Atari Emulation of CRT Effects On LCDs 226
An anonymous reader writes "A group at Georgia Institute of Technology has developed a fun little open source program to emulate the CRT effects to make old Atari games look like they originally did when played on modern LCD's and digital displays. Things like color bleed, ghosting, noise, etc. are reproduced to give a more realistic appearance."
What's next? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
xscreensaver's Apple ][? (Score:5, Interesting)
What about the Apple ][ screensaver?
http://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/screenshots/ [jwz.org]
I think it did something very similar.
(hey, first post!)
It's been done before (Score:5, Informative)
One of the most widely used Blargg's NTSC libraries. Many console emulators make use of them. This new one just looks to be more advanced than most of the preceding ones.
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple screensaver is good. One of the Windows ports for MAME has excellent scanline emulation. At least on a high res CRT. It has a multitude of different patterns to choose from to best match the type of screen used on each game.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that blew my mind when I finally decided to look at the Analog TV code that the Apple ][ screensaver a couple others uses is that it's not just faking the effects, but it's actually simulating the real effects of interference, etc, on a picture tube. In other words, it simulates the operation of a CRT and what happens to the signal to cause the various effects we used to see in the Good Ol' Days.
I definitely didn't understand it all, but it's a very cool and convincing effect.
Great use of tag (Score:4, Insightful)
I think this is one of the most justified uses of the 'brokenbydesign' tag ;)
Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming. (Score:2, Insightful)
And does their program eliminate motion blur and the poor contrast of LCD to make it looks like a CRT?
Re:Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
And does their program eliminate motion blur and the poor contrast of LCD to make it looks like a CRT?
No but the 21st Century did.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen a flatpanel yet that in objective terms of quality comes anywhere near a CRT.
Try looking at a new one then. The colour isn't _quite_ where CRTs were but it's within spittin' distance. Ghosting hasn't been a problem for 5+ years.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Ghosting hasn't been a problem for 5+ years.
Black-level is still a huge issue. Manufacturures have been trying to correct bad contrast ratio by amping up the backlight, screwing up the blacklevel even more.
It's gotten so bad that TVs have begun cheating and dimming the backlight during dark scenes. Which just turns them into a muddy mess.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably a problem with larger TVs only, which can only use strong backlights around the edges, causing a lot of problems trying to light the middle.
My 22" computer monitor has no trouble what-so-ever with black. Or contrast.
Re: (Score:2)
Digital projectors often suffer the same problem, as they use a much stronger light projecting a small LCD, it tends to bleed through the black.
There are projectors which dim their bulb for dark images just like you described flat panel TVs doing.
Re: (Score:2)
And you would have gotten away with it if it weren't for DLP [wikipedia.org], LCoS [wikipedia.org] and LED backlight [wikipedia.org]...
np: Kontext - Blinkende Stjerne (Round Black Ghosts 2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ghosting is a still a problem, because LCD motion is sample-and-hold rather than CRTs' impulse response. The problem was reduced with the recently released ViewSonic VX2265wm and Samsung 2233rz, but only for games capable of running at 120Hz.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/archive/TempRate.mspx [microsoft.com]
The ViewSonic VX2265wm is the only LCD I consider acceptable for gaming, and it's still inferior to a good CRT.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How are you measuring that? I'm sitting here in a bullpen surrounded by 2 year old ~$600'ish (at the time, they're like $200-$400 now) LCDs and a couple of really expensive CRTs. The CRTs are blurry and dim in comparison, by a sickening amount I might add. Actually they bloom a bit, making everything a bit soft. There's not one aspect of those CRTs I'm envious of, and these aren't cheapies.
I haven't even had a laptop in the last two years with display that makes me look fondly at CRTs. The closest I've
Re:Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
CRTs have better black levels and better colors. On the other hand, they have fussy geometry adjustments (and you can never get them as perfect as an LCD), moiré patterns, and are generally much fuzzier than LCDs.
