OSSC (DIY video digitizer & scandoubler)

[cleeg]

Sussed out the issue, it was either the GSCARTSw, the component to SCART adapter or both. I went straight into the OSSC's component connections and all looks A1. Shame that adapter was so pricey...

[BuckoA51]

An entirely passive adapter like that shouldn't have any problems.

[cleeg]

Yeah, bit of a bugger that. I'll take the GSCART out of the chain at some point perhaps...

[headlesshobbs]

Is it normal to see the OSSC going for this much?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/OSSC-Open-Sourc ... 7675.l2557

[cleeg]

Looks a bit steep.

[ZellSF]

Sorry to be impatient, but any update for 480p sometimes being detected as 960i on component YUV for PlayStation 2? Or mask brightness?

[Guspaz]

Either a scalper, or somebody without a good sense of value. That's nearly double the price of a new OSSC, and while shipping may be a bit less, that's not enough to make up the gulf.

[Gunstar]

The PSU also matters for 5x stability, right ?

Oh, this is interesting, stability as in it reduces jitter/trembling in x5?

I had some flickering and trembling (little bit at 4x and a lot at 5x) and well since then I've found that it was indeed because of a weak PSU delivering slightly under 5V.

(all gone now, using a proper psu)

Thanks for the info, I see some minor trembling at 5x but I don't really use that mode. I'll check to see if I am getting 5v with a multimeter.

[CobraKing]

^^
Just curious but is the OSSC PSU or the console PSU that was problematic?

[headlesshobbs]

Either a scalper, or somebody without a good sense of value. That's nearly double the price of a new OSSC, and while shipping may be a bit less, that's not enough to make up the gulf.

I know.

I wish that I could have caught this one sooner so that I could report it in as a scam, but there really isn't anything that can be done by now. It really is a common side effect of things when a product/project goes to market and there's always someone who's willing to pull a stunt like this. Makes me wish that Ebay's policy could be a bit more lenient so that I could have the buyer still contacted about this to maybe see if he's willing to press charges?

But if there's still a way to leave a mark on this seller's profile, I guess we should make it a responsibility to do that instead of letting him getting away with it completely?

[Guspaz]

There's nothing illegal about it, and it's not in violation of eBay policies. I'm not sure what you would report him for. It sucks, and it's a dick move, but he's allowed to do it. It's not a scam: a product was offered at a certain price, and somebody was willing to pay that price for it. Even if the buyer was unaware of the retail price, they couldn't press charges since no crime has occured. The lack of near-term availability of the OSSC makes that possible, if somebody is willing to pay more to get a product immediately instead of waiting.

[Jademalo]

Eh, I paid nearly that for the audio mod version from VGP. It's not that crazy a price, I've seen people pay a lot more to get things quickly.

[RGB0b]

So today I connected this cheap scaler again to compare against the XRGB-mini as I don't have anything that handles 480p 2D games quite how I want them to be handled.

When comparing I noticed something weird though. This cheap scaler looked pretty good. I remember it looking pretty crap. Gone is the artificial sharpening, noise reduction and oversaturated colors. And it handles 480i now! Lag and 240p-480i transitions are still weaknesses though. Haven't tested enough to see if it still drops frames.

I quickly figured out that this scaler seems to have wildly different processing depending on if the OSSC is set to DVI or HDMI TX mode. DVI TX mode is what you want with this scaler.

Decided to capture two samples:
240pX3
240pX4
The scaler does stretch all inputs to 16:9. For X3 I used the OSSC's 4:3 mode, for X4 I resized it in Irfanview using hermite filtering. I think most TVs should do an equally good job at it.

I finally had time to do some more testing with mine and as far as I could tell, DVI or HDMI didn't seem to make any difference, other then sound wasn't passed through in DVI mode. Also, here's the lag test results, with some control tests in there, using my 1080p plasma:

Direct 240p component video (HDRetrovision cables) = just under two frames of lag.

OSSC 2x direct into the TV = About 1.5 frames of lag (weird that it was always a hair less then component video)

OSSC 3x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 720p = Just over three frames of lag; About 2 frames more then direct through the OSSC.

OSSC 4x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 1080p = Same as above.

OSSC 5x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 1080p = "Mode not supported"

Console directly into the SCART to HDMI = About 6 frames of lag. Seriously.

So, all in all, going through the cheap scaler via HDMI isn't too terrible. Personally, I'd sacrifice the sharpness of 3x & 4x for the lag, but many people aren't as sensitive to lag as I am. I guess having all those extra wires running through everything is a bit of a pain too, but once again, people with different setups might not care about that.

