Ibara port's graphics

elvis · Post by **elvis** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 6:00 am

SAM wrote:The use of the term "Hi-res" should be strictly followed, it should never be confused with interlaced / filtered graphic.

Otherwise it would lead to confusion since...
*SNIP*

Thank you SAM for applying common sense to this thread. Great post.

Metal Gear Okt · Post by **Metal Gear Okt** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 6:39 am

SAM wrote:
Metal Gear Okt wrote:Ok, let's say I've got my PS2 hooked up through component cables to a CRT HDTV. How shit is this going to look?
It would look GREAT.
That's the best way to hook this version up.
(Unless your HDTV did some procceding to upscan the singal internally.)

Excellent!

(i'm pretty sure it doesn't do any upscaling)

Post by **system11** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:37 am

SAM wrote: It would look GREAT.
That's the best way to hook this version up.

Actually using some form of RGB cable is better. My PS2 looks pinsharp with the RGB scart cable. Component is a less pure signal.

elvis · Post by **elvis** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:12 am

bloodflowers wrote:Actually using some form of RGB cable is better. My PS2 looks pinsharp with the RGB scart cable. Component is a less pure signal.

That depends greatly on the device doing the showing.

YUV->RGB calculations are supposedly lossless, but TVs with poor conversion circuitry will often look notably worse (as is the case with one of my TVs where even S-Video is a very visable quality jump over YUV, believe it or not).

Likewise on some namebrand plasma displays, SCART will look worse than component input due to the fact that manufacturers scrimp on electronic components on the SCART input as they expect most users to be looking at hi-def YUV input instead.

It's difficult to say across the board what sort of input is the best without also talking about the device doing the displaying to the eye. In the vast majority of circumstances I prefer RGB to an RGB capable device (monitor or SCART TV). But in rare circumstances YUV output can look superior, again depending more on the display device than the console or game.

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:42 am

Thank you SAM for applying common sense to this thread. Great post.

Except for the fact that he makes it look like Mushihime-sama and DOJ are displayed in the exact same manner, which they certainly are not (unless you're talking about DOJ yoko). Leaving out interlaced is probably worse than calling it "fake high/low res".

Bingo · Post by **Bingo** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:49 am

Probably not overly productive when everyone has their own definition of the terminology. Why not keep it simple? Ibara is a low res source, the port is not displayed as actual low res but upscaled and slightly filtered before it's sent out. Like Mushi, maybe a wee bit less filtered but don't quote me on that. I never understood the introduction of interlaced/non-interlaced (=progressive??) into the debate. Can't mean progressive output 'cause the people discussing aren't using that in either case (last time I checked neither ESP nor DOJ had progressive output). So is non-interlace a homonym for actual low res output? I know Dave insists on the distinction, and I don't doubt its practical relevance, but I can't shake the feeling that it's a misnomer.

Just look at the confusion when in practice it's really fucking simple: Ibara is not like ESP or DOJ, it looks like Mushi. Whatever you want to call either way of display. It's not that complex on the user end.

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:25 pm

True low res is 15khz non-interlaced (DOJ/ESPGaluda in tate)
Fake low res is 15khz interlaced (DOJ/ESPgaluda in yoko, Mushi or Ibara in either). It is indeed a low res signal, but it is not how the game was intentionally meant to be displayed.

Apparently there are different levels of crap attained. ESPGaluda and DOj actually don't look all that bad. Mushi looks pretty poor in TATE compared to the PCB, and REALLY shitty in yoko. I've not seen Ibara yet, but I assume it favors more Mushi. HOw much of this is filtering, and how much of it is what's being filtered is beyond me, but I would assume that the brighter something is, the worse it will turn out when filtered (menaing Mushi would probably be the worst here).

There's a link to a good article Recap wrote (in this thread I think) that explains the finer points.

icycalm · Post by **icycalm** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:14 pm

You know, I originally asked Recap to write that article for my site, but when I first read it, I didn't understand much. I still don't. When I asked him to clarify he linked a 15-page technical article on display technology and told me to read it.

I still haven't done that, but I plan to do that sooner or later. This shit needs to be explained to a wider gaming public in very very plain terms. People are actually paying shitloads of money to buy crappy PS2 collections of old games when they could have the original versions for pretty damn low prices. I realize that many would STILL buy the crappy collections even if they knew they were crappy, but I am also certain that some of them would choose to hunt down the original games.

On the other hand, that may not be a good thing for us because they would drive up the prices.

Post by **system11** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:42 pm

Well, I tried my Ibara today - there is some filtering, but it's nothing like as heavy as Mushi. It's not -quite- as clear as galuda. So there you go..