My LCD provides a sharp, high-resolution image with low power consumption in a small package at a low price. All of those factors (sharpness, resolution, power cosumption, size, price) matter more to me than the areas where CRTs continue to lead (color reproduction, black level).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually you may be right if digital masters continue to be horrible.
Re: (Score:2)
I play rhythm and fighting games on my LCD all the time. They're completely fine.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been working on an 800+ character MUGEN game for quite some time, now. My primary monitor is a 32" 1080p LCD made by Samsung, and there are NO timing issues. I even have an X-Arcade controller for testing. No lag. That's like 50 feet of wire/cable between controller and monitor.
The biggest problems most games have these days on LCD screens is their own inputs. Every guitar hero/rockband controller I've touched likes to double-strum, even on touchier movements. While DBZ BT3 on the Wii is great, part of
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of it comes down to the "native resolution" problem that plagues LCD. If you're running at native res (or a favored resolution that doesn't get scaling), you get minimal latency. If you go outside that resolution, you start to get perceptible lag due to the video scaling.
This is especially true with 480I/P signals on newer displays. The scaler on most TVs makes a real laggy mess of the whole process.
That much said, LCD doesn't necessarily mean "automatic nasty latency" like the previous poster suggest
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly have not tried to play rhythm or fighting games with an LCD.
I clearly have not played the one game you're thinking of, no. I have, however, played quite a few games and the LCD display hasn't even lightly come up on the radar as being an issue. I would love for you to provide a specific example so I could give it a try.
Until I can see that first hand, I can only assume you've either been exposed to old or really cheap LCDs. I can't even get a viewing angle shift in contrast with my monitor.
They have not improved, and it is unlikely that they will in the future.
I don't understand either side of this statement.
Re:Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming (Score:4, Insightful)
Since the fastest runners in the world have reaction times in the 170-190ms range, and unofficially at least the fastest "clicks" [humanbenchmark.com] are all above 100ms (I averaged 232ms myself, just below average), I'd doubt you could notice, let alone be affected by, a 10-50ms disparity.
And I'm not sure how you can say 2ms response time leads to a 50ms disparity anyway, that doesn't make sense. Hell, there was a 70ms difference between my slowest and fastest clicks, and I couldn't notice the difference. The tech to get the response times so low does tend to jack colors and produce some odd artifacts, but none of those relate to how quickly it displays the data on the screen, not as far as I've ever heard anyway. Since the color/artifacting issues are relevant, and since 15ms vs 2ms is not noticeable, it's better to pick a 15ms LCD anyway.
Plus, a frame will generally be displayed at least 10 times, if it is displaying at 15ms, before you can actually react to it. Again, the response time argument for not going LCD is tired and nearly worthless.
The problem is probably just that you've been reading weird crap about LCDs, and haven't used them much yourself. Most likely to keep from justifying an upgrade.
Actually, if you really want to prove me wrong (and find out for yourself if the LCD response time is really the issue), go to Humanbenchmark.com [humanbenchmark.com] and compare your OWN clicks on a CRT with your OWN clicks on an LCD. I'm assuming you have access to one, of course, but it shouldn't be hard to get access to one anyway.
I'm betting there is less than a 5ms difference in your 10 click averages.
Re:Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming (Score:5, Informative)
The tech to get the response times so low does tend to jack colors and produce some odd artifacts, but none of those relate to how quickly it displays the data on the screen, not as far as I've ever heard anyway.
The 2ms 'response time' is just about the pixels response to the electrical signal. In other words, those 2ms means: this LCD can change a pixel from black to white in 2ms. It doesn't mean: this LCD will change the pixel 2ms after the computer or console tells the screen to change the pixel.
Since a couple of years, LCDs have a 'image enhancement' mode that adds some lag, from 40 to 105 ms. This is precisely to have a buffer that lets the chip preprocess some stuff and reduce ghosting or other things. I think that the 15ms or less to change a pixel is also possible only because of this processing.
