I'm talking about CRT vs modern monitors. You, I think, are talking about the video feed? S-video and RGB and RF cables and all that can and did still feed into CRT monitors. And while theres a world of difference between a low ejd and a high end CRT, there is still color bleed on all but the crispiest displays, and all of them have scanlines and other CRT elements, as well as a different relationship to color than modern displays.
Pixel art has inherent limitations that can lead to artifacting issues. Take a look at this image:
Show
See how the middle and right-side examples have these apparent vertical lines that run through them? This is called "banding," which is a partocular example of the moire effect (or screen door effect). It makes the lines look like giant removedy pixels and increases the "apparent resolution." Or to put it another way, it makes the pixel grid more obvious. And that can look very different on a CRT or an LCD display because of how they render images. Looking at the art of Chrono posted earlier, there are places on that image where the natural blurring of a CRT makes an otherwise poor choice look amazing. That's because an artist made that image intetionally to look a certain way on the CRT medium.
That's because an artist made that image intetionally to look a certain way on the CRT medium.
Yeah but like... it doesn't, though? As in, the added shading, banding, stuff you're talking about is native to composite video itself. A proper YPbPr video feed into any decent CRT has a very small amount of colour bleed, on account that the colours are separated at the cable. You can get really sharp images off a CRT...
I've seen demo images of like, Guardian Legend and how much more detailed it looks on a CRT! and they were using a Famicom hooked up via RF. I just don't have a face for stuff like that. Like, a decent YPbPr or RGB feed going to a decent (so like 20"+) consumer set is not going to be that "naturally blurred", or else playing Sonic 1 on the Wii's GenesisPlusGX over component would produce exactly the same "blurred" dithering you get with composite... right?
What I'm saying, and again correct me if I've misunderstood or something, is that only the lowest quality analog connections to a TV will produce the "blurring" that makes the "otherwise poor choices" of the dithered Sonic 1 waterfall or whatever "look amazing". And at that point you're getting such a degrated image (combined chroma+luma lmao) that why bother? The allegedly intended way to play them is through the worst video hookups possible?
It is always disheartening to remember that every console up until like, the Playstation was sold with an RF box thing as standard. Just why? I mean I get it, common TVs, but goddamn.
I'm talking about CRT vs modern monitors. You, I think, are talking about the video feed? S-video and RGB and RF cables and all that can and did still feed into CRT monitors. And while theres a world of difference between a low ejd and a high end CRT, there is still color bleed on all but the crispiest displays, and all of them have scanlines and other CRT elements, as well as a different relationship to color than modern displays.
Pixel art has inherent limitations that can lead to artifacting issues. Take a look at this image:
See how the middle and right-side examples have these apparent vertical lines that run through them? This is called "banding," which is a partocular example of the moire effect (or screen door effect). It makes the lines look like giant removedy pixels and increases the "apparent resolution." Or to put it another way, it makes the pixel grid more obvious. And that can look very different on a CRT or an LCD display because of how they render images. Looking at the art of Chrono posted earlier, there are places on that image where the natural blurring of a CRT makes an otherwise poor choice look amazing. That's because an artist made that image intetionally to look a certain way on the CRT medium.
Yeah but like... it doesn't, though? As in, the added shading, banding, stuff you're talking about is native to composite video itself. A proper YPbPr video feed into any decent CRT has a very small amount of colour bleed, on account that the colours are separated at the cable. You can get really sharp images off a CRT...
I've seen demo images of like, Guardian Legend and how much more detailed it looks on a CRT! and they were using a Famicom hooked up via RF. I just don't have a face for stuff like that. Like, a decent YPbPr or RGB feed going to a decent (so like 20"+) consumer set is not going to be that "naturally blurred", or else playing Sonic 1 on the Wii's GenesisPlusGX over component would produce exactly the same "blurred" dithering you get with composite... right?
What I'm saying, and again correct me if I've misunderstood or something, is that only the lowest quality analog connections to a TV will produce the "blurring" that makes the "otherwise poor choices" of the dithered Sonic 1 waterfall or whatever "look amazing". And at that point you're getting such a degrated image (combined chroma+luma lmao) that why bother? The allegedly intended way to play them is through the worst video hookups possible?
The vast majortiy of people were using RF cables or RGB until like the 2000s. Most people were not rocking state of the art stuff.
RGB is pretty good, dunno...
It is always disheartening to remember that every console up until like, the Playstation was sold with an RF box thing as standard. Just why? I mean I get it, common TVs, but goddamn.