getting the best picture out of my playstation 1

[BazookaBen]

Well the fairy's wings probably flap faster than the pixel response time on the panel, so it may be that the "dithering" you're seeing is just the pixels changing color.

[Grimakis]

Well the fairy's wings probably flap faster than the pixel response time on the panel, so it may be that the "dithering" you're seeing is just the pixels changing color.

You appear to be correct. I use the framemeisters Freeze feature to see that it alternates between the wing being solid to the wings not being there.

Regards,
George

[Josh128]

Ah, so its how the game shades the wings during the animation. If it was paused or frozen when the pic was taken, it shouldnt have anything to do with pixel response time. If it were taken in motion, however, it could be.

*Nevermind it couldnt be how the game shades it-- its freakin sub-pixels.

[Grimakis]

My bad, I didn't explain well.

The screen shot is not frozen, it is in motion. Later I used the Freeze function on the xrgb, and saw that the game alternates between frames that include the wings(solid color) and frames that the fairy has no wings. This creates the flapping illusion.

I took a few more photos and wasnt able to reproduce the initial.

It looks like I caught my TV while it was updating the screen. Weird, huh?

Regards,
George

[LEGENOARYNINLIA]

I find it absolutely endearing how some people can go their way and purchase a device such as a Framemeister and yet be confused by regular consumer grade television technology and photography.

[Ed Oscuro]

ssssay redknight, is that a phosphor decay line slap bang through the middle of your avatar

[LEGENOARYNINLIA]

ssssay redknight, is that a phosphor decay line slap bang through the middle of your avatar

Yes it is. I find that it makes Lau look like he just farted. I'm sure you've seen a similar effect used in manga? There's a bigger version of the photo in my tumblr if you want to take a look.

[Grimakis]

I find it absolutely endearing how some people can go their way and purchase a device such as a Framemeister and yet be confused by regular consumer grade television technology and photography.

Since you appear to know what's going on, could you share your explanation?

I'm neither familiar with LCD technology, nor photography. However, I am familiar with the concept of buying a Framemeister for the small sum of $350(less than a TV) and vastly improving the PQ of all my consoles,

Not everyone has researched these topics at lengths you know.

[Ed Oscuro]

I find that it makes Lau look like he just farted. I'm sure you've seen a similar effect used in manga?

Nice one!

Since you appear to know what's going on, could you share your explanation?

What's the question?

RedKnight said earlier that using a proper camera without flash was a good idea - this is true, but I think the original pics are just fine for showing what you wanted, especially for a 15-year-old camera. I've used one recently. Disable the flash if you can.

The best way to take photos is to use manual control, if it's available, but I'm not sure you need to bother. In an automatic mode, the camera will guess at the best settings to make a natural-looking bright image (but here it shows it does a pretty good job). If you want to experiment, you'll want to try changing the shutter speed / Time value if the photo. Typically I'd choose something like 1/60th of a second (to capture one frame) but you can play with that setting as needed. LCDs don't dim before pixel refresh as CRTs do, as you can see in RedKnight's profile photo you'd have to take the photo again (without changing the settings) to hopefully capture the refresh at a different time. Screens showing CRTs going dim before the beam sweeps through again and brightens the phosphors can be useful, but don't represent the usual experience of watching a CRT TV normally. LCDs (and plasma) don't have an effect of dimming before new frames, but instead can show pixel response related blur. It could be useful to take a photo showing this happening, but again it's probably not representative of what you're aiming for.

There are other settings to help the image out (lowering ISO sensitivity - lowers the gain on the sensor, typically reduces the appearance of "dirty" noise) but this will come at the expense of needing a wider aperture or longer shutter speed, or otherwise getting a dimmer image (brightness = shutter * aperture * ISO, roughly).

I think the semi-transparent wings probably do a fine job of showing how the image looks in reality, since we don't perceive frames individually.

There isn't any better way to capture what output actually looks like than showing it onscreen. Capturing the signal from a Framemeister directly would just give a clean screenshot, but without the context of being displayed on a real monitor/tv, so it wouldn't be of much help except showing the ideal to attempt with changing TV and FM settings.