You can't say that 105 ms is not noticeable, and this is probably what the GP is talking about. And DLP HDTVs seems to have up to 250ms of lag.
However, modern LCDs have also a 'gaming mode' with (virtually) no processing lag, but with the usual ghosting and other LCD classic issues.
Re:Unfortunately, CRT is still the best for gaming (Score:4, Informative)
But why!?!?!? (Score:4, Interesting)
And to think that it seems all the rage is to be upgrading Atari's with an Svideo board as featured on hack-a-day a few weeks ago http://hackaday.com/2009/04/05/s-video-from-an-atari-2600/ [hackaday.com] . Honestly I don't know why people want to make their TV's look like a 30 year old TV display. The reason for all that bleeding was the circuitry that converted the video and audio signal to RF and then the deconverting of that signal in the TV. It is beyond me why anybody would want to make something look like it did, instead of how it should look. I grew up playing the Atari 2600 and I thought it was fun, but I certainly am not fond of how it looked. I'm just waiting for my SVideo converter board to arrive so I can upgrade my 2600 to look how it should, not how it did. (And I'm still using a CRT TV as well none of these new fangled LCD TV's). - XSS
Re:But why!?!?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because old systems counted on it. They were designed around working on low rez NTSC displays. You find that the color bleed and fringing and such helped smooth out the image and make it more natural. When you display it on a modern high resolution LCD it looks extremely blocky. So you emulate the problems with the older technology and you get a better looking picture for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that was what I hated about upgrading to an LCD. I could notice imperfections that were previously "finessed" by the CRT. Sharp color dropoffs, granularity ... I thought something was wrong with my monitor at first!
Re:But why!?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, in the case of the Atari games, it is fairly obvious that the programmers used the effects to create nicer-looking graphics without going to extra work. Sort of a reverse anti-aliasing effect.
Take a look at some of the comparison images in the article. The 'Enduro' image is particularly interesting: The skyline looks extremely fake on an LCD, but with the CRT emulation it looks almost realistic. The effect basically gives a continuous-color blend which would be impossible using just the colors available to the program.
So really, you can argue that this is how the games were meant to be seen like this, and this is actually how it should look.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The interesting thing comes with retro-game writers (who write games for the old machines, today) and the graphical styles of the games, which due to being designed and written in emulators on LCD monitors have changed. Old games used to stipple a lot to simulate shades of colours between what the hardware could actually achieve, whilst the newer games seem to have a more flat colour scheme - arguably this could be because the LCDs make the stippling look awful, whereas the CRT would make it look blended.
Re:But why!?!?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is beyond me why anybody would want to make something look like it did, instead of how it should look.
But this IS how it "should look". It was designed for that display. People want it to look like it originally did for the same reason that people like muscle cars, vinyl records (complete with the hiss and wow and flutter that they try so hard to eliminate), valve amplifiers. It's because sometimes the inaccuracies in equipment change the signal for the better, and people like that.
Re: (Score:2)
I've played Atari games natively on a color TV set, as well as emulated on a SVGA CRT. I like it both ways. You get a super-clear picture on the computer monitor, but it's nostalgic to play it with the video artifacts that came from the RF input and NTSC. If you value a true historical re-enactment, you kindof need to be able to do this. It's something that you can configure to your preference, so having it as an option doesn't hurt anybody. Even MegaMan 9 had a special mode that allowed you to emulate
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This page [slack.net] has screenshots showing the difference. Many games were designed with NTSC artifacts in mind.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a few steps ahead of me.
I'm still trying to figure out whether I can simply connect the video cable to the input rather than the output of the RF modulator. I have a 2600 with about 30 cartridges waiting to fire back up . . . hmm, and how will I get the sound out, given that the only input I have on these things are separate R/L/V connections?
And while we're at it on apple's, I want a pre-rev 7 emulator for the ][, so that I get the purplish tint (Rev 7 killed the color subcarier in text mode). Hmm
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure if I understand your post.