However, what I did notice is that the visibility in the game is astonishingly poor. Spinning light blue + white bullets against grey = bad bad news, for my eyes at least - especially as they move so fast. Couldn't see a fucking thing, died due to spending considerable time trying to focus on them. More time than it took for them to hit me. Purple bullets not a problem at all.

freddiebamboo · Post by **freddiebamboo** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:47 pm

bloodflowers wrote:Well, I tried my Ibara today - there is some filtering, but it's nothing like as heavy as Mushi. It's not -quite- as clear as galuda. So there you go..

Good to hear the graphics are not as bad as mushi, better than most expected then.

Still waiting for parcel force to get their arse in gear and deliver the damn thing...

Post by **Dave_K.** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:53 pm

GaijinPunch wrote:True low res is 15khz non-interlaced (DOJ/ESPGaluda in tate)
Fake low res is 15khz interlaced (DOJ/ESPgaluda in yoko, Mushi or Ibara in either). It is indeed a low res signal, but it is not how the game was intentionally meant to be displayed.

I think this is as close to correct as possible. I've never understood recap introducing this terminology of "filtered/scaled" or "fake low res", maybe he was trying to dumb it down for people, but the terminology is normally described as:

Standard Resolution = 15khz = "Lowres" (scan rate)
Medium Resolution = 24khz = "Medres" (scan rate)
High Resolution - 31khz = "Hires" (scan rate)

Non-Interlaced/Interlaced is describing how the picture is drawn in the above resolution-scanrate.

Interlaced = drawing twice the number of lines in one of the above resolutions, by interleaving fields.
Non-Interlaced = drawing the standard number of lines in the resolution above, with no interleaving/flickering.

The problem happens when people mix the terminology of Interlaced with Hires, in that the number of lines drawn may actually equal a non-interlaced highres image, but is done at 15khz lowres by interleaving fields (and looks unapealing on vertical displays).

The Filtered/Lowres terminology probably sprouted from describing how developers take a non-interlaced lowres image, and double the lines to remove any noticable scanlines in lowres (smoothing the picture out) making it sutiable for standard PS2 resolutions (which are mostly interlaced). Doubling lines from a source/game which was originally non-interlaced lowres does not look good. But taking a source that was non-interlaced hires (like Raiden III Taito-Type X) looks a little better since you are not doubleing, just interlacing the picture for display in Lowres scanrate.

Thus the other questionable terminology that recap introduced is as follows:
True Lowres = non-interlaced lowres.
Fake Lowres = interlaced lowres.

Post by **undamned** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:19 pm

Dave_K. wrote:The Filtered/Lowres terminology probably sprouted from describing how developers take a non-interlaced lowres image, and double the lines to remove any noticable scanlines in lowres (smoothing the picture out) making it sutiable for standard PS2 resolutions (which are mostly interlaced).

I use the term "filtered" as one would use a "filter" in an image editing program. Filters do an operation on the image. Most generally I think of filtering in terms of bluring the image so that people's eye's aren't offended by the "horrible blockies." I've grown quite fond of the blockies and have to vomit once in a while when exposed to blur filters

-ud

it290 · Post by **it290** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 6:06 pm

Well, filtering refers to how the interpolation is performed, so in a sense pixel doubling is a type of filtering, just one that leaves the picture relatively intact.

I can't say I agree with this scan rate = resolution terminology though. It might be useful in describing the resolution of the display device, but to me it's more useful to describe the resolution actually being output by the hardware that the game is running on. Hence, 480 lines rendered to the screen = hi res, whether it's being drawn on a 15khz interlaced display or 31khz non-interlaced. Whether the image is scaled up from an originally low resolution source or not makes no difference in terms of the display mode selected by the software. 'Fake low res' to me would only describe an image that is attempting to look like it's really low res, ie with the inclusion of software-generated scanlines. These semantic arguments get pretty silly anyway, but it seems to me that what we're talking about is whether the game is scaled up or not, so why don't we just say scaled/non-scaled?

elvis · Post by **elvis** » Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:22 pm

icycalm wrote:This shit needs to be explained to a wider gaming public in very very plain terms.

That is unforunately impossible to do. You need to understand how a monitor/tv works before you can understand why certain modes are better/worse than others.

This is the single best explanation I have EVER read explaining it:
http://easymamecab.mameworld.net/html/monitor1.htm

Yes, it's 13 pages long (11 pages of actual content). But this sort of stuff simply cannot be explained in a single paragraph. You're asking for a very complex and technical item to be dummed down to consumer-level thinking, and it just isn't going to happen. Like it or not, electronics and TVs are technical devices. If they were simple, the would have been invented 100 years earlier and you'd be making them in highschool science projects.

Seriously - if you want to understand modelines and interlaced vs non-interlaced, then read the link start to finish. If you still don't get it, give yourself a 24 hour break and read it again. Most non-electronics folks will grok it after 2 or 3 reads start to finish (yes really start to finish - don't skip bits or it won't make sense!!!).