[LEGENOARYNINLIA]

I'd like to add something to what was said above. The human eye and a camera see things very differently. So while I encourage everyone to use effort* you'll never be able to capture what your eyes see. Even if the photos you take do look really nice, it's probably not exactly what you perceive when you look at the screen with your own eyes. With my plasma (Mitsubishi XP-4015C) I underexpose my shots somewhat to avoid losing detail in lighter shades because my monitor' is set to very high contrast. I think that there's no point trying to match the human eye when sharing shots of different screens to show off the level of detail. In the end it's about the quality of your photos and what you say that decides if the other person believes you.

And as Ed said, if you use a capture device you're completely leaving out your TV/monitor from the chain and that's not the point is it? And auto settings are not universal in all digital cameras, especially if some people are using iphones and others are using 15 year old digital cameras. A lot of full auto devices like phones with cameras enhance the photos automatically, which is not a good thing when you are trying to document picture quality. Especially lack of noise in a photo could just be because little Stevie inside your iphone is pulling on switches and tweaking on knobs.

One more thing. I find that using photography to share your setup to get feedback from it is a better approach than to just show off and boast about what you think is the best picture quality ever seen. Peace and love, ya'll.

*Short version: No flash, ever. Match the exposure to the framerate, (1/60 on CRT, or 1/50 if you're cursed with PAL), pick an aperture that your digital camera produces the sharpest pictures with (often not the smallest aperture, surprisingly) and try to use as low ISO as possible (you can adjust the levels in photo editing software with dim pictures). Also, some cameras introduce awful JPG compression, so try to avoid that. When you have the settings down, remember to hold the camera steady when you shoot and have patience. Even the slightest changes in an angle can produce moire effects and sometimes you might have to take dozens of shots to get exactly what you want. There's no need to take photography to rocket science levels (I use a "pro" compact camera with full manual settings) but it does help a lot to have a basic understanding of the tools you are using.

[Grimakis]

I find it absolutely endearing how some people can go their way and purchase a device such as a Framemeister and yet be confused by regular consumer grade television technology and photography.

Sorry, guys. I interpreted this as direct criticism/condescension toward my owning a Framemeister, yet not understanding why the fairy's wings flicker.

My bad if I took it the wrong way.

Thanks for everyone's help, I have decided that the PQ is acceptable to me via Component.

Regards,
George

[Ed Oscuro]

And as Ed said, if you use a capture device you're completely leaving out your TV/monitor from the chain and that's not the point is it?

That's it.

About the whole camera / eye thing - of course cameras are quite different than what the eye sees, so you do need to know what you're aiming to show. If you're just aiming to show what your eye sees, your camera settings should be chosen for this purpose (and, like I said, many cameras do pretty well at this with automatic settings). If you have some specific other purpose, like showing monitor tech artifacts, then of course that requires very different settings.

Shutter speed isn't the only thing. For LCD screens, plasma, or OLED, 1/60th second (NTSC) is probably usually right, so long as you're aware that you don't know when that 1/60th of a second starts and ends. For still images this shouldn't be an issue, but for any kind of movement or animation, you might take the photo as the screen is just finished updating (ideal), or you could take it when there's an update being done right in the middle (bad). This is especially true of CRTs. So, again, multiple photos are often the key, and sometimes longer exposures are better.

[Josh128]

There isn't any better way to capture what output actually looks like than showing it onscreen. Capturing the signal from a Framemeister directly would just give a clean screenshot, but without the context of being displayed on a real monitor/tv, so it wouldn't be of much help except showing the ideal to attempt with changing TV and FM settings.

And as Ed said, if you use a capture device you're completely leaving out your TV/monitor from the chain and that's not the point is it?

Agree 100%, yet when I pointed this out to a certain person when discussing GC 480i vs 480p on the F4500 and my previous Hitachi Ultravision Digital on page 4 of the F4500 thread, I was given the reply:

"That makes no sense at all, sorry. Actually that capture was directly from my XRGB Mini so upscaling was going on. If you want to compare upscaling then capturing is much more accurate than taking photos.

What a trainwreck that thread was early on. I am blameless, of course.

[FBX]

I find it absolutely endearing how some people can go their way and purchase a device such as a Framemeister and yet be confused by regular consumer grade television technology and photography.

Sorry, guys. I interpreted this as direct criticism/condescension toward my owning a Framemeister, yet not understanding why the fairy's wings flicker.

My bad if I took it the wrong way.

Thanks for everyone's help, I have decided that the PQ is acceptable to me via Component.

Regards,
George

It's likely directed at me to piss me off, but as I explained before, my camera is a piece of crap. It only has a fixed set of options and doesn't allow for exposure control beyond idiot buttons like "candle light", "beach", "fire works" etc. I've taken screen pics under every possible setting with and without flash, and they all suck. Without flash, the pixels are blurry and bleed even with autofocus. And yes, I use a tripod.

Now if I had a decent camera, I'm quite certain I could take good pics of the screen. So his condescending remark implying I'm somehow wasting money buying a Framemeister since I'm such a clueless moron when it comes to photography is quite uncalled for and out of line. My knowledge and use of the Framemeister likely exceeds most owners' understanding of it, and I get great PQ out of it from my consoles REGARDLESS of my capability to take good pictures.

*Short version:

I find it absolutely endearing how some people can go their way and purchase a device such as a Framemeister and yet be confused by regular consumer grade television technology and photography.

and

Peace and love, ya'll

Reveal a disingenuous trolling mentality.

[LEGENOARYNINLIA]

Dear FBX,

I don't know where to start, so I'll just state the most obvious thing first to make it absolutely clear: no one, including me, has said that a Framemeister is a bad choice. And given the fact that it's a renowned piece of hardware that produces excellent results, there's absolutely no need to prove that the Framemeister is worth the money if you don't want to hunt for hard to find alternatives.

But if you insist on talking about your amazing Framemeister setup yet can't produce proper visual proof for it then what do you expect? Saying you have a piece of crap for a camera with "idiot buttons" doesn't change the fact that you decided to put up that shot in a thread where they would be scrutinised and judged. Just because you believe your setup looks amazing doesn't change the fact that your photo is a bit shit. If it's a bit shit then there's nothing that can change that. I'm not trolling you. I'm saying that you put up that photo here in the first place and I wasn't very impressed. I would tell anyone who shared a shot like that how shit it is. You're using flash to illuminate a panel. What's the point in that?

So, why don't you just buy a proper camera and learn how to use it? What's there likely to lose? Don't worry, I'm not implying anything. I'm just quite certain your website would benefit from it.

I dont' want to argue with you anymore. You have a Framemeister and a shit camera. That's it. Peace and love for everyone except you.

[Josh128]

^^ lol this guy is funny. The "makes Lau look like he just farted" comment was an excellent comeback, earlier.

[LEGENOARYNINLIA]

^^ lol this guy is funny. The "makes Lau look like he just farted" comment was an excellent comeback, earlier.

I actually spent the majority of one evening to get that shot just right from a 9" CRT. I'm fascinated by the asshole-look some characters have in 32bit fighters.

[Ed Oscuro]

The 'net is filled with hobbyist sites that are useful despite not having production values. I don't see how trying to be helpful is an open for out-of-line ridicule. He doesn't need to jump through any hoops. There's a way to make helpful suggestions without being antagonistic. That is what peace is about.

[TheRac25]

Ive noticed ps1 on ps2 with component output clips a few pixels from the right hand side of the picture (tested with 2 completely different displays and with fat/slim). I suspect rgb does it too.
If you want an example boot up star ocean second on a ps2 and look at the menu screens.
top image is ps2 component bottom is ps1 rgb

[bobrocks95]

Whoa, can anyone else confirm that? I had never heard that before- it's not that significant, but it means I'll be getting a PS1 SCART cable sooner rather than later.

