Opciones de búsqueda

Calamity, that's good you are here, I just would like to ask you few questions about drivers.

So, you made a hack to allow more different resolutions at a time. But do you know why all different resolutions can produce different voltage levels at the VGA output ? It's not a hardware question (few resistor or amps) , because values change according to different drivers and safe mode... For now, I'm quite clueless because I just noticed it recently, in the past few years I would never had the idea of mesuring the voltage out of the VGA port.
Because you know, wide range of resolutions is good, but signal accuracy is really crucial to get the best result possible on CRT. You will say that most video games have a very limited on-screen color palette (and that's true), but to properly calibrate a CRT, you need to have a signal between 0.3 and 1.0 V .
When you display 15 kHz picture at 321x240 for example, you can't change the values of gamma/brightness/contrast for each channel (red green and blue). You can do it at 480i, but anyway, you can get slighty variations between 480i and 240p ...

The ultimate driver would be the one that allows many different resolutions and a constant voltage signal (video part always between 0.3 and 1.0 V), or at least, a possibility to quickly adjust parameters in any resolution (like the gui of Zsnes, which suits every resolution, unlike many other emulators designed for 640x480).

Since PC users had never ever complain about voltage levels (who the fuck cares ? Even those who wanted accurate colors just tweaked the drivers options, whitout mesuring the voltages), I think this issue had been there for almost the beginning. I need to check other graphic cards, and different motherboards to confirm if there are some set-up that delivers more variations or more regular level among resolutions. (if you guys could do it with your graphic card, even with a basic 10€ multimeters, that would help !^^' )

Bluesky is a brand of cheap TVs. While they have some good Philips/Thomson tubes in it, they got some crappy Vestel chassis ("11AKxxx") that break easily and are not well designed. And of course they come with a poor set-up.

In general way, digital electronics tend to be much simpler to design, they have a more regular behavior than analog one. So, on older analog chassis, you often find very wide tolerances on timings, porshs, frequencies. In digital ones, especially because they are designed according to very few broadcast signals (and not video games :P ), you tend to have very few room for your non-standard signals.

If you have troubles, it's better to display a non standard picture in a standard frame ( for example, a 304x224 picture in a 320x240 frame), and choose refresh rates close to 50hz and 60hz (meaning that you won't be able to have perfect emulation for 53hz and 57hz games, because they are too much out of range, generaly a 2 Hz only one).

In other way, you need to try several pixel clocks and porchs to avoid picture deformations. Some chassis won't show you any picture at all if the signal is too much "way off" (but the same signal can be send into a much "friendly" analog chassis...).

So, as usual, older means better, you will enjoy the wide variety of the 15 kHz picture on spherical analog TV sets. If you choose a TV from 1994 to 1996, you can still find "hybrid" chassis that have both digital (geometry correction) and analog parts (especially for the video amplifier on the neck-board).

Recap's Trinitron may be the ultimate TV, because it's a cylindrical tube with an early digital chassis that allows you to easily deinterlace 480i and still has lots of analog components, and it takes lot of resolutions around 15 kHz. Ok, it's a pain in the ass to properly converge it ^^, but I got many skills by working on it (in fact, this TV set had been my "conejillo de india" :P to test everything about CRT convergence and geometry).

So, back to PC at low resolution, with an issue I'm sure absolutely nobody talk about:

Voltage variations of the video signal at the VGA output.

The norm of the VGA signal is fortunatly the same of the home devices: 1 Volt.
The video signal is included between 0.3 V (black level, the screen is supposed to emit no light) and 1 V (peak white). So, you have a "0.7 V" amplitude, from which you will get 256 values to get a 16.8 millions color picture.

0.7/256= 0.002734375. Basically, you have 0.003 V (or 3 mV) for each of the 256 RGB values. Any variations of this range and you loose color accuracy. I won't bother you with shit load of measure tables, but I got lots of different measures not only for different resolutions between 640x480 and 1600x1200, but the same for anything under 640x480, and different level between R,G, and B signal (but when red is higher than the other, it is always higher in every resolutions, for example), and different measure according to genuine drivers, newest ones, and in the Window's  "safe mode" (absolutly no driver and no service or softwares to apply any correction of the display).