But on modern TVs it's better to toss the RF modulator and instead use a RCA to F-Jack adapter to connect to the antenna jack on Channel 3.
(eg. http://www.gigaweb.com/products/view/17206/rca-female-to-f-male-adapter.html [gigaweb.com])
NTCS filters (Score:3, Insightful)
Overdid it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A new, decent quality CRT is still better looking in a lot of ways than a LCD monitor.
Re:Overdid it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Damn kids don't remember what shit used to look like before VGA, SVGA, XGA etc. came along and spoiled 'em. When I was growing up, I had one color! ONE! And it was the nastiest shade of amber ever conceived! At least I could play Airborne Ranger...
Re: (Score:2)
I was lucky, my parents had a 19" Sony Trinitron in '82. The image quality was much much better than this. I had a friend at the time that had a Zenith and even that looked better than this. This project took the effect much to far.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Overdid it. (Score:5, Interesting)
You are missing the point. It looks NOTHING like a real television CRT from back then. The effects are just wrong.
Yes, it really does. As a child of that era I feel quite qualified to say "Yup, that's what Pac-Man on my neighbor's Atari 2600 on their 1970's Sears TV looked like." It looked fuzzy, we knew it looked fuzzy, but we still loved it. It was quaint even when it was new, and we knew that but it was seat-of-your-pants gaming. This was the late 70's...Disco was in; everyone's clothing & carpets & cars & wood paneling were brown; Commander Adama was still played by Lorne Greene; Trans Ams were cool; our games were blocky & fuzzy. The world was right.
Oh and computer displays never had artifacts like that. I've had every PC display type from CGA to WUXGA
You're right, they didn't. As a dozen other posts have pointed out, this is meant to emulate what computer graphics sent to a TV through a composite cable looked like. You remember those Radio-Shack metal switchboxes that went between the antenna and the TV's RF input that let you plug in a single cable from the Atari/Commodore/whatever? That one cable carried audio, chroma, and luma, all bleeding into one another. Thus this type of bleed. Nothing to do with Hercules, CGA, EGA, VGA, etc.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Amiga 1080? Is that i or p? ;p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Yeah, because when I played computer games as a kid in the 80s, I played it on a brand new late-90s CRT display. Not an 8 year old hand-me-down 14" TV in the bedroom (albeit mine was a 14" Trinitron which was surprisingly competent and not as grainy as this emulator, and even good for the old Amiga). Then again they're emulating a late 70s CRT.
If there is something this emulator doesn't do, it doesn't emulate what the poor signal quality on the cheap cable between the console and the TV that would create ar
Re: (Score:2)
I never did get why they put the fake-wear on those jeans in the one place that lasts longer than everywhere else and then leave the knees and ankle areas completely normal.
Re: (Score:2)
How old (young) are you? It looks quite accurate to me. Heck, I still remember playing 'TV games' on our old black and white TV.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. I don't recall Atari games looking quite that bad on my TV screen. The effect here is more like looking at an old CRT from two inches apart, except you're really much further away.
Re: (Score:2)
Also the images have no ringing. That is the effect when there was a high luminance area on the left with a sharp transition to a low luminance area to its right. There would a pattern of vertical lines at diminishing distances and with diminishing brightness from that edge to the right. That was the most annoying effect of systems that used RF modulators.
Amusing (Score:2)
It reminds me of the audio effects that add pops and scratches to music to imitate (badly) the sound of old vinyl.
Why bother? (Score:3, Insightful)
Honestly, craig's list is riddled with people throwing away CRT's. Why run a crappy emulation...if that is what you call it, when you can go next door and get CRT?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I don't want a CRT on my system? (Score:2)
I like my LCD. For any sort of productivity work or modern games, it looks way better than any CRT ever could. So I want to keep it. I don't want to haul out a CRT any time I want to emulate an older system. There's also the problem that computer CRTs won't do the trick. They are higher resolution, and have better signaling than NTSC sets. So they too will offer a different image than an old NTSC TV.