Doing these tests certainly reaffirmed my disdain for those generic SCART to HDMI boxes!!! Not only is the lag bad, they're REALLY ugly upscalers! I guess that's due to them processing 240p as 480i...but regardless of the reason, it made me appreciate the OSSC even more!

[CobraKing]

Either a scalper, or somebody without a good sense of value. That's nearly double the price of a new OSSC, and while shipping may be a bit less, that's not enough to make up the gulf.

I know.

I wish that I could have caught this one sooner so that I could report it in as a scam, but there really isn't anything that can be done by now. It really is a common side effect of things when a product/project goes to market and there's always someone who's willing to pull a stunt like this. Makes me wish that Ebay's policy could be a bit more lenient so that I could have the buyer still contacted about this to maybe see if he's willing to press charges?

But if there's still a way to leave a mark on this seller's profile, I guess we should make it a responsibility to do that instead of letting him getting away with it completely?

How is this a scam? The seller appears to be a kid collecting (and selling) both sneakers and retro/inline video games. FWIW, if you convert the OSSC's GBP price to USD and add in both eBay & PayPal fees, I think the kid either broke even or made about $20 in profit.

[headlesshobbs]

There's nothing illegal about it, and it's not in violation of eBay policies. I'm not sure what you would report him for. It sucks, and it's a dick move, but he's allowed to do it. It's not a scam: a product was offered at a certain price, and somebody was willing to pay that price for it. Even if the buyer was unaware of the retail price, they couldn't press charges since no crime has occured. The lack of near-term availability of the OSSC makes that possible, if somebody is willing to pay more to get a product immediately instead of waiting.

Eh, I paid nearly that for the audio mod version from VGP. It's not that crazy a price, I've seen people pay a lot more to get things quickly.

That's a shame, even without the audio mod and even when he makes mention of the site where you can actually get this thing directly. I guess if people want to pay more to get theirs quickly, in spite of it being 'used' already...

How is this a scam? The seller appears to be a kid collecting (and selling) both sneakers and retro/inline video games. FWIW, if you convert the OSSC's GBP price to USD and add in both eBay & PayPal fees, I think the kid either broke even or made about $20 in profit.

I guess I might have missed something in the conversion rate, but unless I'm mistaken, I remember paying like $208 or something when I made my order (this with the rate conversion to USD)

Anyway, I'm going to quit being disruptive and get back on topic.

[BuckoA51]

Audio mod is kinda expensive because I have to pay for it to be couriered down to my subcontractor and then back again to be shipped out (since I'd rather handle shipping myself, than expect him to label 100s of boxes etc). It's why I recommend getting a local modder to do it if possible. 1.6 should be considerably cheaper since this won't need to happen.

[Jademalo]

Audio mod is kinda expensive because I have to pay for it to be couriered down to my subcontractor and then back again to be shipped out (since I'd rather handle shipping myself, than expect him to label 100s of boxes etc). It's why I recommend getting a local modder to do it if possible. 1.6 should be considerably cheaper since this won't need to happen.

I figured it was something like that, that's why I was more than happy to pay for it though. Don't know any local modders, and I figure I'd just have to post it there and back to one myself anyway. Add in the labour and it's six and two threes.

I am kinda bummed the revision came out right after I ordered mine, especially since it's not an irrelevant amount of money. But ho hum, at the end of the day, someone has to be last before the revision, lol. At least the difference in the two versions is really only price, and functionality doesn't really factor into it, at least not in a major way anyway.

I'm guessing the latest batch is going to be sent any day now? I'm super excited!

[headlesshobbs]

You know I'm beginning to wonder since I asked about the VGA quality being off awhile back, is there some possibility the newer batches can have it properly filtered? I know Adam Koralik had an issue with it in his review and I think that's the next important step to look into. In fact, I'd like to know if filtering can even be modded onto the current boards? (Like how to do it, actually...)

[BuckoA51]

Sources like the Dreamcast shouldn't require a low pass filter, I've no idea why Adam had problems, I wrote to him but he seemed unwilling to actually troubleshoot the issue.

[marqs]

Sorry to be impatient, but any update for 480p sometimes being detected as 960i on component YUV for PlayStation 2? Or mask brightness?

Yeah, those are on top the todo list. I'll need to tweak the firmware anyway in a couple weeks (when v1.6 prototypes arrive) so they could be fixed simultaneously.