[Xan]

I don't really get this comparison, it seems that the top PS2 pic actually has more pixels...?

It's worth having a PS1 regardless as the odd game just doesn't work well on the PS2.

[bobrocks95]

The upper portion of the U is cut off- so 5-6ish pixels it looks like are cut off on the right side. Both the "underline" and U have more pixels to the right that aren't shown.

The pictures just aren't horizontally aligned- imagine the top picture shifted a bit to the left.

[speedlolita]

Has anyone replaced the composite video pin on the AV port with composite sync directly from the video chip? Was thinking of trying it with my SCPH-1000 but I largely don't see a difference between composite video and composite sync on my Trinitron, unless it is a console like the Nintendo 64.

[Xan]

For me luma was a huge difference from CVBS, tested both on CRTs and a plasma. Don't see the point in the c-sync mod unless luma would still cause issues on some scaler setups.

[TheRac25]

Whoa, can anyone else confirm that? I had never heard that before- it's not that significant, but it means I'll be getting a PS1 SCART cable sooner rather than later.

slim and fat ps2 both do this, and both do it on gbs-82xx to vga monitor and direct input to a samsung tv set
you can see the transition from color data to black at the end of the line so its defiantly in the signal coming out of the ps2
whereas the ps1 rgb output is fine, i can only conclude the ps2 clips a few pixels (~5-6) from the end of the scan lines for some reason

to be fair star ocean second story is the only game ive found with this issue so far out of maybe a dozen, but there could be others
I would still pick a ps2 if i could only have one or the other and the output is good with this exception

[bobrocks95]

slim and fat ps2 both do this, and both do it on gbs-82xx to vga monitor and direct input to a samsung tv set
you can see the transition from color data to black at the end of the line so its defiantly in the signal coming out of the ps2
whereas the ps1 rgb output is fine, i can only conclude the ps2 clips a few pixels (~5-6) from the end of the scan lines for some reason

to be fair star ocean second story is the only game ive found with this issue so far out of maybe a dozen, but there could be others
I would still pick a ps2 if i could only have one or the other and the output is good with this exception

I'm tired of moving my PS2 to a different display whenever I want to play PS1 games anyway, but I'm curious if there are other games that do this. A small handful of games don't work on PS2 anyway, so that's another reason to just stick with the PS1.

[FBX]

Looking at PS1 games on the PS2 using zoom functions on the Framemeister, I found that the top line is 'smashed' into the 2nd from the top line. The best way to see this is to take Suikoden and then use the "V_POS" setting of 32 and lower it to 31 or 30. You'll see the top line sort of 'flickers' over the 2nd from the top. Other than that, I don't see any data missing from the sides or corners.

I'd also like to point out that PS2 480p as well as Gamecube 480p look perfectly fine to me on the Framemeister. I jumped back and forth between 480i and p, and I honestly thought they looked better than interlaced mode.

Lastly, "MOVIE" does NOT introduce noise or low pass filtering. It is the ONLY deinterlace mode that doesn't. "NATURAL" adds in noise via saturation, which I was able to pick up on a color band test with the SNES. So if you need to use one of the deinterlace modes, make sure it's "MOVIE". Use "PICTURE" for all progressive signals.

[Xan]

I think the complaint was that the Framemeister still adds 1.5 (or so) frames of lag, while the 480p processing quality might not be visibly better than on a good TV. It also adds the noise issue, which isn't fixed in the latest firmware if I'm correct.

Also still images should look sharper with 480i compared to 480p, at least on Wii and possibly GC.

[bobrocks95]

I think the complaint was that the Framemeister still adds 1.5 (or so) frames of lag, while the 480p processing quality might not be visibly better than on a good TV. It also adds the noise issue, which isn't fixed in the latest firmware if I'm correct.

Also still images should look sharper with 480i compared to 480p, at least on Wii and possibly GC.

That was determined to be from the Wii's 480p blur filter, correct?

[Xan]

I think it's due to an inferior signal quality in 31 kHz.