On my Ati Radeon 1250, with pure white full screen, no software calibration (raw ouput), it goes from 0.930 V (red signal, 1280x1024, safe mode) to 1.114 V (green signal, 640x480, safe mode). I never got the same results between resolutions, using the same mode (either safe mode or ATI drivers). I tried another card (Radeon 2400 HD, PCI express, which by the way can't go under 7.40 mHz pixel clock, meaning I cant' display anything under 352x256 :[ ) , and I got different results, with almost the same (wide) range around 1 V. Very few combinations of resolutions and driver gave me something close to 1V (what is normallly expected...).
You will tell me that you can modify the graphic card settings via software (in order to calibrate your screen), but it's very limited (it can be OK for a slight correction, say a 0.996 V signal, but when you deal with 1.114 V, it's too much way of). Now, I understand better why it has always been so difficult to maintain a good greyscal and to display proper tones under 5% and above 95% of intensity...
Damn, the graphic cards should send a signal in the 0.7 V range, and no more than 1 V, for every resolutions ! And most of all, the same level for every lines (R,G and B). The only time you would have to tune the levels  should be when you can't tweak anymore your monitor set-up (because of aging cathodes, at different level).
But when you think about the fact that almost nobody takes time to properly calibrate his PC screen (even most of graphist users), nor tweak the levels via software, plus the fact that back then almost everybody used the "brightness" setting in a wrong way (to get greyish black, not an actual brighter picture...), plus the too much high color temperatures... it's hopeless. I never read any advertising nor review of graphic cards saying : " it's magic ! Perfect video signal amplitude at any resolution !"

I wanted to use the PC to display a precise calibration mire (thanx to soft15kHz) to finely tune my TV screen (because the connection between G2, cut-off and gains is crucial to display the best scanlines, the sharpest spot), but as always, it's not "plug and play", you have to burden yourself with problems to solve. Damn, whoever create the PC is a devil ! ^^'

Yeah, "conejillo de Indias" is "Guinea pig" in english. But in french, it should have been "cochon d'Inde" (a pig from India). I don't know why they choose "rabbit" instead, and "rabbit from america", which does absolutly not refers to the "conejillo de Indias". And I still don't understand the sentence, it's a special expression in spanish ? Because there's no relation whatsoever with computer stuffs, nor monitor things...^^'

Ok, I just checked a topic where Pegote explain his situation:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/crt-tvs/ … input.html

So it's a modified wall monitor. And it does accept analog and digital signals by the same connector ! ^^'
(just have to switch between analog and TTL)

The 9-pin connector is clearly labelled "RGB HV" (HV for separate sync, on 2 pins), meaning that you may need an external sync splitter if you send a 15 kHz signal (composite sync, on one pin). The chassis may be 31 kHz only but I don't think so.

Polarity of the sync pulse: the 15 kHz video standard has negative sync (meaning below the voltage of the black level, set at 0.3 volts).
There are few sources that provide negative sync (H) and positive sync (V), but in most case, sync is negative, for both H and V.

Generally, you need to keep signal grounds separate along the cable, but at both end, they can be joined.
The pinout may be the same for Barco and Hantarex, but it depends on how the chassis work, what they need from the signal.

I don't understand the last sentence...

Hola ! ^^

I will try to respond to this topic, with the approximate help of online translators ('cause I'm french).

Funny translation :

" J'adorerais m'offrir comme petit lapin de l'Amérique mais je n'ai pas non plus l'un toujours(encore), et il(elle) attendait pour te demander un peu à voir. "

I don't know what a "little rabbit of the America" have to do there... ^^'

But OK, just a few words about tri-sync monitors :

Everybody still use the "CGA-EGA-VGA" naming to describe these monitors, which can lead to confusions, because those standards are digitals, and there are some digital only monitors, and some that accept digital and analog signals (on separate connectors).