There's no need to bother with all the physical hardware if it can just as easily be simulated by the compute
Am I the only one who thought of Pacman sounds (Score:3, Informative)
Isn't it sort of ironic that people want perfect emulation of Atari 2600 PacMan when Atari 2600's PacMan was notoriously not like the arcade version? Even NES didn't do emulation well. I think the first well emulated game I ever played was Street Fighter 2 on SNES.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing I was wondering was where could I play the emulated games?
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it sort of ironic that people want perfect emulation of Atari 2600 PacMan when Atari 2600's PacMan was notoriously not like the arcade version?
Because for one thing, the port of Ms. Pac-Man to Atari 2600 [youtube.com] sucked far less. And I seem to remember a ROM hack of Ms. Pac-Man that restored the original Pac-Man boards
The ultimate test! (Score:4, Funny)
So, can I get burn-in on my LCD monitor now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Usually LCD burn in can be exorcised out with a simple rotating video of solid red, green, blue, black, magenta, yellow, cyan and white at a frame rate of about 10-20 fps. Run that overnight and it will often fix persistent images and occasionally stuck pixels.
Nice (Score:3, Insightful)
Looks similar to the efforts the xscreensaver developers, with their m6502 and Apple2 hacks that simulate CRT artifacts such as static, colour separation, and shear.
Next up: Lag emulation (Score:3, Funny)
Here's a list of stuff I'd like to emulate, for the sake of nostalgia:
286 without math co-processor
trig function lookup tables
film
typewriters
horse dung smell in the streets
Morse code
the black plague
Get on it!
Re:Next up: Lag emulation (Score:5, Funny)
Emulating old stuff:
286 without math co-processor - Install Vista
trig function lookup tables - You would be surprised that they are still being used (both in paper and in code)
film - you mean like 35mm? There are filters in most semi-advanced photo programs that will emulate this.
typewriters - http://www.instructables.com/id/Typewriter-Computer-Keyboard/ [instructables.com]
horse dung smell in the streets - Go live in NYC, open the window and take a deep whif
Morse code - Well, everything is still binary these days so technically it's similar to really fast morse code.
the black plague - Swine flu?
Re: (Score:2)
trig function lookup tables - You would be surprised that they are still being used (both in paper and in code)
Well in code, it's generally done in hardware to interpolate between two values. In software you can find lookup tables for programs meant for MCUs and really small architectures.
But paper?... I'd need to see photographic evidence. I mean these days I really can't think of a situation where you'd find paper lookup tables for trig functions.
film - you mean like 35mm? There are filters in most semi-advanced photo programs that will emulate this.
I didn't consider that, though it's usually the emulation of what happens to the film under/in different environments. But technically it does emulate (simulate?) th
Re: (Score:2)
Try construction. I'm talking about old-school architectural engineers here. I recently saw somebody do it with a fairly simple formula to give an approximation on something. The younger engineer had to find and unwrap his scientific TI calculator and then was figuring out typing in the correct syntax of the formula when the old guy was already done doing it on paper. He kept a sheet (one can be found here: http://www.sosmath.com/tables/trigtable/trigtable.html [sosmath.com]) in the back of his notepad. The old guys on t
Re: (Score:2)
Pick up the "Pocket Ref" by Sequoia Publishing. [sequoiapublishing.com] It has everything from CPR instructions to structural material strengths. I picked mine up at a college book store but I'm sure I've seen them at Powell's Technical as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry man. Paper tables [cskrattiger.com] do still exist.
Oh snap! (Score:2)
I had it on my within-hand's-reach shelf. Includes squares, cubes, and roots. Unbelievable, I was just wondering how far back I'd have to search to find printed lookup tables within a published book.
Apparently this one's still going strong [amazon.com].
