| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003 Posts: 2467 |
Best way to make IFLI screenshots im Emu?
Hi everybody,
I have the following problem: I want to upload a screenshot from an old compopic of mine which is in IFLI, and I have it only as prg. How is the best way to make a decent screenshot of it in VICE? I have seen many nice IFLI-screenshots here and would like to know how they were done.
Thanks!
-Bugjam |
|
... 22 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts.... |
| |
Tch Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004 Posts: 512 |
Quote: Or...just use some tacky gfx-format that doesn't flicker :)
Absolutely agree with this.
Interlace is kinda annoying nomatter how good it is pixeled.
And it is not like there are no alternatives. ;)
|
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003 Posts: 2467 |
First of all, THANK YOU everybody who posted a reply here! It is amazing how fast a vital discussion comes up on a question I hoped I would get a short, simple answer on! ;-)
But nevertheless, I will try some of the supposed methods when I am in the mood for it. All take their time, but are also interesting.
Actually the picture is not really worth spending so much time on it (it is really old and I did not use the IFLI mode well), but you know how it is when you want to have your stuff complete... ;-) |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 1576 |
>> The TV blurring is the mixing of luminances... The PAL blur is the mixing of chrominances. <<
No, I mean the ugly blur caused by the TV's bad contrast, I guess that has nothing to do with luminance factors, mixing or whatever similar... |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 1576 |
>>Interlace is kinda annoying nomatter how good it is pixeled.<<
@Tch: well, that's a very subjective opinion and a matter of taste, just like music genres you love or hate... Some people like it, some dislike it, but every of them has it's pros an cons.
I've never understood this "IFLI sucks" attittude which was started by Deekay years ago in some diskmagazine. Actually it needs a huge dose of experience to pixel on an advanced level in IFLI/MCI, just as in any other C64 grapicsmode.
@Graham: IMHO, you are aproaching this matter on a too technical way. As a graphician, I don't really care about chroma/luma values of any kind, my perception is strongly visual. So I think I'm more or less competent to tell the difference between a blurred and a dithered screenshot suitably to a picture I've pixelled. I understand your reasoning, but please try to have a tiny bit of look on it from my (our) angle. I find it quite interesting that graphicians have an oposite opinion than programmers on a strictly graphical matter. :)
And for the last time, absolutely, dithering isn't the best way to "emulate" IFLI on a screenshot. But, in my eyes, it still looks closer to the original than a blurred mess.
|
| |
Tch Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004 Posts: 512 |
Wow Jailbird,I ment no offence. 8)
And ofcourse my opinion is subjective..I am a graphician.
Let me explain how I feel about Interlace in general..
I made a spiral scroller with bobs some time ago,but the ORA wasn´t working as it should..
The result was: flickering dots everywhere.
It was simply distracting and the emphasis was clearly on
the BLINKING PIXELS on the screen.
They simply draw attention.
I feel the same about Interlace.
A picture must be ´still´ and not `blink`,otherwise the feeling gets lost.
(But this is from a coders point of view,ofcoz) ;P |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 1576 |
>> Wow Jailbird,I ment no offence. 8) <<
Neither did I interpreted your words as an offence :D
>> I feel the same about Interlace.
A picture must be ´still´ and not `blink`,otherwise the feeling gets lost.
(But this is from a coders point of view,ofcoz) ;P <<
:)
Indeed, flickering could be disturbing. Although, if one truly masters the interlace mode and uses colors of lower brightness combined with smart antialiasing and suitable dithering, the flickering could be reduced to minimum. On a real C64/display screen, that's it... |
| |
Tch Account closed
Registered: Sep 2004 Posts: 512 |
You are right when it comes to ´masters´,Jailbird.
There sure are some beautiful interlaced pictures that almost look ´normal´.
But I am dreaming of demos like "Tsunami",with ´small´
pixeled (non interlaced) graphix.
That is the future for our beloved machine. ;) |
| |
Graham Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002 Posts: 990 |
"No, I mean the ugly blur caused by the TV's bad contrast, I guess that has nothing to do with luminance factors, mixing or whatever similar..."
This TV blur is only the blur of luminances. Makes Hires pixels fade the stronger it is. You can 100% get rid of it if you use a seperate chroma/luma cable, but you will NEVER get rid of the chrominance blur.
"IMHO, you are aproaching this matter on a too technical way. As a graphician, I don't really care about chroma/luma values of any kind, my perception is strongly visual."
Yes and this is exactly what I told you: There is always a blur on chrominance, a VERY strong blur. But your perception (and other humans aswell since PAL was built with human perception in mind) does not notice it very much, it's a quite subtle effect which makes C64 pictures "somehow" look better without people actually noticing what it is. That's also the reason why the 10 years of search for >THE< C64 palette failed: Those 16 C64 pictures do not exist in a dithered picture, in reality you have much much more colors. The search for a palette failed because of this, since even if all colors were 100% like on c64, once you used these colors in a picture they still looked all wrong.
"I find it quite interesting that graphicians have an oposite opinion than programmers on a strictly graphical matter. :)"
This is not about opinion. If you want to have the IFLI screenshots as on C64, you would have to simulate the mentioned chroma blur. And those 320x200 pixels also do not exist in reality. It is and stays 2 * 160x200, no matter what you do. The "opinion" part is actually what you/me/others like better. |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001 Posts: 1576 |
@Graham: the "opinion" part of this topic equals with the visual interpretation of IFLI screenshots, and that's what I meant since my very first post, nothing more, nothing less. Everything else is a technical matter, which I will never understand to the bone - but that's your table anyway...
In my opinion a blurred screenshot looks ugly whilst I put the technical rules aside. In your opinion, it's the correct, technical way of doing it, even if it's ugly in the eyes of a graphician. I guess we're even then :D |
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002 Posts: 206 |
Quote: Wow Jailbird,I ment no offence. 8)
And ofcourse my opinion is subjective..I am a graphician.
Let me explain how I feel about Interlace in general..
I made a spiral scroller with bobs some time ago,but the ORA wasn´t working as it should..
The result was: flickering dots everywhere.
It was simply distracting and the emphasis was clearly on
the BLINKING PIXELS on the screen.
They simply draw attention.
I feel the same about Interlace.
A picture must be ´still´ and not `blink`,otherwise the feeling gets lost.
(But this is from a coders point of view,ofcoz) ;P
I actually quite like the blinking effect you get with interlaced modes. I feel if gives a certain life to the picture and I think can help draw the viewers eye around the screen (so long as the eye is not being drawn for the wrong reasons; there's a different between a carefully anti-aliased blinking and a black-next-to-white flickering!).
Obviously you've pushed UFLI much further than I thought was possible and it's certainly made me want to have a go at that mode for myself, but I don't think I'll neglect IFLI forever. Aside from having to do some over the top anti-aliasing to reduce flickering, it's one of the most natural modes to work in on the C64. You have very few colour restrictions, you don't have to worry about sprite/colour priorities and so on. It's just about setting the pixels exactly where your eye and your mind tell you is best. |
Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |