 'quest' on.Exidna wrote:PixelsXyga wrote:Then on CRT shaders; I've tried the alternatives of course many are pleasing, but none get even close to what CRT-Royale is capable of.
Actually I'm quite surprised at all the hate this shader is getting (actually no; I hated it too in the beginning because it's just too tricky).
If people are giving up on it only because of the current impossibility to fix the scaling without the integer scaling option on, it's okay I understand (and I'm one of them).
But for everything in regards of realism I just can't believe what I'm reading in many places and to see the alternatives people propose and they think look better (sorry dude but you ESPrade scanlined screenshot just doesn't makes sense to me, that's definitely not what I'm aiming at).
Scanlines
Scanlines + CRT Easymode
You don't get the bloom, but it seems pretty close to a CRT to me.
I bet a shader could start to emulate the bloom at 4K too, if that's something you wanted.
The softness of analog and the bloom of a CRT are not things I really want to emulate though.
I accept that scanlines are necessary, and at least for some games, simulating a shadow mask can really help make everything appear to be smoother. But that's as far as it needs to get for me, at least as far as the "look" is concerned. There are other problems with non-CRTs like motion.
I've never been able to get anything but a blurry picture out of CRT Royale and I get a headache from straining to focus on the image.Xyga wrote:If you check a few posts above you'll see I could achieve pretty awesome rendering on 1080 and 1200 displays, but with a lot of effort and consistently comparing directly with the two genuine 15KHz CRT RGB TV's I own.
I've been playing on such TV's + arcade cabs almost all my life and I know what it's supposed to look like, and even if CRT-Royale isn't quite exactly what it needs to be yet, it's still considerably more realistic than any other solution at the moment (though I have yet to dive into the fixed HLSL to compare, will probably do next week).
I've read many disappointed comments when it come to CRT-Royale (including mine), and there's one thing I've come to understand: every individual situation is different, and we cannot efficiently share settings, only knowledge about individual settings.
Unless I have overlooked a setting somewhere, if you're CRTs are like the output from CRT Royale, they need the focus or convergence adjusted.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
It's been moved to the core options now in the nightly versions, presumably because you might want a different scale for each system.Xyga wrote:How do you do that ?Exidna wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by "out-of-bounds" resolutions. If you mean overscanning beyond the edge of the display, you can do that right now.Xyga wrote:First on integer: what RA needs is a way to do integer scaling with out-of-bounds resolutions, like it can be done with the Frame Meister or marq's DIY video digitizer & scandoubler project.
I've been looking and asking everywhere and the only setting that responded was inside the CRT-Royale parameters, but it's working in manual increments and there's the transparent GUI in front so I can't see well what's going on with the actual picture, getting it to integer is impossible like that.
Inside RA video settings everything in direct relation to scaling refuses to respond, the settings are simply locked for me...
Well the only solution is a larger, higher resolution display. Non-integer scaling will always result in a distorted image with edges that flicker when anything moves.Xyga wrote:Well the fact that I cannot stand borders is one thing, getting an even smaller (I could never get close-enough to the edges) when I don't use a big TV is another, but more annoying is the fact that any CRT-Royle settings I use don't work well at all when Integer Scaling is on, it's too small/tight to work anything and I don't want that.
Fullscreen integer scaled, even if a few lines are left out of the display's edges, and with my CRT-Royale settings + finally correctly spaced scanlines -> this is how I want it and I don't see how it could be any better on a 1080 display.
The color and contrast is my camera at fault. Sony can never seem to get color right like Nikon and Canon do. But you get stupid amounts of resolution in a pocketable camera. (Alpha 5100)Exidna wrote:Oh God no, don't take it the wrong way but what you're showing me doesn't look even close to my TV's and definitely not like the consumer Trinitron I'm basing my settings 'quest' on.
Yours as I see it in that CRT-easymode totally lack the variable thickness and brightness intensity, there's zero blending in brighter spots, nor shaping, nor life to colors and contrast...sorry but this totally lacks realism and looks nothing like I've ever experienced with CRT's.
As you move to higher and higher-end CRTs, it really does change the look.Exidna wrote:(PS: my trinitron's okay except in the corners, but my Royale settings weren't ideal and also limited by the two displays, what I'm showing is as close as I could get with what I know about parameters)
-> This is what I mean when I say it's impossible to share CRT-Royale settings, most people are using different displays and more importantly have completely different ideas of what a CRT simulation should look like.
CRT-Royale is extremely hard to use and puzzling, it took me weeks of hair-pulling googling/reading, trial-and-error etc to get closer to what I wanted, and I still only understand maybe 1/3 of all of the settings and parameters.
Obviously while I was discussing it on other forums as well, there was not a single person who would agree with the other on the settings and the desirable output.
