I wanted to play some PS2 and instead of getting a CRT or a scaler, I decided to try an old 4:3 LCD TV I found that has YPbPr inputs and very low response time.However I found that the video output from the PS2 appeared too narrow on this TV for most games, and in investigating this I learned that the PS2 is uniquely a clusterfuck with regard to its video output modes. I found this guy testing how best to scale recorded PS2 footage for a typical game:https://lparchive.org/meatsupport/CroppingAndResizingRecordedPS2Footage/In this article, the video output for Yakuza is a 720x480 frame, but the actual video content is 640x448 and the rest is black padding around the edges. In theory the black padding is to compensate for overscan, and the 720x480 (3:2) signal is supposed to be displayed at a narrower PAR (pixel aspect ratio) to fit a 4:3 display. What confuses me, though, is the specific PAR that it is supposed to be displayed at.See my pic for an illustration. My natural thought would be that if you just take the whole 720x480 signal and squish it to 4:3, the video should look correct. But the writer of this article found that actually, the video looks most correct if only the 640x448 video content is stretched to 4:3. The black padding does not have a 640:448 aspect ratio, which means if you scale the whole 720x480 signal it becomes too narrow. I took measurements on my TV and they matched the calculations in my image exactly.I know that good CRTs usually let you adjust the width of the image, so you could compensate for this. But I don't think most other analog video sources use this same intended PAR, do they? Does this mean that to get correct video, you would have to adjust the horizontal stretch on your CRT every time you switch between the PS2 and another source? Or is the seemingly too narrow version actually correct and it's the game devs' fault for being inconsistent? Or is there something I'm missing?
I'm pretty sure most CRTs back then would stretch the 640*448 to 4:3
>>12030984they stretched horizontally, not vertically. The truth is that overscan meant you wouldn't even see the full fat 480 scanlines on most TV's anyway, so 448i was the lowest common denominator for visible resolution.
>>12030880>I know that good CRTs usually let you adjust the width of the image, so you could compensate for this. But I don't think most other analog video sources use this same intended PAR, do they? Does this mean that to get correct video, you would have to adjust the horizontal stretch on your CRT every time you switch between the PS2 and another source? Or is the seemingly too narrow version actually correct and it's the game devs' fault for being inconsistent? Or is there something I'm missing?You don't have to do that. You leave a bit of overscan so games that are 448i and 224p fill up or almost fill the screen. Horizontal is always stretched to fill like the other anon said. I don't quite understand it but even games that are 512x448i fill the screen horizontally just like SNES at 256x224p on SNES will. But the lower than 240p/480i (usually 224/448) vertical resolutions will show black on top and bottom without much overscan. Older CRTs had a shit load of overscan by default.There might be instances of where these non square pixels on a CRT display stuff like circles incorrectly (like 8:7 vs 4:3 on SNES) but stretched horizontally is how everyone played them back in the day.
>>12030880Idk what any of this means. I just hook the console up to my crt and play the games
You can spend your entire life going down this rabbit hole for various consoles and you'll find genuine evidence in both directions regarding whether to stretch or not to stretch. Sometimes a game contradicts ITSELF with what aspect ratio you should be playing at. You can lose your mind over it and be autistic about every single game, or you could just play in 4:3 and forget it.
>>12030880>In this article, the video output for Yakuza is a 720x480 frame, but the actual video content is 640x448 and the rest is black padding around the edges. In theory the black padding is to compensate for overscan, and the 720x480 (3:2) signal is supposed to be displayed at a narrower PAR (pixel aspect ratio) to fit a 4:3 display. What confuses me, though, is the specific PAR that it is supposed to be displayed at.720x480 is NTSC standard. 3:2 PAR displayed in 4:3 DAR (Display aspect ratio). You need to display it with non square pixels to match both. Content is often lower horizontally because CRTs don't really have horizontal resolution. But it will always draw 480 lines (unless double strike) whether they are used or not.
>>12031029If your aspect ratio is more than 5% off you didn't beat the game.
>>12030880It doesn’t matter.
>>12030880Emulators already have the correct default retard, unless is a per game autism hack but in that case the developer is at fault. Most SNES emulators do the "intended" thing, and PCSX2 already does the intended thing by default unless you manually go in and change it.
>>12031031this.you can skip some steps if the game is 640 pixels wide. but this is how you calculate aspect ratio.
>>12031270Weaponized Autism
>>12031270In my example (OP), everything is happening as it does in your image up through the "Shrink to 4:3 aspect ratio" step, but it doesn't seem like the video is actually at the correct aspect ratio at that point. In your example the shrunk-to-4:3 image is clearly correct based on the dimensions of the moon, but in my example the radar has been compressed horizontally too much and it's an oval shape. >>12031123I'm not talking about emulation, you should learn to read dude
>>12031385not all devs consider or care about aspect ratio and perfect shapes. that is if they are even calculating it correctly, since it's a tricky matter and not even current emulators that have done research have it implemented correctly.for example, aspect corrected sonic on genesis is not a circle while jumping.
>>12031270This image is complete gibberish.
