| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
a plea from an old schooler
please dont use modified PAL emulating screenshots for pictures on this site.
people may want to use this site to download unmodified c64 art in gif or png format with pure pixel definition.
if they want to see the stuff in highly debatable pal emulation mode people can download the PRG files and view them in that mode on an emulator.
Thanks
Steve |
|
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
Steve,
are you aware of http://c64pixels.com?
Cheers,
enthusi |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
yes very much so. but alas that also uses modified data for its large views which i have to say i am not keen on.
i have no problem with it being optional, but i would like always like to view the pure pixel data rather than a modified version that i dont remember it ever looking like, regardless of what the "experts" spout these days.
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
isnt the only way to download the unmodified c64 art downloading the prg and viewing it on a c64 ? =P |
| |
v3to
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 150 |
jep, that was the idea of using the thumbnail-version at c64pixels for a puristic view. which was also for a long time the biggest issue, because they were all shown as jpegs what also has a slight feel of pal emulation. currently those pics will be all changed to 8bit png pics but this will take some time.
speaking of the scaled view there are no plans for doing optional views between simple scaling or pal emulation. main reason is the way how the gallery2 software works. the only way to do a more flexible presentation without changing the official code would be using flash for each entry. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
reply to groepaz:
not at all.
as a graphic designer and fairly technically savvy artist i can take any unmodified c64 screenshot and get it back into project one for real koala editing if i want.
but theres bugger all you can do with a "mucked about" psuedo pal emulated gif on a 64.
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
sure, but the purpose of a screenshot is to show how it looks like on a c64, not to serve as a repository for graphic designers. |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
@ste & veto:
Any reasonable browser nowadays can scale individual images, so you can always blow up or save the preview-image which is 1:1 pixel. Especially with the recent option to change them to PNG! |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
@groepaz
That's exactly what Ste is saying. If you want to see "your" version/recollection of how it looks, go download a prg, set the palette and PAL emulation settings to how "you" think it should look. If someone wants a pixel exact image (ie 16 colours, no blending/scanlines etc) then there should be somewhere to download them like that NOT what someone else has decided to set the emulation to as then there's no going back.
*edit* as you posted again while I was typing..
I don't believe that's right, this is a repository of things as close to accurate as possible and having 16 colours and 320x200 (160x200) with the pixels where they were put is closer than a filtered image. You don't go downloading demos and re-packing them just because it might make them smaller. Ok if there are .koa or .prg files available then it's not so bad, but once again, who makes the decision what is right for a filtered image?
Pete |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:I don't believe that's right, this is a repository of things as close to accurate as possible, you don't go downloading demos and re-packing them just because it might make them smaller. Ok if there are .koa or .prg files available then it's not so bad, but once again, who makes the decision what is right for a filtered image?
i am not sure i get what you want to say, but: the screenshot is not the content. the content are the linked files (and only those) |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Quote:who makes the decision what is right for a filtered image?
Obviously the uploader does (currently).
I agree that the ideal solution is to have pixel exact screenshot with a site side PAL option for viewing.
If we don't have that I think it's a bit hard on people to forbid emulation on screenshots.
Several images use PAL blending quite a lot.
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Which is part of what I said. The problem is that unless everyone agrees on a "correct" PAL emulation, who gets to decide which is the right one? or the right palette for that matter? Surely it's better to give people a pixel accurate image, the files that go with it and let them decide how they view them, not be forced to look at something someone else decided is right?
Pete |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Quote: Quote:I don't believe that's right, this is a repository of things as close to accurate as possible, you don't go downloading demos and re-packing them just because it might make them smaller. Ok if there are .koa or .prg files available then it's not so bad, but once again, who makes the decision what is right for a filtered image?
i am not sure i get what you want to say, but: the screenshot is not the content. the content are the linked files (and only those)
I agree. And the rule that the binary must equal to the screenshot shown is also enforced quite well within this community. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:Surely it's better to give people a pixel accurate image, the files that go with it and let them decide how they view them, not be forced to look at something someone else decided is right?
yes, and thats why the PRG file is right there |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Yeah, it would be ideal to have an option for filtering on/off, and of course if images are drawn to make use of it everyone will have been informed of that and if the uploader is the artist (quite possible these days) they can easily add a comment to say it's filtered.