GaijinPunch wrote:True low res is 15khz non-interlaced (DOJ/ESPGaluda in tate)
Fake low res is 15khz interlaced (DOJ/ESPgaluda in yoko, Mushi or Ibara in either). It is indeed a low res signal, but it is not how the game was intentionally meant to be displayed.

Well instead if "true low res" and "fake low res" can we please use three separate categories to define these games:

1) "Low res", "Medium res", or "High res" (ie: true final output)
2) "Interlaced" or "Non-Interlaced"
3) "Filtered" or "unfiltered"

So for instace, as far as I'm aware ESP Galuda offers:
Yoko - low res, interlaced
Tate/Tatehosei - low res, filtered (unsure of interlacing status)
Tate/Tate - low res, unfiltered, non-interlaced (with bad overscan on some TVs).

[edit]
Of course, the above gets shitty when people argue whether "low-res"/"hi-res" refers to the internal rendering or the final output. Perhaps instead I should say "15KHz interlaced" instead of "low-res interlaced" to avoid further confusion? But again, the "interlaced"/"non-interlaced" bit should make that clear for most, I hope.

icycalm · Post by **icycalm** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:07 am

elvis, that's the same article that Recap told me to read. It's bookmarked now and I will sit down and read it at some point. And I'll tell you what, after I've understood it I'll explain the main points perfectly clearly in the space of 2-3 easily understood paragraphs.

As long as I don't understand it, my explanations will be fuzzy--just like the thoughts in my head. Once I've understood it, I will be able to explain it to a 9 year-old if I have to. Even the most complex subjexts (take quantum mechanics, or nuclear fusion or plasma physics) can be explained in a few words by those who grasp them completely.

cigsthecat · Post by **cigsthecat** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:57 am

We got the censored crotch on PS2. I'm dying inside.

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 4:05 am

Well instead if "true low res" and "fake low res" can we please use three separate categories to define these games:

You can say whatever you want, but not everyone's going to abide. I wish people would quit using that 733t horsehit on the internet, but, I'm not ruler of the world yet (working on it).

Very few people are going to read 13 pages of text to explain something that can be done in 2-3. You don't have to know the ins and outs of resolutions to understand issue at hand. I think the "fake" terms were introduced b/c in most cases, it's not the original low res, and it might be easier for some to understand.

ESPGaluda:
Tate/Tate - low res, unfiltered, non-interlaced (with bad overscan on some TVs).

Where'd you hear/see that?

We got the censored crotch on PS2. I'm dying inside.

Who?

FMK · Post by **FMK** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 4:31 am

Arcade:

PS2:

zakk · Post by **zakk** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:19 am

GaijinPunch wrote:
ESPGaluda:
Tate/Tate - low res, unfiltered, non-interlaced (with bad overscan on some TVs).
Where'd you hear/see that?

I assume you mean the overscan part; it's obvious on many TVs. If you put it in Tate (not Tate Hosei), you'll lose nearly all the score and all the guard barrier meter. I have a component->DV bridge that freaks the fuck out if you put Galuda in Tate mode because of this.

If you mean the other part, huh? It's been well established since that port came out that Arika went though the effort to have a mode with the original arcade resolution intact.

teetu · Post by **teetu** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:52 am

if you want to promote the use of a common naming scheme, which would be nice to have around here, you should use "standard resolution" instead of "low resolution"

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:05 am

]I assume you mean the overscan part; it's obvious on many TVs.

Yeah, I've got that on mine, but it's the original resolution of the game, no? More Cave's fault than Arikas (if anyones). Same problem w/ ESPGaluda II, FYI. Ketsui, which runs on the same hardware as ESPGaluda, does not have this issue. In fact, there's a healthy sized black bar at the top of the screen.

elvis · Post by **elvis** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:28 am

icycalm wrote:elvis, that's the same article that Recap told me to read. It's bookmarked now and I will sit down and read it at some point. And I'll tell you what, after I've understood it I'll explain the main points perfectly clearly in the space of 2-3 easily understood paragraphs.

If you are able to do so, then I strongly suggest the powers that be put it in the Hardware forum and sticky it. It would be a great service to the whole community.

I have chronic logorrhea, and can't ever explain these things quickly.

GaijinPunch wrote:
ESPGaluda:
Tate/Tate - low res, unfiltered, non-interlaced (with bad overscan on some TVs).
Where'd you hear/see that?

That's how it appears to my naked eye on my 26" Kortek RGB monitor. But that's not authoritive, and I have been known to be wrong.

zakk · Post by **zakk** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 8:01 am

GaijinPunch wrote:
]I assume you mean the overscan part; it's obvious on many TVs.
Yeah, I've got that on mine, but it's the original resolution of the game, no? More Cave's fault than Arikas (if anyones). Same problem w/ ESPGaluda II, FYI. Ketsui, which runs on the same hardware as ESPGaluda, does not have this issue. In fact, there's a healthy sized black bar at the top of the screen.