You know I'm beginning to wonder since I asked about the VGA quality being off awhile back, is there some possibility the newer batches can have it properly filtered? I know Adam Korvic had an issue with it in his review and I think that's the next important step to look into. In fact, I'd like to know if filtering can even be modded onto the current boards? (Like how to do it, actually...)

There's no changes related to VGA (except dedicated audio input) on v1.6 board, so it's still recommended to connect noisy sources to scart/component inputs. It'd need a dedicated LPF IC (such as THS7327) to filter out noise.

Sources like the Dreamcast shouldn't require a low pass filter, I've no idea why Adam had problems, I wrote to him but he seemed unwilling to actually troubleshoot the issue.

My DC+Kuro combo has a bit of noise (especially at 15kHz), but after setting correct sampling rate and optimal phase, it's barely noticeable.

[orange808]

So today I connected this cheap scaler again to compare against the XRGB-mini as I don't have anything that handles 480p 2D games quite how I want them to be handled.

When comparing I noticed something weird though. This cheap scaler looked pretty good. I remember it looking pretty crap. Gone is the artificial sharpening, noise reduction and oversaturated colors. And it handles 480i now! Lag and 240p-480i transitions are still weaknesses though. Haven't tested enough to see if it still drops frames.

I quickly figured out that this scaler seems to have wildly different processing depending on if the OSSC is set to DVI or HDMI TX mode. DVI TX mode is what you want with this scaler.

Decided to capture two samples:
240pX3
240pX4
The scaler does stretch all inputs to 16:9. For X3 I used the OSSC's 4:3 mode, for X4 I resized it in Irfanview using hermite filtering. I think most TVs should do an equally good job at it.

I finally had time to do some more testing with mine and as far as I could tell, DVI or HDMI didn't seem to make any difference, other then sound wasn't passed through in DVI mode. Also, here's the lag test results, with some control tests in there, using my 1080p plasma:

Direct 240p component video (HDRetrovision cables) = just under two frames of lag.

OSSC 2x direct into the TV = About 1.5 frames of lag (weird that it was always a hair less then component video)

OSSC 3x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 720p = Just over three frames of lag; About 2 frames more then direct through the OSSC.

OSSC 4x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 1080p = Same as above.

OSSC 5x through the SCART to HDMI scaler in 1080p = "Mode not supported"

Console directly into the SCART to HDMI = About 6 frames of lag. Seriously.

So, all in all, going through the cheap scaler via HDMI isn't too terrible. Personally, I'd sacrifice the sharpness of 3x & 4x for the lag, but many people aren't as sensitive to lag as I am. I guess having all those extra wires running through everything is a bit of a pain too, but once again, people with different setups might not care about that.

Doing these tests certainly reaffirmed my disdain for those generic SCART to HDMI boxes!!! Not only is the lag bad, they're REALLY ugly upscalers! I guess that's due to them processing 240p as 480i...but regardless of the reason, it made me appreciate the OSSC even more!

On the subject of lag, I have seen some folks in the community (still) claiming that: scaling lower resolutions (480p or 720p, etc.) on new displays will add significant lag. The Leo Bodnar devices have busted that myth. We really shouldn't be spreading it, anymore.

I still see questions out here on the internets about it. People ask if using different output modes from the OSSC will reduce lag. In reality, the display is only adding about a decile of a millisecond (at the most) to handle scaling 480p or 720p.

I was watching a video review at MLIG and there was a big warning about scaling 720p adding lag--and it rubbed me the wrong way. That's rubbish.

To tie this back to the OSSC: there's no real lag advantage to the different output modes of the OSSC. It's just image quality. Slow displays are always slow and fast displays are always fast.

Sorry for the rant, but this myth just won't die.

[bobrocks95]

On the subject of lag, I have seen some folks in the community (still) claiming that: scaling lower resolutions (480p or 720p, etc.) on new displays will add significant lag. The Leo Bodnar devices have busted that myth. We really shouldn't be spreading it, anymore.

I still see questions out here on the internets about it. People ask if using different output modes from the OSSC will reduce lag. In reality, the display is only adding about a decile of a millisecond (at the most) to handle scaling 480p or 720p.

I was watching a video review at MLIG and there was a big warning about scaling 720p adding lag--and it rubbed me the wrong way. That's rubbish.

To tie this back to the OSSC: there's no real lag advantage to the different output modes of the OSSC. It's just image quality. Slow displays are always slow and fast displays are always fast.

Sorry for the rant, but this myth just won't die.

The myth won't die because we've come full circle and now have some 4K TVs that are indeed adding lag when scaling low-res sources.