Problems arise when someone like Ste uploads his stuff and (I believe this is what happened) is followed around by someone changing them to PAL emulated ones.. I don't think there was any reason behind it other than that person believing it was the right thing to do, but to Ste it obviously wasn't.
Pete |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Note that you have the option to lock your entries.
If you are the author and do have a specific opinion on it, change the screenshot and lock it. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Note that you have the option to lock your entries.
If you are the author and do have a specific opinion on it, change the screenshot and lock it.
Which has been done ;) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Quote:Surely it's better to give people a pixel accurate image, the files that go with it and let them decide how they view them, not be forced to look at something someone else decided is right?
yes, and thats why the PRG file is right there
So we disagree on what people should be shown as a screenshot, despite an unfiltered one being the exact pixels an artist dropped onto a bitmap and PAL emulation being someone's attempt to emulate the signal path of those pixels after they leave that bitmap... Like has been said, an option to have filter on/off would be ideal.
Pete |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Quote: So we disagree on what people should be shown as a screenshot, despite an unfiltered one being the exact pixels an artist dropped onto a bitmap and PAL emulation being someone's attempt to emulate the signal path of those pixels after they leave that bitmap... Like has been said, an option to have filter on/off would be ideal.
Pete
Since implementing PAL emulation in PHP isn't too much fun we could do this quick fix: Allow both a filtered and an unfiltered screen shot.
Require the screen shot uploader to flag which.
Only one screenshot is required, but two allowed.
Note also that most screenshots include the screen border to some degree. Having no border isn't very common.
The site might not always have black background you know... :) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Since implementing PAL emulation in PHP isn't too much fun we could do this quick fix: Allow both a filtered and an unfiltered screen shot.
Require the screen shot uploader to flag which.
Only one screenshot is required, but two allowed.
Note also that most screenshots include the screen border to some degree. Having no border isn't very common.
The site might not always have black background you know... :)
That sounds like a nice compromise, maybe mouseover to switch the two but show the chosen type as standard :)
Pete |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
ok, we can do that - come back if you have a significant number of users behind you that agree on which palette to use for this =P
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: ok, we can do that - come back if you have a significant number of users behind you that agree on which palette to use for this =P
Well as there's going to be the option for the uploader to decide on PAL/no PAL/both, surely they've either got some claim to the image or think they have so until someone with more claim to it comes along it's up to them ;)
Pete |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: So we disagree on what people should be shown as a screenshot, despite an unfiltered one being the exact pixels an artist dropped onto a bitmap and PAL emulation being someone's attempt to emulate the signal path of those pixels after they leave that bitmap... Like has been said, an option to have filter on/off would be ideal.
Pete
the unfiltered one is not how it looked like on the artist's display. I still remember the horror of seeing the 'unfiltered' pixels of the c64s emulator for the first time. It was anything but not how a c64 looked to my knowledge. So far everyone was happy with the PAL filtered stuff around here, its not like it happened against the crowds will. |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
BTW: Don't forget that there are different sets of luminances for the colors.
The really old ~1982 c64 has a 6569R1 video chip which is different.
Some early sceners had that, which might add to the palette confusion. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: the unfiltered one is not how it looked like on the artist's display. I still remember the horror of seeing the 'unfiltered' pixels of the c64s emulator for the first time. It was anything but not how a c64 looked to my knowledge. So far everyone was happy with the PAL filtered stuff around here, its not like it happened against the crowds will.
First, that's not the point of what's being discussed ;)
Second, the filtered stuff is nothing like how Ste, myself and quite a few other people I know saw it. I think Ste would've noticed while he was drawing that magical new colours were appearing and while some stuff did attempt to use PAL blending the demos we saw with it in didn't actually produce the effect they had in mind.
If other people with different TVs saw different then that's the whole point we're getting at, you cant foist your memory of something on everyone else despite them disagreeing and still tell them they're wrong. That's why I'm happy that there's the possibility of a compromise.
Pete |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: BTW: Don't forget that there are different sets of luminances for the colors.
The really old ~1982 c64 has a 6569R1 video chip which is different.
Some early sceners had that, which might add to the palette confusion.
Yeah, different palettes and even the PAL emulation good/bad isn't really a problem. If someone uploads an image using Pepto palette and I think Wanja is closer, I'll download it and change it to keep on my HDD, presuming there's one to download that's not been blurred to all hell ;)
Some people seem to be mistaking us wanting a "clean" image for us saying PAL emulation is TOTALLY wrong or unnecessary. I don't think it's correct yet but I do think to get the full effect of a C64 connected to a TV something along those lines IS needed, just not in this instance.
Pete |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: First, that's not the point of what's being discussed ;)
Second, the filtered stuff is nothing like how Ste, myself and quite a few other people I know saw it. I think Ste would've noticed while he was drawing that magical new colours were appearing and while some stuff did attempt to use PAL blending the demos we saw with it in didn't actually produce the effect they had in mind.
If other people with different TVs saw different then that's the whole point we're getting at, you cant foist your memory of something on everyone else despite them disagreeing and still tell them they're wrong. That's why I'm happy that there's the possibility of a compromise.
Pete
The alternate line color mixing is the reality. Try it on your setup. I've seen it myself it was a shocking discovery. Blurred smeared pixels were also there. In the 80s you had all these artefacts on a CRT. Its not a matter of opinion. You can literally count hires pixels in a chessboard pattern on todays monitors, on the old CRTs you will get most of the time new colors out of this.
Its not a matter of different TVs either, its how PAL signal works.
Wish I had my phone's usb cable with me, I could show all these effects to you right away. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Quote: the unfiltered one is not how it looked like on the artist's display. I still remember the horror of seeing the 'unfiltered' pixels of the c64s emulator for the first time. It was anything but not how a c64 looked to my knowledge. So far everyone was happy with the PAL filtered stuff around here, its not like it happened against the crowds will.
Well i'm not happy with it Oswald :)
and bearing in mind i used to draw on the original i would would find it extremely difficult to draw in the current favoured palettes and effects being as how they make about 1/3 of the palette almost the same colours.
we didnt use the Force you know. we could actually tell the colours apart.
Steve |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
"Some people seem to be mistaking us wanting a "clean" image for us saying PAL emulation is TOTALLY wrong"
rightfully so:
"the filtered stuff is nothing like how Ste, myself and quite a few other people I know saw it" |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: The alternate line color mixing is the reality. Try it on your setup. I've seen it myself it was a shocking discovery. Blurred smeared pixels were also there. In the 80s you had all these artefacts on a CRT. Its not a matter of opinion. You can literally count hires pixels in a chessboard pattern on todays monitors, on the old CRTs you will get most of the time new colors out of this.
Its not a matter of different TVs either, its how PAL signal works.
Wish I had my phone's usb cable with me, I could show all these effects to you right away.
It's ok, my memory isn't so bad that I don't remember what I saw in front of me. PAL blending is a reality but I think sometimes the emulation version is WAY over what it should be.
Pete |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Quote: The alternate line color mixing is the reality. Try it on your setup. I've seen it myself it was a shocking discovery. Blurred smeared pixels were also there. In the 80s you had all these artefacts on a CRT. Its not a matter of opinion. You can literally count hires pixels in a chessboard pattern on todays monitors, on the old CRTs you will get most of the time new colors out of this.
Its not a matter of different TVs either, its how PAL signal works.
Wish I had my phone's usb cable with me, I could show all these effects to you right away.
actually what u tended to get was "moire" if used more than a characters worth.
use lots and u got a lovely alternating vertical stripe effect that anyone painting with koalapainter on an 80s crt can tell u about.
you didnt get any usable extra colours just irritating chroma noise.
Steve |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "Some people seem to be mistaking us wanting a "clean" image for us saying PAL emulation is TOTALLY wrong"
rightfully so:
"the filtered stuff is nothing like how Ste, myself and quite a few other people I know saw it"
Jesus, is your name atariski? lol
No, that's you reading what you believe I'm saying into what I actually said ;) I'm saying after talking to Ste and some other people I know the PAL emulation is too overzealous you could maybe call it and therefore ruins the image "for us" I'm also including certain palettes in that that are then hard coded once pal emulation is applied to a gif/png. I've never said it's not necessary at some point in the chain to produce an "emulation" of a C64 displaying an image.