Unrelated but I spent all yesterday trying to figure out why my upscaler wasnt working for PS2 and it turns out it was my extron switcher not wanting to properly distribute RGsBkilling myselffuck pee ess too
>>12030880>the PS2 is uniquely a clusterfuck with regard to its video output modesAlmost every single retro console has some fuckery going on with its video outputs, that's why all the wanking around pixel perfect scaling never made any sense.Pretty sure the only console to consistently output real 240p is the Neo Geo, and even that expects some pretty heavy overscan in most games. Everything else is a mismatch of all sorts of fucked up resolutions, specific expectations around color blending or video standards, slightly off refresh rates, varying aspect ratio expectations sometimes even mixing multiple within a single screen, too much or too little overscan, and every other possible issue you could have with analog video.
>>12030990NTA, but I figured this until reading an interview with a Genesis developer back in the day who said that the Genesis' 320x224 picture actually displayed the pixels slightly taller than they were wide. I assume it's the same for the PS2.
Uhm, how about you know... actually play the game like everybody did back in the day on their shitty consumer grade CRTs, without giving a fuck about the absolute 1:1, pixel/blur perfect, dev intended autism.
>>12030880Man thats doing too much i just have my ps2 hooked up with some amazon bought component cables which makes it look great on my 16:9 modern tv with black bars 4:3
>>12031493Yeah lol most people just played on whatever they had.
The CRT doesn't really stretch anything beyond what you do with the knobs. In an analog signal a line is transmitted during a fixed interval (depending on parameters like refresh rate, number of lines, V/Hblank etc.).It's the video hardware in the console that fits a line of a low resolution source into such a time slot, essentially stretching it.
>>12030880Hold on, is SA so fucked that the LP archive now has to archive regular ass discussions too?
>>12030880>the video output for Yakuza is a 720x480 frame, but the actual video content is 640x448You disrespect the devs by playing like that.FOR SHAME
yakzua came out at a time when most people would have been playing it on really shit lcds or plasmas, usually stretched to fit the display and through a SCART or RF cableor at least that's how i played it so therefore that's how it should be played
>>12030880Why do all these ratio threads always assume that the rounded hud objects are supposed to be perfect circles?
>>12031432Mistranslation and/or insanity
>>12032124Not to mention, most of the people that original worked on these game probably used the default circle tool in their paint package to draw those assets in the first place. Meanwhile, the game itself was 2D tiled-base.
>>12030984my phillips 32 inch CRT TV does 4:3 and 16:9 widescreen etc as well as pal and pal 60
>>12031037>If your aspect ratio is more than 5% off you didn't beat the game.underrated post
>>12030880What do other sources look like on your TV? Try some other consoles, DVDs, even other PS2 games since some of those run at different resolutions like 512x448. See if using other input methods like composite or S-video makes a difference as well.
>>12032124do you mean mini-maps or something else?
>>12032894This thread is referring to the minimap, but I've seen other threads refer to things like circles in text.There's nothing that makes circular objects an absolute reference point. There a plenty of possible reasons why in development things don't work this way.It is also my impression that individuals on the autistic spectrum get a bit myopic on topics like this.
>>12031270i remember those threads, thanks.https://warosu.org/vr/thread/11787401#p11791279
>>12032903>There's nothing that makes circular objects an absolute reference point.well, I think its because a perfect circle is easier to do in 2d tiles
>>12031285
>>12032907OP here, that threadis very helpful. I didn't realize just how much inconsistency there was with this stuff>>12032124>>12032903The circles are just the most obvious form of supporting evidence. In the games I've has this issue with there are many other graphical elements that just look a bit off, but it's more subtle and depends on subjective judgment
>>12033208SNES seems to be the worst because of the weird 256x224 resolution giving a heavy horizontal stretch in games that didn't compensate for it. The difference between 320x224 (10:7) with square pixels vs NTSC 4:3 isn't much difference. That's why PS2 is so fucky too since it often uses a low horizontal resolution that is like the interlaced version of SNES's weird output
>>12033240Is that why when watching PS2 video captures the picture looks to squashed up?
Figured I'd post this here, since I'm trying to display PS2 emulation on my TV.Use: connect my PC to my living room TV as a secondary display, mainly for 1P gayming and emulating up to PS2 and Switch.Options:>Long HDMI cable + DP to HDMI converter>Long HDMI to DP cable (Amazon Basics on pic)>Long Display Port cable + DP to HDMI converterI want the least quality degradation, I'm just doing up to 4K and 30Hz and perhaps 60z. What do?
>>12034185just use an hdmi cable broyou'd have to be using one you found in a landfill covered in trash-juice to actually see much of a difference
>>12030880>I wanted to play some PS2Sauce? Everything in your post indicates you just wanted to be a streamer attention whore.
>>12034027I think I'm half wrong in my previous post. The issue is with DAR and PAR not matching but PS2 output resolution is always 720x480 although the games internally run at those lower resolutions like 512x448. So you would want to capture in 720x480 and resize to 640x480. Or for widescreen capture some other number that is true 16:9. Some people do it right and it's not squashed.
>>12034624Whatever reasoning is behind this post, it seems like such a tangled mess of your own myopic social insecurities, autistic theory-of-mind difficulties, and general teenageness (actual or virtual) that I can't possibly respond to it