Yeah, it's not Arika's fault. I think the point is more that if you don't have a display device that can adjust the horizontal size of the image, you have to live with having some part of the display cut off. This is probably what leads to this whole scaling/filtering etc thing. They go 'well crap, native resolution won't fit on anyone's TV, we need to scale it!' (amongst many reasons).

I'd still like to find out the resolution of the Cave SH3 hardware. I think there was a nice match with the ketsui/galuda/etc hardware resolution and one of the resolutions the PS2 can do. Which probably made things easier for Arika. If the SH3 resolution isn't as 'easy' to fit in original size, yet another thing to push them towards what we're getting.

Post by **Dave_K.** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 8:28 am

zakk wrote: I'd still like to find out the resolution of the Cave SH3 hardware. I think there was a nice match with the ketsui/galuda/etc hardware resolution and one of the resolutions the PS2 can do. Which probably made things easier for Arika. If the SH3 resolution isn't as 'easy' to fit in original size, yet another thing to push them towards what we're getting.

You may be on to something here Zakk. I just got the Ibara PCB today, and put it on a switcher with Ketsui PCB. When I center the Ibara picture on the monitor, to all the edges, and switch back over to Ketsui, Ketsui is considerably smaller (large borders on all sides).

I will do a side by side comparison with the PS2 port on the same monitor soon.

Ord · Post by **Ord** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:08 am

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but K.L.O.V. lists Mushihimesamma as medium resoulution. That uses the same board as Ibara and Espgaluda II doesn't it?

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:17 am

That's how it appears to my naked eye on my 26" Kortek RGB monitor. But that's not authoritive, and I have been known to be wrong.

I guess I was misleading... it's in the original port, so didn't find it a shortcoming of the port. A bonus, if anything.

Pingu · Post by **Pingu** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:45 am

elvis wrote:Likewise on some namebrand plasma displays, SCART will look worse than component input due to the fact that manufacturers scrimp on electronic components on the SCART input as they expect most users to be looking at hi-def YUV input instead.

Not to be a prick but while we're at it at not mixing up different signals, resolutions and filters I want to point out that SCART is NOTHING but a socket, through a SCART PLUG you can get RGB, s-video or composite. Saying you got a SCART TV is like saying, "duh, I got a tv with phono input". And phono input can be just about everything as well. Usualy you only have RGB input in one of the SCART sockets on a TV, strangely enough.

Edit, spelling.

99pence · Post by **99pence** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:18 am

Pingu wrote:
elvis wrote:Likewise on some namebrand plasma displays, SCART will look worse than component input due to the fact that manufacturers scrimp on electronic components on the SCART input as they expect most users to be looking at hi-def YUV input instead.
Not to be a prick but while we're at it at not mixing up different signals, resolutions and filters I want to point out that SCART is NOTHING but a socket, through a SCART PLUG you can get RGB, s-video or composite. Saying you got a SCART TV is like saying, "duh, I got a tv with phono imput". And phono imput can be just about everything as well. Usualy you only have RGB input in one of the SCART sockets on a TV, strangely enough.

Saying you've got a SCART TV is like saying you've got a TV with a SCART socket. Not all TV's have SCART sockets. Some TVs are more equal than others.

elvis · Post by **elvis** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:59 pm

Pingu wrote:Not to be a prick but while we're at it at not mixing up different signals, resolutions and filters I want to point out that SCART is NOTHING but a socket, through a SCART PLUG you can get RGB, s-video or composite. Saying you got a SCART TV is like saying, "duh, I got a tv with phono input". And phono input can be just about everything as well. Usualy you only have RGB input in one of the SCART sockets on a TV, strangely enough.

Edit, spelling.

You are most certainly correct. I did mean RGB/SCART in my post eariler, and should have said as much.

SAM · Post by **SAM** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:02 pm

zakk wrote:I assume you mean the overscan part; it's obvious on many TVs. If you put it in Tate (not Tate Hosei), you'll lose nearly all the score and all the guard barrier meter. I have a component->DV bridge that freaks the fuck out if you put Galuda in Tate mode because of this.

I used hate overscan output in the past too. Games like PS/Saturn DP, PS/Saturn DDP, Saturn Batsugun, PS R-Type, PS/Satun In the Hunt, etc. all are like this.

But once I connect these games on to a RGB monitor, the whole screen shown on the screen.

The same aspact ratio as the acrade, clean and sharp grahic. Wow, it's heaven. Now I like it so much that I actually wish the game got overscan output.