Pete |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: Well i'm not happy with it Oswald :)
and bearing in mind i used to draw on the original i would would find it extremely difficult to draw in the current favoured palettes and effects being as how they make about 1/3 of the palette almost the same colours.
we didnt use the Force you know. we could actually tell the colours apart.
Steve
I have drawn a LOT of stuff on the original aswell. Not as much as you, but i have plenty of sprites, sprite animations, character sets, logos & fullscreen koala pics behind my back. All on the real thing.
Pepto's palette is based on very strict measurements and calculations and its not as you imply made up to make pixelling easyer. Guess you have seen the page where all calculations are written down?
Do you have a c64 setup atmo? Arent the pixels blured? Same brightness alternate line colors dont mix? Dont you see that every 2nd line is darker? etc. Its hard to believe. |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
my 2 cents:
I *really* dislike the idea of a screenshot here representing the image... People judge/vote/comment on screenshots already as is. Most prominent in MCI images :)
For all I care the screenshots could be made with 4-col dither instead to FORCE people to check it out on either a real thing OR at least a decent emulator with THEIR setting of preference. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: Jesus, is your name atariski? lol
No, that's you reading what you believe I'm saying into what I actually said ;) I'm saying after talking to Ste and some other people I know the PAL emulation is too overzealous you could maybe call it and therefore ruins the image "for us" I'm also including certain palettes in that that are then hard coded once pal emulation is applied to a gif/png. I've never said it's not necessary at some point in the chain to produce an "emulation" of a C64 displaying an image.
Pete
Sure, Pal emulation is imperfect, but I had several nerdgasms when it was introduced, its much better than without. Also in Vice You have a lot of options to change it to your liking, saturation, cntrast, blurryness, etc you name it. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
well in all honesty i think the pepto palette is complete cobblers.
no 64 palette i ever used has such dark and muted colours as what i see when i load a koala image into your app with that palette.
in your own app, the Wanja palette gives me the results i would expect to see on a 64.
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"Its hard to believe."
indeed. it may sound harsh but, some people may simple remember wrong, and should check out some things on the real thing again :)
"For all I care the screenshots could be made with 4-col dither instead to FORCE people to check it out on either a real thing OR at least a decent emulator with THEIR setting of preference."
i like to encourage people to create actual screenshots, ie not use an emulator but a video grabber :) |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
just a small point but if u can and need to change all the values, how the hell can it be accurate and definitive?
Steve |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: well in all honesty i think the pepto palette is complete cobblers.
no 64 palette i ever used has such dark and muted colours as what i see when i load a koala image into your app with that palette.
in your own app, the Wanja palette gives me the results i would expect to see on a 64.
Steve
I think pepto is perfect. Anyway its personal preferences tastes, and what TV set you had with what settings. Probaby you had a setup which was closer to Wanja's. I bet you could take pepto's display it on a certain crt with certain settings and it will look as you like it :)
btw, have you read my reply over at format war? |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: just a small point but if u can and need to change all the values, how the hell can it be accurate and definitive?
Steve
http://pepto.de/projects/colorvic/
read it how he did it. Its a nice nerd read :-) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "Its hard to believe."
indeed. it may sound harsh but, some people may simple remember wrong, and should check out some things on the real thing again :)
"For all I care the screenshots could be made with 4-col dither instead to FORCE people to check it out on either a real thing OR at least a decent emulator with THEIR setting of preference."
i like to encourage people to create actual screenshots, ie not use an emulator but a video grabber :)
That would solve the problem nicely if we all just had an incorrect memory but despite me not really being active since 88-89 it's been nowhere near that long since I last saw a real machine ;) I know Ste still has his. I had one till about 5 years ago, I've seen stuff running on real hardware since then when I stopped with a friend for a month.
Pete
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: http://pepto.de/projects/colorvic/
read it how he did it. Its a nice nerd read :-)
I think this is skewing towards palettes only again where the real problem is a mix of palette and pal emulation producing a fixed high (compared to 16 colours) colour image that it's really hard to do anything with if it's not what you expected/remember.