I think it's too advanced, too complex, and that in reality very few people have seen what it can really do.
We see people posting about Royale, sharing settings and screenshots, but nothing much ever reaching a consensus.
I know I'm far from having seen all of it, but I believe I went a bit further than average in a sense that I did not give up too soon (which let's be honest most people do).
I really believe Royale has no future if it stays in RA and doesn't get better useability and documentation, and that would be too bad because it's awesome (well...it can be).
Thank I didn't know this ever existed. Will try ASAP !Exidna wrote:If you grab the nightly from 21/04 (nightly = beta = potentially buggy, and things broke since then) the GLUI menu driver lets you see what you're doing with scaling.
The XMB covers it up, and RGUI is ugly and partially covers it up.
I'm not sure if there's an option somewhere to make it more transparent than it currently is, as that would be nice.
When you are running a game, go to: Options > Video options > Custom Ratio[/url]
And I am one of them, I don't find the PVM that much better than the consumer tubes and the BVM are really too much, what I'm aiming at is what I've seen and played on most of my life: consumer-grade rgb crt's and arcade monitors.Exidna wrote:As you move to higher and higher-end CRTs, it really does change the look.
...
I know a lot of people that actually don't like the look of high-end CRTs. They actually prefer the older or lower-end PVMs, or even prefer consumer-grade CRTs with RGB connections/mods.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Yes, it lets you do that. See the shot of Metal Slug being set to "1920x1344" which will crop the top and bottom of the image on a 1080p screen.Xyga wrote:EDIT: I've messed up the quote tags and lost something, well anyway somewhere I was mentioning that I'm not looking for fullscreen integer within the 1080p area, but rather with out-of-the limit (like in overscan area) integer scaling leaving a number of lines out.
e.g. 224x5 = 1120, leaving 20 lines out both on top and bottom. With a system like the MD with thick borders it's better.
Well for many of us, it's that scanlines make a huge difference to the perception of 2D artwork. Adding scanlines makes the image look much higher resolution than it actually is.Xyga wrote:And I am one of them, I don't find the PVM that much better than the consumer tubes and the BVM are really too much, what I'm aiming at is what I've seen and played on most of my life: consumer-grade rgb crt's and arcade monitors.Exidna wrote:As you move to higher and higher-end CRTs, it really does change the look.
...
I know a lot of people that actually don't like the look of high-end CRTs. They actually prefer the older or lower-end PVMs, or even prefer consumer-grade CRTs with RGB connections/mods.
Seriously some of those BVM's are so sharp with super strong scanlines I don't see the point, I could get something quite close with a good plasma and a Mini (considering the work those broadcast monitors are giving people I don't think that would be a bad tradeoff).
I'll try to shoot decent pictures of my trinitron tomorrow with my crappy phone camera to show you what I wish for and I believe Royale can get very close to.
PS: I'm thinking, if it's the high TVL you like you can try the following settings:
mask_type 0.00 (aperture grille)
mask_sample_mode 1.00 (sharper)
mask_triad_size_desired 2.00 (triads much narrower than 3.00)
Alternatively there's:
mask_specify_num_triad 1.00 (activates the option below)
mask_num_triads_desired 480 (values from 342 to 1920) -> which in combination with desired triad size gives you some more flexibility over triads but it's a tricky thing that would require proper calculations to get right.
Of course the first two sample modes, as well as all bloom, beam and filtering options (which are too high by default) heavily affect the look.
With triad size @ 2.00 anyway I've obtained better results on a 1600x1200 display, higher the better of course.
I think you idealize one particular type of crt and look which most games were not designed or intended for to begin (normal people never owned any broadcast monitors) and maybe you think anything that's different would be 'wrong'.Exidna wrote:the bad aspects of a CRT. (softness, bloom, misconvergence, color bleed, low contrast etc.)
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
No, I don't think it is "wrong" but at the same time, all of these CRT Shaders are far softer than any CRT I ever used.Xyga wrote:I think you idealize one particular type of crt and look which most games were not designed or intended for to begin (normal people never owned any broadcast monitors) and maybe you think anything that's different would be 'wrong'.
The CRTs I grew up with were all relatively small but they did have RGB connections on them.Xyga wrote:Maybe PVM's and particularly BVM's with that heavy computer-like w/ huge ever-thick black lines look are the only crt's you've ever experienced I don't know, but personally after over three decades playing on crt's I am certainly not trying to replicate a run-down TV, just a common well-working consumer one, with a preference for the aperture grille type like the Trinitron which looks absolutely great.
I'll show a number of pictures of mine asap I promise, it's not perfect but I might be able to source some good pics of similar ones to add to the comparison with Royale.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"