[orange808]

On the subject of lag, I have seen some folks in the community (still) claiming that: scaling lower resolutions (480p or 720p, etc.) on new displays will add significant lag. The Leo Bodnar devices have busted that myth. We really shouldn't be spreading it, anymore.

I still see questions out here on the internets about it. People ask if using different output modes from the OSSC will reduce lag. In reality, the display is only adding about a decile of a millisecond (at the most) to handle scaling 480p or 720p.

I was watching a video review at MLIG and there was a big warning about scaling 720p adding lag--and it rubbed me the wrong way. That's rubbish.

To tie this back to the OSSC: there's no real lag advantage to the different output modes of the OSSC. It's just image quality. Slow displays are always slow and fast displays are always fast.

Sorry for the rant, but this myth just won't die.

The myth won't die because we've come full circle and now have some 4K TVs that are indeed adding lag when scaling low-res sources.

I would be fascinated to read about that.

All I have seen to date is 4k displays that--actually--benefit from (go faster) at lower resolutions. Given that information is being repeated in a predictable way, it makes sense that a proper algorithm would save time by not performing redundant processing; so, it only shocked me for a moment.

But, I am interested if there are new displays that struggle with scaling.

[headlesshobbs]

My DC+Kuro combo has a bit of noise (especially at 15kHz), but after setting correct sampling rate and optimal phase, it's barely noticeable.

Ok just to keep me on the right path, under which setting is this under? I have a pretty decent VGA cable as it is, so I thought I'd do another check into this when I get time later.

The myth won't die because we've come full circle and now have some 4K TVs that are indeed adding lag when scaling low-res sources.

In my opinion, the myth still stands just because people aren't smart enough to research this on sites like DisplayLag and such. Maybe them MLIG boys should do a lookup to what their panel is and get a figure estimate?

[Xyga]

On the subject of lag, I have seen some folks in the community (still) claiming that: scaling lower resolutions (480p or 720p, etc.) on new displays will add significant lag. The Leo Bodnar devices have busted that myth. We really shouldn't be spreading it, anymore.

I still see questions out here on the internets about it. People ask if using different output modes from the OSSC will reduce lag. In reality, the display is only adding about a decile of a millisecond (at the most) to handle scaling 480p or 720p.

I was watching a video review at MLIG and there was a big warning about scaling 720p adding lag--and it rubbed me the wrong way. That's rubbish.

To tie this back to the OSSC: there's no real lag advantage to the different output modes of the OSSC. It's just image quality. Slow displays are always slow and fast displays are always fast.

Sorry for the rant, but this myth just won't die.

The myth won't die because we've come full circle and now have some 4K TVs that are indeed adding lag when scaling low-res sources.

I would be fascinated to read about that.

All I have seen to date is 4k displays that--actually--benefit from (go faster) at lower resolutions. Given that information is being repeated in a predictable way, it makes sense that a proper algorithm would save time by not performing redundant processing; so, it only shocked me for a moment.

But, I am interested if there are new displays that struggle with scaling.

There's no mystery, it still all depends on the processing, not the scaling. If the manufacturer adds a layer of sluggish processing to the scaling of lower resolutions of course there'll be more lag. The Sony A1 seems to do just that, while the LG C7 shows consistent lag.

It seems the only cases in scaling where additional lag is inevitable are when something 'unnatural' is forced; 16:9 letterboxed in 16:10, picture rotation, that sort of stuff requires to buffer at least one frame.

EDIT: actually I think even without processing added on purpose it is possible to mess up things and shoot the lag up in some modes, but that happens because the designers suck or didn't give a single fuck about it.

[bobrocks95]

I would be fascinated to read about that.

All I have seen to date is 4k displays that--actually--benefit from (go faster) at lower resolutions. Given that information is being repeated in a predictable way, it makes sense that a proper algorithm would save time by not performing redundant processing; so, it only shocked me for a moment.

But, I am interested if there are new displays that struggle with scaling.

Looking at rtings' database (http://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/inputs/input-lag) shows that results are all over the place.

Sets that are slower with 1080p sources (compared to 4K):

• LG UH7700
  Vizio E Series
  Sony Z9D
  Sony X930E

Sets that are faster with 1080p sources:

• Vizio P Series
  Vizio M Series
  LG B6
  Sony X900E/C
  Sony X850D

I don't think manufacturers have any clue what they're doing in regards to lag lol. Yet most all companies nail it with PC monitors right? Do their PC display teams and their TV teams not say a word to each other?