When you have a tri-sync monitor, you should read : "15-24-31 Khz", not "CGA-EGA-VGA", because even if it concern the same frequencies, the latters are digital norms.

I saw a link to Starcab.net, even if it's not about a Hantarex monitor, so I guess your monitor is really an arcade one, and not a stand-alone broadcast monitor or something else. And man, in arcades, almost everything is analog video since decades. Your tri-sync monitor, like many arcade monitors, is designed for analog video, for several frequencies, and it has only one connector, so every signals will go inside (and you can be sure it's analog only, because when you have digital+analog monitors, you always have separate connectors).

You need to know the pin-out of the connector (pins for composite sync at 15 and 24/25 kHz, and separate sync at 31 kHz), and you need to know if the frequency selection is automatic or if you need to move a jumper on the chassis (on the big PCB under the picture tube).

Beware that arcade monitors standard is 2.5 to 5 Volts for video signal (15-24 kHz), 1 volt for 31 Khz.
If you want to plug any home console or you PC driven at 15 kHz (1 volt), you need a video amplifier, otherwise you will get a very dark picture.

Another thing: the same way you have lots of resolutions around the frequency of 15 khz (from 240x192 progressive to 768x576 interlaced), so you have lot of resolutions around 24-25 kHz and 31 kHz. The only limits are the margins of the electronics. They vary according to manufacturers, but in analog world, you have a lot of freedom, more than in old digital standard (with very limited resolutions and colors available for every frequency).

Some monitors can accept non standard frequencies (outside the basic 15-16, 24-25 and 31-33 kHz), but most of them are locked around those.
Virtualy every modern chassis (less than 15 years old) can accept out of range frequencies without damage. They either refuse the signal (telling you "out of range") or simply accept it but you won't be able to see a usable picture.
Some old TVs (15 kHz only) display a weird picture if you send a 31 kHz signal on it, but they aren't damaged, as long as you don't stay too much time. So, try many frequencies to see the margin of your monitor, and don't display out of range signals for too long, and it will be fine.
Anyway, there are very few resolutions used at 24-25 and 31 Khz, because there are very few games that run at those frequencies. When you talk about 24 kHz, most time it's Sega hardware (and few Konami ones), with two or three given resolutions, and 31 Khz is mostly used for 640x480 (I don't know if there are games at 853x480, for example).
Some Japanese computer may use different resolutions at those frequencies (like 768x512) , but the most diverse frequencies are around 15 kHz (and most of the best video games ever run at 15 kHz :D ).

So, I hope everything is more clear know...^^

So, I go to gamepsot.com to check the screenshots.........."View full size" : 1200 x 675. Sounds weird. A close look at simple elements (the "zeros" of the score) cleary shows it's not native res' (it could have been).

The same day, Gamekult, a modest french site (not as big as US sites), put the same serie of screenshots online:

http://www.gamekult.com/images/J000103987/150022/

Look at the first screenshot:

http://www.gamekult.com/images/ME0001288100/

resolution: 1280 x720. But, this time, it's really a genuine screenshot at its exact resolution. Look at the zeros, they are all identical, and show no artefacts of upscaling (just a slight artefact of .jpeg compression).

So, we can guess that Arc-System spread the same screenshots for every sites, but some sites decide to downscal them, just for the pleasure to add the more artefacts possible... (because, remember we are in the age of "crystal clear" displays...)

^_^ :P :P

Yes, in that case, it works fine. But "plain scaling" should be done only if resolutions are exact multiples (224 and 448, 240 and 480).
In CRT display, especially at low resolution, the most important thing is the precision of the line. If you want "full screen", you juste have to change the geometry size of the picture. But that's a thing lot of programers don't know or don't take in consideration, assuming that the typical customer will never be able to change the size of his picture...

When all game systems had lower resolutions and smaller color palette, nobody could strecth and filter the picture. The best choice was always taken (because there weren't other choice ^^) : crop the picture.
The first console to open the path to shitty filtring and bad scaling was the Dreamcast.

