OK. The PC98 screens thing for now, then. You're referring to this post from 2010:
Recap escribió:Another thing is PC88 games (and several other computer games I'm sure) that run at different weird resolutions, and with different aspect ratios it seems:
http://www.soundshock.se/dump/WER1.png
Is that Wer Dragon?
See, that's what I meant. All the CRT games have a 4 : 3 aspect ratio. It just happens that many of them have also black borders, but those are also part of the screenshot itself. You'll find all the interweb emulator screens from PC88 and PC98 games at 640 x 400, but the actual hardware always left two black borders for a 640 x 480 full-screen resolution. So when you find this, for instance (PC98 Digan no Maseki):
...you actually should be editing it in order to get this:
Your proof, in case:
http://postback.geedorah.com/foros/view … 9430#p9430
To which you, to sum it up, object with this:
480 lines is NOT possible in 24khz, let alone something that needs to be deliberately added for some reason. The only reason you might see letterboxing is that it's essentially showing a 16:10 image (8:5, 4:2.5) on a 16:12 (4:3) screen, and if the software was made to use square pixels rather than ones stretched to 120% of normal height, you have to adjust the pic to be a little squashed.
I'm afraid you misunderstood my message there and it's pretty much my fault. There're too many subjects mixed-up in this thread now and my poor wording there (2010!) is not helping to clarify what was being discussed in that moment. See, in actuality, this thread is about web page design, about how to show game screenshots in game reviews. And for that very matter, I advocate a whole real state approach instead of a frame-buffer approach. The user, in the end, doesn't care about the cause of the letterboxing -- he just get black borders or he doesn't, and that affects his experience (full-screen gaming has always been a concern for a reason, as you'll agree).
So when I used the actual hadware phrase in that post I was just trying to remember that everybody is forgetting the PC98 monitor in the equation (which *always* had a 4 : 3 ratio, 'cause nope, *nobody*happened to have an actual 16 : 10 monitor designed for 640 x 400 with square pixels). That is to say, this picture:
...is not there to count pixels, but to explain the game/experience.
You seem pretty versed in PC98 matters (much more than myself, in fact, which is not that hard) so I'm sure this is not necessary, but since that title screen may not be clear enough for everybody and given that this thread seems to have more relevance than even I am aware of, let's do a bit of hotlinking:
(Thanks, Tokugawa)
Give it a try -- you just won't find a single PC98 game (not one that matters, at least; and I'm not counting 9821 games since that's another platform altogether) which looks more natural (or just plain correct) with its graphics using a 4 : 3 ratio (though for not few cases, I'm sure, it won't matter much and therefore this distortion will come off more convenient). And yeah, even if on the original hardware, you have to adjust the pic to be a little squashed. Notice I indeed leave apart the aforementioned black borders when talking about graphics.
So those pics above from random PC98 games are not actually screenshots, but merely full-frame, 1 : 1 graphics. Semantics; what can you do.
Of course, we're talking of analog display technology, so ultimately it's up to the user's preferences and settings, but, even if I myself am not too anal with aspect ratios when gaming (not as little as to turn unmissable circles into flagrant ovals, though!), I think you can't skip the as intended part when doing game review.
This leads us to the part of your dissertation where I disagree:
So, burning-in letterboxing to 640x400 PC98 images is just the same as doing similar to bulk out 640x200 to 640x240 or 320x200 to 320x240... or indeed 640x200 to 640x480 instead of just stretching to 640x400.
Editing the full frame is editing the full frame no matter how, I guess, but I'm not sure this approach is useful beyond hardware analysis and pixel count. When you burn-in letterboxing to 640 x 400 for a 640 x 480 screenshot or say, EGA's 320 x 200 for a 320 x 240 one, you're doing that because you know the original display used (or should use) square pixels and that kind of mimics what you see on screen. When you do it with a 640 x 200 for a 640 x 480 screenshot -- to illustrate:
...you're doing... nothing which makes sense, no matter the approach.
Stretching (line-doubling, whatever) to 640 x 400 is not very different, if you ask me. On the one hand, you distort the pixel so that the picture's integrity is lost and on the other, you still don't represent the original letterboxing. Two wrongs don't make a right. At least, add a scanlines effect.
Anyway, the hardware point of view is utterly interesting, and I want to thank you for the heads-up. The PC-9801 series (much like most Japanese PCs) is not too well documented after all, and the video thingie likely suffers the most from that. I didn't know for certain that it had a 15-kHz mode, for instance, and always thought it didn't make much sense since the main reason behind the computer's conception was better hardware for kanji usage than the PC-88 series (and also, you never find 15-kHz games on it, despite all the direct ports from the 88 Mk-II SR without graphic alterations). But that makes for another thread, I'd say. In fact, it's perfect material for a new thread on Eiusdemmodi [ > ], given its relevance in the emulation field. One of the things pending there is documenting the video aspects of every relevant gaming system so that we can pick later the best emulators currently for CRT usage and properly configure them, and the PC-9801 series is as good as any other to begin the task. Hopefully at this point you've heard of CRT Emudriver and Calamity's work, but if you haven't, I'm sure you'll enjoy what you'll find there. And you'll find out that there's no need to explain stuff like horizontal scan rate, blanking lines and other CRT technicalities which, simply, were required beforehand for what we're attempting there. So if you're willing to participate, I can create an account for you -- automatic registration is disabled.
If you aren't, please, let me know if you wouldn't mind me asking you some questions about the subject in another thread here.
As for the Atari monitor thing, have you tried asking here?
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php