[paulb_nl]

You know I'm beginning to wonder since I asked about the VGA quality being off awhile back

The VGA quality being off? "This thing, its amazing" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST3B83kvtM4

[orange808]

There's no mystery, it still all depends on the processing, not the scaling. If the manufacturer adds a layer of sluggish processing to the scaling of lower resolutions of course there'll be more lag. The Sony A1 seems to do just that, while the LG C7 shows consistent lag.

It seems the only cases in scaling where additional lag is inevitable are when something 'unnatural' is forced; 16:9 letterboxed in 16:10, picture rotation, that sort of stuff requires to buffer at least one frame.

EDIT: actually I think even without processing added on purpose it is possible to mess up things and shoot the lag up in some modes, but that happens because the designers suck or didn't give a single fuck about it.

Hi Xyga,

Thanks for the response.

Looking for some solid links if you can give us some leads, because I still don't buy that lower resolutuons are going to get special features. We're discussing developing a fairly complicated custom processing chain with full processing versus latency options.

Is that a thing with cheap OEM equipment? I don't know. It could be, but would manufacturers really care enough to engineer that? Sony and Samsung seem like the only possible candidates to me--and that even seems unlikely right now.

So far, all I see is a game mode that bypasses everything at all output resolutions. That's quick and dirty--and that's precisely what we would expect.

I only know of one external video processor that offers real full trade off choices for processing versus latency--and it's an expensive one.

DVDO's iScan Micro can't cost more than $20 usd to manufacture. The software/firmware is the only thing holding it back. That kind of performance is well within OEM budgets.

In most cases, I expect manufacturers to control costs and spend a minimal amount of time--versus developing a full custom scaling solution. Most of these sets are using prefab Chinese manufactured solutions and adding minor tweaks, right?

A full custom video chain that adds and subtracts features and full frames of lag for different resolitions? That's alot of work.

[orange808]

I would be fascinated to read about that.

All I have seen to date is 4k displays that--actually--benefit from (go faster) at lower resolutions. Given that information is being repeated in a predictable way, it makes sense that a proper algorithm would save time by not performing redundant processing; so, it only shocked me for a moment.

But, I am interested if there are new displays that struggle with scaling.

Looking at rtings' database (http://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/inputs/input-lag) shows that results are all over the place.

Sets that are slower with 1080p sources (compared to 4K):

• LG UH7700
  Vizio E Series
  Sony Z9D
  Sony X930E

Sets that are faster with 1080p sources:

• Vizio P Series
  Vizio M Series
  LG B6
  Sony X900E/C
  Sony X850D

I don't think manufacturers have any clue what they're doing in regards to lag lol. Yet most all companies nail it with PC monitors right? Do their PC display teams and their TV teams not say a word to each other?

At the most, one millisecond. Usually a fraction.

My OP on the subject said no significant lag difference.

Ok. It's more than a decile of a millisecond on a few of them. Then again, the ones I saw with that much gap had almost two frames. Slow display gonna be slow.

Even a full millisecond isn't going to be significant. I could lock you in a room with two tv's for a week and ask you to find the one millisecond slower display. You would be guessing.

This isn't a thing. It's about image quality, the lag difference is negligible. Slow displays are always slow and the fast ones are always fast.

[Xyga]

I don't follow you, what is the topic exactly ? If you want to know if scaling adds lag then the answer is still no in most cases we are dealing with.
If you want to know if TVs are designed with different processing chains and algorithms for different signals and inputs, then yes, all that can be shoved into a single set and today it is more of a mess than ever.
They're basically custom computers with an OS running various programs for many different situations.
Scaling in itself isn't what adds lag, but when it comes to how the whole 'studio'* was arranged by its designers; there are no set rules that everyones knows of like that of the PC market. For instance we're all used to our GPUs, we know how they work and what the settings do, but with TVs it's a black hole.
So anything can happen, like lazily using a process/path where a buffer is added for a signal that doesn't need it, why not if it saves the designers some hassle? they can tidy shit up and fix the lag later with an update like LG did a few times already, if someone actually cares to mail some memos.
Don't try to find much more sense in this when there isn't really much if any, just the fact that pretty much all PC monitors can be almost completely lagless whatever their resolution and what other they scale, is proof enough that lag happens where it shouldn't because of bad design or carelessness.

(*I like to call the built-in I/O-scaling-processing system of TVs 'studio' now, because unlike purely video dedicated processors they're basically rooms to shove every idea, trendy shit, new features, fixes and whatever into new sets every 6 or 12 months)