I hardly expect that changing just a few hexadecimal lines will magicaly offer a good regular scaling... The few modified lines (in fact, the same line reported several time in the iso file) remove the interlacing (set the 240p PS1 mode), but you will always get the scrolling artefacts, and blurry picture of course.

So yeah, just saving money to buy the PCB... :P (and I'll do the same for Kestui).

Ok, I understand better.

If the software is able to display a 480p content at 15 kHz 480i, it may be possible to "remove" the sync pulsations of the interlacing before the output and display a 640x240 frame.
It's not exaclty a genuine 320x240, but it's impossible to make the distinction. ^^

Even if nothing is done on that way, as long as you display a non filtred 480i picture with the same content for each pairs of lines, you have the possibility to get a nice 240p picture by removing the interlacing in the TVs that allow it (or in any 15 kHz monitor if I achieve my little electronic circuit ^^).

The strongest constraints are the roots of the most valuable fulfillments.

That's why video games die inexorably as time goes by.

Go to the service mode (with the remote), and check it. Sometimes, it's called " VCO " , or " XTAL ".

It's even worse, considering the PAL and NTSC resolutions: so, in many compilations, you have games with 224 lines that are stretched to 480 lines (PAL resolution of the PS2, 50 Hz) , and you have games with 240 lines stretched to 448 (NTSC resolution, 60 Hz).

I tried Mushi. It's badly scaled on the Y axis (240 to 448) as you know, but even on the X axis !!! When the backgrounds scroll, there are several places where the lines are suddenly divided...
It's small, but it's anoying. And of course the game is filtred.

Here is a demonstration: take your genuine 320x240 picture [>], and apply a brainless scaling that keep the aspect ratio when it's not recommanded [>]597x448, instead of use a clean doubling on X axis (320x2=640). If the game had artefacts only on the Y axis, it should have been better. But doing the same way as Dai-Ou-Jou would have been so much better !!! -_-

I didn't try the patch for recovering the 240p mode, but I know the picture won't be much better. A filtred picture is an altered picture, a bad upscal is a bad upscal, and nothing can be done. You need more than a patch (that set the PS2 output in PS-one mode), you need to modify the game's code... Well, it's a bit tricky ! :P

Same shit for Ibara (some would say it's even worst, but I can't imagine how it could be worst...).

If the game runs at 640x480 with a clean line doubling, there's no need to force it to 320x240. Just run the graphic card at 480i, and disable the interlacing on the TV.

If you use Windows XP, when you force the game at a lower resolution, it may be filtred, as everything is filtred by now (on Windows 2000, the defaut image viewer didn't filter the pictures when you saw them at different resolution, for example).

It works, but you have heavy flicker on bright horizontal lines, and the picture isn't as sharp as a true 240 ouput...

There is no danger for the TV, the deinterlacing process doesn't modify frequency, timings and voltage amplitude of the signal. It's just a question of skipping some sync lines and the half-scanline of the regular interlaced signal.

Every old game systems that run at 240p use non standard signal, a video signal  with (deliberately) missing sync informations. That's the secret. :)

By the way, another exemple of dumb scaling:

Ketsui port on XBox 360.

Well, how display the PGM resolution (448x224) in a 640x480 window, for those who wants to set their system at 480i, to plug it into a 15kHz 4/3 CRT ?
As usual, let's do some irregular stretch an blurr it !!
Considering that this resolution (640x480) is meant for 4/3 CRT, and not for 16/9 HD LCD with fixed resolution, they could have done it way better: they should have double the height of the screen (224x2=448) with nearest neighbor option (no filtring) and do nothing to the horziontal size. So, you display a 448x448 picture in a 640x480 windows. You just have to change the horizontal size in the chassis of your CRT, a perfect stretch with no loss of quality (thanx to the flexibility of the raster).

There are several ways to disable the interlacing of the picture (because the 360 can't do it, 480i is the lowest it can do): some chassis allow it (in arcade monitors and consumer TVs) , some scan-converter do it too.

