| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 681 |
Screenshots of Interlace Pics
I’m interested to know what people’s thoughts are on screenshotting interlace pics…
On C64GFX, we do things a bit differently to CSDb. Generally, we care more about the original art than how it’s presented - so we’ll host logos with all the “extras” removed (scrollers, textual information, etc). But of course CSDb screenshots are of how things are actually released.
With interlace pics, it’s more complicated. In theory we should be displaying animations at 50fps (usually) switching between 2 screenshots.. but I’m lead to believe that that could cause battery drain and other problems on devices - plus the FPS probably wouldn’t be 50.
Some sort of blending was suggested.. or simply choosing alternate pixels and merging to create a full-res pic.
The latter is what I’ve tried with some pics .. eg. Some of Leon’s. It looks good and it looks like it’s true to the original creation - I’d hazard a guess that he simply drew these pics at full 320x200px resolution on most of these, actually, rather than drawing on C64 in an interlace editor?
Eg. https://c64gfx.com/image/168046
I toyed with the idea of blending the 1px offset pictures (frame 0 and frame 1).. but I’m not sure that that’s correct either.
Others have suggested some fairly complex blending schemes that presumably show more like it would be on CRT - and I think this is where the 1,000s of colours problem comes in (evident on many CSDb screenshots). This seems unfair since regular MC/HI screenshots don’t get the same treatment.
Anyway, interested to know thoughts… both for CSDb and for C64GFX.com |
|
... 76 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Impetigo
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 33 |
Quote: I've prepared again some examples.
Please check which one looks best on your computer (maybe comparing to real hardware/VICE) and let us know. Please also refresh rate of your monitor.
https://kawalekkodu.pl/leon.html
W10, Firefox 133, 90Hz refresh rate monitor
6b is closest to what I see on Vice 3.8 (a recent nightly). 6 looks similar to 6b. Didn't check it on real hardware.
1, 2, 3, 4 are (same) fixed images. Looks like only one of the frames is displayed.
7, 8, 10, 12 flicker a lot! Far from what I see on Vice.
5, 9, 11 is strange. One type of flicker for 1 second then another type of flicker for another second. And it repeats like that. |
| |
Gordian
Registered: May 2022
Posts: 80 |
Quoting Impetigo
7, 8, 10, 12 flicker a lot! Far from what I see on Vice.
What do you mean exactly by "flicker a lot". Is it flickering too fast (faster than what you see in Vice?) or very slow? |
| |
Impetigo
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 33 |
Quote: Quoting Impetigo
7, 8, 10, 12 flicker a lot! Far from what I see on Vice.
What do you mean exactly by "flicker a lot". Is it flickering too fast (faster than what you see in Vice?) or very slow?
I think they flicker slow so, it looks like there is a lot of movement on the picture. |
| |
Gordian
Registered: May 2022
Posts: 80 |
Could you record video? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
showing these effects by recording video is .... doomed to fail. You'll add at least one more framerate conversion to the mix :D |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 - Next |