Just busting yer balls over your sig (Score:2)
> Don't support corporate radio any longer - listen to X1FM, raw and uncut internet radio. Go to x1fmradio.com for more in
Don't know if you are being paid to spam for them or you are just an idiot. Hard to tell sometimes.
1. It's as over compressed as the worst "Hundred Thousand Watt Blowtorch" FM station. Yuck!
2. Don't support corporate radio... by going to a corporate radio site. Oh hell yea. Guess you never bothered to click on their about us link where they explain about their years of hard work
Re: (Score:2)
Don't support corporate radio
Then what radio should people listen to in a vehicle? Without 3G service, which costs $720 per year in the United States, one can't easily listen to Internet radio.
Swine flu misconception (Score:2)
the black plague - Swine flu?
The latest sources are calling H1N1 no worse than ordinary flu, which kills an average of 100 people a day in the United States. People are recovering from H1N1 on the same schedule that they recover from the more familiar flu. The only thing about H1N1 is that nobody has the immunity yet.
I don't get it... (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't remember my Atari looking like that on my TV. Sure it wasn't LCD perfect but it didn't suck that that does.
Hercules Video Card Emulation... (Score:2)
Doesn't dosbox do this? (Score:2)
dosbox supports a whole swag of graphics modes, including (from memory) hercules.
already been done (Score:3, Funny)
Vector? (Score:3, Insightful)
Vector graphics may be the most difficult to emulate because of the potential brightness of specific spots. The brightest white on most LCD monitors cannot compare to such a spot. Asteroids is probably the most famous vector game. Basically, the electron beam could be controlled to "draw" the game via lines and dots instead of merely scanning back and forth at a fixed pace like traditional CRT's. The beam could "dwell" on a specific spot or line if needed, making it glow like nobody's mamma.
Artificing for colors (Score:2, Interesting)
Back then I wrote a drawing program that took advantage of the artificing to draw in color. I knew which pixels in a block could be turned on or off to generate one of up to about 16 colors. Obviously, the smallest blocks were only 5 colors. (Red, Green, Blue, Black, White) So the more detail you wanted your drawing,
Hated it then, and it hasn't improved with age (Score:2)
We hated those miserable image anomalies back in the day, and it hasn't become more endearing to have it fuzzed up with modern technology just to look old again.
Is this the new definition of progress? Use the best new technology we can find to generate the same old crap we already grew tired of?
Tubes for video are coming (Score:2)
Just like tube amplifiers for audio, the NTSC TV look is probably going to be sought after. We thought those artifacts were going to be around for all time & mastered how to choose colors that would always display. The new VGA monitors were too expensive & we weren't old enough to know any better.
One silly thing about the article (Score:2)
was that they illustrated the performance using a jpeg file. Yes, the compression artifacts are different.
It's rather ironic that there are more bits of data in the poorly rendered compressed version than there were pixels on the screen when you played a game on the real hardware.
...No (Score:2)
UGH, I'm trying to forget those days. I used to play goddamn NES on a B&W portable-tv monitor, and of course Atari before that on even worse displays. Some games required you to see certain colors, notably Low-G Man. The red ones were a slightly darker shade of gray on a B&W tv /wrists
The idea of being nostalgic for those days, or wanting to see things like that again, it's hard to believe. It's like people being nostalgic and going back to communism after the wall fell. IT'S SICK. It's like visual
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm yeah, Model T's are fun to ride in, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it comfortable. I think the same applies here, playing old games is fun, but they were ugly then and this filter makes them the same king of ugly. It really gives you the true experience I suppose. It is true that a lot of old games look arguably worse on a nice new LCD.