Of course, this way of display Ketsui isn't available, and will never be (it could be done via some software patch, but nobody [ but me :P ] will demand it, and Cave won't do it even if there were enough people to demand it...).

While you can disable the interlacing of the game, anyway you will always get a shitty picture (stretched and filtred), with scrolling artefact...

Aw shit...

What a PURE WASTE ! The most important things, on which you have your eyes every seconds, are the sprites. You can't take time to notice every little details in the background, while being able to perfectly know that the background has lot of detail (your eyes can't analyse every detail individualy, but can percieve the fact that there are lot of informations globaly).

Yeah, they support 480p, but not with the maximum quality (ie: non filtred display).

The graphics of KOF XII are ruined first because of lack of 2D technology. Since many years, no hardware can display sprites anymore, everything is "flat 3D". That means lack of power and memory where 2D graphics need it.

I'm pretty sure SNK-P really began the sprites at 720p (like BlazBlue). But they quickly realised it wasn't possible to achieve the quality they wanted (lots of shades and frames). So they reduced the size (half the size), and relied on filtred shitty tricks.

When I saw Ryo's face for the first time (I expect it was one of the early fighter they started with), with a "missing line" for his mouth (as it can occur with 50% nearest neighbor resizing), I immediatly thought it.
If the sprite have been genuinely designed at 360p, the graphist would not have skipped this special line.

KOF sprites are great, even if they are only "360p". That wouldn't have been a problem if there were multi-sync large 16/9 CRTs in arcades (and at consumer level). But instead, we jump from 4/3 CRT to HD flat screens.

If KOF XII would have come in a nice 16/9 cab' at 24 Khz, everybody would have notice the gorgeous graphics, with lots of vibrant colors, great shadow and lightning effects, smooth animation... Resolution isn't every thing in a quality picture. But for many years, people are brainwashed to believe that resolution is the most important thing. They want so hardly flat screens with high number of pixels, but shitty screens that LOST their sharpness as soon as something moves (because cells are to slow to react fast enough to follow the animation). They want screens with "crystal clear picture", but screens that are 99% of time feeded with non-native signals (blurry picture). Well, I already talked about that...

I expect more than that... ^^'
I expect hacked dash boards that allow non filtred downscaling, and other resolutions (853x480 for example).

Man, on this fucking generation of hardware, almost nothing is done at the native resolutions of HD standards. And when it's done, the graphics are less sophisticated than those done at "sub-HD internal res".

BlazBlue is 1280x768. WXGA is 1366x768. Even on the original hardware in a brand new cab, it is fuckin' upscaled and filtred (at least, only in the horizontal direction)... But anyway, BlazBlue sprites are always displayed at 1:1 pixel mapping, weither the height of the screen is 720 (for 1280x720 panels) or 768. The back grounds are in 3D, so it's easy to resize.

KOF is "pure" 2D. If you could set the game at 768p, that would mean that the backgrounds are cropped when you see them at 720p. But no, there do not exist extra pixels beyond 720p. The window of the graphics is 1280x720, what ever screen will display it. Since there are barely flat screen at this exact resolution, you will always have your "crystal clear" picture (:P) upscaled and filtred, in association with the internal blurring of the sprites... Aw shit... where is my hammer ? ]:) 

I don't think so. For KOF XII, since the sprite have an exactly 200% upscaling (round number, constant pixel size), they considered the option of disabling the filters, but for KOF XIII, if you display the sprites without filtring them, they will look fuckin ugly with enormous jaggies. They will look uglier than those unfiltred in KOF XII.

The only correct way to display the game without filtred or jaggy sprites is to set the resolution at 853x480 (and have a display that can resolve this resolution without artifact... Some old plasmas, and of course CRTs).

I understand that, but when the ultimate goal will be reached (perfect CRT simulation), you can have shitload of options to mess the screen (adding misconvergence errors, set-up the screen out of focus, overdrive the red gun etc.). But FIRST, it's important to achieve the perfect thing, the top, so after that, you can easily "go down".

If you consider bad set-up as the main thing, it won't be possible to go beyond that... And that's why most people interested on this difficult subject are all wrong, and can hardly propose something decent...
(well, by now, some dude might have reached some good point, but they still lack the essential knowledge of CRT, and are still far from the perfection).

The goal is to solve the emulation matter, and offer a scaling algorithm that allows developper to continue to create pixel art in the fixed resolution HD era.
Beyond that, it could even help to play old video games on modern screen (because CRTs won't last forever...) with top quality visual and with almost inexisting lag (about 1/60 second, something barely noticeable, and way better than any scan-converter available now,).

About web design requirements, I'm working on it, but even the large resolution you propose (about 1280x960) is barely enough to show something accurate. Even the best picture I take from a real CRT can't show enough detail when reduce around 960p, either one way or the other...

The best I can reach by now is that:

http://raster.effect.free.fr/tv/Photos_ … na_02f.jpg

Note that this picture is taken from a low curvature Trinitron (no cheating, it's a real old 29" low-res tube, not a computer one! :P ), from 3m from the screen. The curvature seems very low at this distance, and the focus of the picture is good even for corners.

Each time I try to go under that, the picture shows lots of artifacts ([>] like this...).
I can reduce that with a little bit of horizontal blurr, but anyway, the picture will always loose the smallest details of the surface of the CRT screen (i.e. the phosphore layout).

Damn, do you realise it ? All those fuckin "High Resolution crystal clear" screens of today can't show the magnificence of a low-res picture tube at one time... :P :P :P

The best way is to provide full shots with a necessary lack of phoshore layout (something that seems too much  "clean" to you), and propose shots of small parts of the action. Something that can shows the greatness of pixel art displayed by CRT, like [>] this or [>] this, maybe...

Most multi-sync/31 kHz arcade monitor have the same large pitch as usual TVs driven at 15kHz. That means you can't obtain such precise scanline (as on the picture shown before) at 31 kHz on these.
The electron gun is conceived for bright and large beam spot, and you have limited number of phosphore triads. You need a 21 or 22" PC monitor with thin electron gun and precise grid (but small screen size...) or an insanely expensive 32" CRT Broadcast monitor that can really display 720p.  You can also have good results with CRT projectors (but not as good as direct view CRT).

I don't own an Xbox 360, but I'm pretty sure that the downscaling to 480p is filtred. Anyway, even if it's not as precise as the picture posted above, it will alway be more pleasant to the eye than rough cubic pixels at different resolution of the background, and of course blurry filtred sprites.

This picture [>] is based on a nice .png screenshot of KOF XII (720p), reduced to 360p with nearest neighbor option. Perfect pixel for the sprites and the background, displayed in heavenly conditions on a performant CRT. Each time I look at this, and then go to see the game on 768p or 1080p flat screen (because there are very few true 720p flat pannels out there...), I'm so angry. I just want to take a hammer and smash the screen. :P

Considering that KOF XIII only runs with filtred sprites upscaled at 150%, there's definitly no chance to try any tricks to display a nice picture on the best CRT displays.

Just for the tears:

http://raster.effect.free.fr/tv/photos_ … s_comp.jpg

> Part of a 720p KOF XIII screenshot on the same Trinitron monitor, driven at 31 kHz. On the left, a native res' sprite of Iori, and on the right, the sprite with 150% filtred upscaling.
:-[

Even if you take the signal and converted it from 720p to 852x480 (a 66% downscaling in order to recover the original size of the sprites and have the same definition between background and sprites), it's impossible to obtain the same precision and gorgeous visuals as the KOF XII 360p picture.

Men, I hate fixed res' pannels, and I hate the "everything scaled and filtred" shit.

What's the point to have easily adressable pixels (the only advantage compare to CRT) if most time you get blurry picture and artifacts ? Flat pannels are just good for internet browsing and word processing. For everything else, you need true multi-sync monitor. And CRT is the only technology that can gives you this.

