Do all Dreamcast VGA adaptors give a dull image?

[Mikey]

No matter what monitor I use at whatever brighness and contrast, the DC always gives a dull image in VGA. The reds in the Third Strike menus, for example, look more brown.

Can anyone tell me if this is always the case, or have I been using a bad VGA adaptor these 9 years or so?

[Jack_from_BYOAC]

I always have similar issue when I connect my PS2 and PS3 to one of my monitors via a RGB cable. It isn't there over the S-video input, or when I connect it to a different monitor.

I do get good reds, but the colors just don't pop like they do on the S-video input.

At this point I'm just putting it down to old age, and that the color temperature of my big mitsubishi is quite warm.

What kind of monitors have you connected it to?

[neorichieb1971]

Sony are dark on the RGB, there isn't enough luminance, at least thats my experience on Trinitrons.

Dreamcast is a really really bright console, if that is dull I would put it down to the size of the screen. I noticed on my 40" its a bit duller in VGA mode. The smaller the screen the more it gets brighter.

[Mikey]

I've used several CRT VGA monitors - Gateway, Digital, Fujitsu-Siemens, and now a Dell m991, and again it's dull on VGA, whereas it's bursting with colour on SCART with any CRT TV, big or small. That's why I suspect it's a bad VGA adaptor.

[antron]

what brand is it? I know that all should be fine, as the DC outputs VGA, but I've seen many complaints with various ones.

[Mikey]

Electronics Boutique.

[undamned]

I use the one available on RacketBoy on my Dell 17" LCD and it looks excellent. May just be a crappily designed unit?
-ud

[Specineff]

EB? I get the feeling it's not an actual DC VGA box/cord. Could it be one of those S-Video or Composite-to-VGA adapters?

Got a pic or link?

[Mikey]

It's giving a VGA image alright. It's a clear image, just a dull one.

http://www.box.net/shared/6vq2ihl6sc

[antron]

It's giving a VGA image alright. It's a clear image, just a dull one.

http://www.box.net/shared/6vq2ihl6sc

looks like it has composite too, is there a switch on it?

[evil_ash_xero]

I just bought a NAKI one, and the picture is super clear via VGA.

[Mikey]

There is a switch on it, and it's set to PC, not TV.

[neorichieb1971]

Have you tried different color settings on the monitor?

Most monitors have a color setting for 6300k and 9700k or something like that. You might find its more colorful or brighter using a different setting to the current one.

A lower resolution monitor closer to 640x480 is going to give a better image than a super hi resolution one. Since it has to scale everything giving a washed out look.

[Mikey]

I'll play with the monitor's settings, but I've used it with 15, 17, and 19 inch monitors and the colours were always dull. Even in 2001, on a 15 inch monitor, Metropolis Street Racer looked dark (and it wasn't just the Tokyo permanent night bug), while it was bright on a 14 inch TV through SCART. The first time I tried Soul Calibur I thought the picture looked sharp, but the colours looked wrong.

[neorichieb1971]

I'm pretty sure the symptoms you are talking about can be somewhat rectified with the color setting for 6300k and 9700k (9700k gives more vibrant colors).

The problem is that 640-480 is the lowest VGA resolution setting and it looks washed out.

TV's are set to default settings.

[Jack_from_BYOAC]

I'll respectfully disagree and say the colors set to 6500k look more natural and vibrant to me than one set to 9300 or thereabouts.

However, it is highly, highly down to your preference. I believe most modern games must be designed for higher color temperatures, so this is probably a good solution for the OP. But if you want to play classic games then I would recommend 6500k. Most of the old arcade monitors probably ran at a color temperature close to that. Whenever I play 1980's era games in 6500k they just feel more "real".

Again, highly, highly down to individual preference.

One other thing to keep in mind is that PC monitors do not put out as much light as a TV does. They are designed for desktop use and to be easy on the eyes over a long period of time in a brightly lit room. TV's are designed for viewing from a distance and television signals are more amplifed than VGA ones.

I have used a 19" PC monitor and a 19" TV at the exact same resolutions and refresh rates with the exact same images, and the TV was always more vibrant. I have even used a studio monitor that supports both 480i S-video and 480p VGA and the S-video signal was worlds brighter. However, I do not think it was brighter in a good way. At first it looks better, but really I think it is just overamplying the image, and you lose some detail in the contrast. After getting used to the VGA signal it now looks perfect and natural to me, and is much easier on the eyes over a long period of time.

If you ever run your monitor through a professional calibration program you will often find that you need to reduce your contrast and brightness to get the most out of your monitor. At first it will be off-putting, but after a week you won't want to go back.

I don't know how much of this is relevant to the OP, but I think it might be helpful for posterity on the forum.

[Mikey]

It was set to 9300.

[Mikey]

Well I plugged the VGA into a 17 inch monitor, and it is a bit brighter, as neorichieb1971 suggested it might be. It's still far from bright, though. I wouldn't rule out resistance in the VGA adaptor.

Also, I'm getting used to 6500k, Jack. I like the way it looks.

[Mikey]

I've solved this for one CRT monitor, which has a 0.7V/1.0V switch in the on-screen adjustments. It was set at 1.0V, and changing that to 0.7V fixed the image, and the whiteness level is not correct.

I don't know why other seem to expect 1.0V from the Dreamcast. Maybe those that I found dull also had a manual 0.7V/1.0V switch.