I've played with the NTSC filter in an NES emulator before, and yes it really does look like the real deal, but its ugly to me so I have to turn it off :-)
That's pretty neat (Score:2)
NEStopia has a display filter they call 'NTSC' that can emulate television video of varying quality and standards. Complete with color bleed and a little bit of ghosting. This sounds like it's maybe a more sophisticated version of that idea. :D
Zzzzz... (Score:2)
Why is this news? There already is a module named "analogtv" in xscreensaver that does essentially the same thing. It might be moderately interesting when this actually gets released as part of Stella, but until then all we have are some screenshots that look very similar to existing TV simulators.
By the way, the 80's TV sets I played Atari games on never showed afterimages, and flickering objects (like the ghosts in Pac-Man) flickered very clearly. I hope this effect will be optional.
Personally I'd like to
Re: (Score:2)
I had one of those monitors. I do love Trinitron tubes, but this one eventually had something funny happen to the EDID information and it became unable to do more than 60 Hz.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm still keeping my ibm p260 alive until something that comes closer to CRTs than flatpanels is out. Even built my own windas cable to fix the g2 issue.
Re: (Score:2)
SED monitors - basically micro CRT tubes in a grid array. It's expensive, but it's also LCD form factor.
Re:Does this mean i can use a lcd in my mame cabin (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Does this mean i can use a lcd in my mame cabin (Score:4, Interesting)
Wait, you need two ports taken up so you can display on a 30" screen?
Crap, I'm still using a single 15-pin D-SUB to connect to my 32" 1080p LCD on my old computer.
Re:Does this mean i can use a lcd in my mame cabin (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, you need two ports taken up so you can display on a 30" screen?
Crap, I'm still using a single 15-pin D-SUB to connect to my 32" 1080p LCD on my old computer.
I'm betting you're using a Monster Cable. That other guy has to use two because he is using normal cable.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still using a 21" Viewsonic CRT built like 15 or 20 years ago.
Still has great picture too.
Re: (Score:2)
Still takes up a friggin desk all on its own, too.
Man those things sucked, you had to make sure your desk was at least 5 feet deep, and that was just so you could have a little room to rest your wrists in front of the keyboard!!
Or you could put it to the side, but you don't want to know how bad that is for ergonomics.
OTOH, I do know of a case where someone put a 24" LCD in a very cramped area (short desk, and no room to move back). They had to swap it with a smaller one, because there faces were about a fo
Re: (Score:2)
And my desk is made such that the monitor is in the corner, so I have no problem with my 21" Dell P1130. If I replaced it with a LCD I would only have free space behind the monitor (but no, I like CRTs, so I'll use this monitor at least until it fails or I buy a better CRT).
Re: (Score:2)
Still takes up a friggin desk all on its own, too.
Man those things sucked, you had to make sure your desk was at least 5 feet deep, and that was just so you could have a little room to rest your wrists in front of the keyboard!!
My Viewsonic G225f 21" CRT sits on a 17" deep surface directly in front of me. Another 17" surface in front of it holds my keyboard with plenty of room to rest my forearms. So more like 2.5 feet than 5.
2048x1536 @ 75Hz, greater than HD resolution at half to a third of the cost of 30" dual-link DVI displays, and works with my older VGA-only systems over my KVM switch.
Re: (Score:2)
P815? That's what I'm typing this in on right now. I still have little incentive to upgrade. 30" is really the only place to go from here.
Re: (Score:2)
1920x1080 (1080p) < 2560x1600 (30" Apple cinema display)
Dual link DVI does not take up two ports. Dual link DVI uses both logical data links available in a single physical DVI connection.
Re: (Score:2)
1920x1080 (1080p) < 2560x1600 (30" Apple cinema display)
But if you're emulating an arcade board that outputs 240p (JAMMA standard resolution) or a console that outputs "240p" (that is, 480i NTSC with all even fields), do you really need a monitor with more than 720p?
Re: (Score:2)
they are talking about using the apple 30in display which requires dual link just to start talking to the graphics card - no matter what you send down the lines to it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a standard feature of MAME! Jeez.
No pedantry needed... (Score:4, Insightful)
... since they were referring to realistic emulation... meaning closer to the reality of the system being emulated.