Yeah, I suspected you would already know the software ^^, or have tried an arcade VGA or something else.
I knew there were solutions to drive a graphic card at 15 kHz, but for many years I didn't want to hear anything from PC stuff and emulators. I was fed up with, and went to original hardware: nice CRTs, real consoles and arcade PCBs.

The reason I finaly try soft15khz few day ago was the creation of the best patterns for convergence and geometry adjustement.

You can check this:

(others: http://raster.effect.free.fr/15khz/CRT_set-up/ )

Very useful, and much more efficient than any stuff you can find in PCB service menu, or any regular convergence pattern available.

Without modesty, I can say that I'm the expert of CRT photographing. :P
With my advices, you will achieve such quality  as this :

http://raster.effect.free.fr/tv/photos_ … G-SvsC.jpg
(it's reduced at 50%, the original picture is much precise, but very big, about 5 MB)

Near perfection CRT set-up and proper way to capture it with your camera.

This is the best you can obtain from a curvated shadow mask picture tube at 15 kHz. The beam spot is precise at every greyscale, even on bright red.
And about the matter of the red beam:

The red beam is alway driven stronger than the green and blue (because red phosphore is less efficient and needs more current), but with a proper set-up of every parameters, you can obtain precision at all levels.
So, the usual blur and merging that occur with bright red portions are not a characteristic of the CRT picture, it's just a question of the quality of the adjustment. Hence, we see that carefull observation is not enough, you need to know the way to set-up a CRT to determine what to do for recreating a CRT picture in digital environement.

Most TVs and arcade monitors are not set-up to their maximum possibility (especially for convergence), because you need time to do it, and because 15 kHz screen are primarily conceived for bright picture (for use in bright environment) and interlaced signal, with a necessary melting of lines. Precision is not the main goal for 15 kHz interlaced picture tube. But we, pixels lovers and users of non-interlaced signals, we want it, because it's possible !!! :P

Lots of people think that each field of the interlaced signal ("half picture", at half the resolution) is supposed to be displayed with a large space between the lines in order to fit the lines of the next field. That leads to think that "scanlines" are plain black lines with the same size of the line displayed. Hey no ! First, scanlines are the lines that are displayed (that are... scanned), and the black space between them is not regular, not as large. But for convenient sake, people continue to call "scanlines" the black space they see in 15 Khz picture, and they continue to view it as regular lines. It's difficult for them to understand why the beam vary in size. But this is nothing less than the fundamental part of the CRT technology, and the most important thing to achieve a good CRT simulation. But when you see some atrocity like this:

http://www.bogost.com/games/a_televisio … ator.shtml

Then, you know that people are very far from understanding the point...

I've been working on a way to easily recreate the variation of the beam:

(example of a bright pixel)

(example of a dark pixel)

Even if in reality, the spot would have different sizes, for digital environment, I choose to use the same size and create the illusion with shades of colors.
A pixel that would have been a 4x4 square in a classic 400% nearest neighbor scaling becomes a 6x4 sample (the core is 4x4, and you have two extra columns depending if the beam size increases of decreases).

The goal is to "interpret" the picture in only one pass (to have minimum use of resources and minimum lag), directly taking each original pixel and "construct" the final result according to a table that store small sets of values ( 1A to 4F in the examples above) for every variations of greyscale. There would be only one comparison with each previous pixel per line, to determine if the beam increases or decreases. Well, it's a simulated scanning (from top to bottom and left to right) to obtain the data, but the result is made of a full frame (no layers, no transparencies), constructed for fixed resolution.
It may not be very clear, because it's not so easy to explain it in french even for me... ^^
But I think this is the best way. The difficult part is to create the table, you need a perfect screenshot to start from. For this, I will use my method, because it's very tweakable and precise. I need to adust every layer according to the observation of the behavior of the real beam in the best condition : the proper set-up of the screen. For this last point, I'm ready now, I know. :-P

I need to explain the trick and convince somebody to write a bunch of code lines, somebody who wants to recreate a perfect CRT picture, not somebody who think that CRT screens produce genuine dirty pictures with lot of defects that you need to focus on. In fact, that's the tricky part ! ^_^

So, wait and see...