Pepto's certainly gone about it the right way and for a palette alone it is one of the better ones. I think what Ste was getting at with sliders etc is once you add PAL emulation on to that you've got a whole world of possibilities and it's all down to personal preference again so even if Pepto is 100% correct, it's easily screwed once it's put into an emulator.
Pete
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: I think pepto is perfect. Anyway its personal preferences tastes, and what TV set you had with what settings. Probaby you had a setup which was closer to Wanja's. I bet you could take pepto's display it on a certain crt with certain settings and it will look as you like it :)
btw, have you read my reply over at format war?
Yeah, hurry up and recover! He's started asking me for a paint app now :P |
| |
v3to
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 150 |
imo there is no perfect c64 palette for pc, each one is a compromise. try various pix on a real c64 and compare them with the pc using pepto. there are always different impressions of the colors itself.
that is mostly caused by domination effects between pixels. well known for white, yellow, light-green, blue or brown. if you experiment with dark red and dark blue or violet and orange it seems that you can increase saturation on the real thing. all of this is missing on a tft and even current vice or timanthes pal emulation does no proper show (though groepaz new pe is damn promising). guess why many graphicians check their stuff on a real thing...
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: I think this is skewing towards palettes only again where the real problem is a mix of palette and pal emulation producing a fixed high (compared to 16 colours) colour image that it's really hard to do anything with if it's not what you expected/remember.
Pepto's certainly gone about it the right way and for a palette alone it is one of the better ones. I think what Ste was getting at with sliders etc is once you add PAL emulation on to that you've got a whole world of possibilities and it's all down to personal preference again so even if Pepto is 100% correct, it's easily screwed once it's put into an emulator.
Pete
Still Vice's PAL emulation is a whole lot closer to old CRT displays, than pixels defined 100% crystal clearly without any blur effect. You're pretty wrong: a real display has more than 16 colors. I've seen displays where a line of +++++++'s looked like <><><<><> with certain fore/background colors, on clear displays you can see the char columns even if the screen is empty, there are a lot of effects and pal emulation only does a few of them.
Pepto has measured the YUV signal of various c64's with various oscilloscopes, and converted these values into RGB. How this may be wrong is over me. The emulator settings are there so the likes of you complaining about dull/dark colors can tune up saturation/brightness just like on any TV set you can do it. |
| |
tlr
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 1714 |
Quote: Still Vice's PAL emulation is a whole lot closer to old CRT displays, than pixels defined 100% crystal clearly without any blur effect. You're pretty wrong: a real display has more than 16 colors. I've seen displays where a line of +++++++'s looked like <><><<><> with certain fore/background colors, on clear displays you can see the char columns even if the screen is empty, there are a lot of effects and pal emulation only does a few of them.
Pepto has measured the YUV signal of various c64's with various oscilloscopes, and converted these values into RGB. How this may be wrong is over me. The emulator settings are there so the likes of you complaining about dull/dark colors can tune up saturation/brightness just like on any TV set you can do it.
Though some of those effects are like STE mentions, chroma noise, or rather the luminance signal crossing into the chroma carrier.
That's not properly emulated in any emulators AFAIK.
Anyway I agree with JCB to try to keep this thread on the screenshot policy issue.
|
| |
null
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2006
Posts: 645 |
I haven't read this whole thread, so this might have been said, but...
How about this. If you don't like how the PREVIEW IMAGE ('cause that's what it is to me) here on the site looks, why don't you just grab the .prg and, you know, open it in VICE and DISABLE the PAL emulation. Tah-dah! \:D/
Seriously, is it really that hard? even after scanning this thread quickly I haven't seen anyone suggest this. If I did overlook something like it, I appologize. ;_)
------------------------------------
http://zomgwtfbbq.info |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Oswald, please READ the thread, as tlr said this is about the screenshot policy, you keep sidetracking it to wanting to talk about pal emulation and how TVs work, I think after reading some arguments on AA you'd know I understand all that stuff a lot better than some people who claim to be "experts".
This thread is about the fact that if you ONLY make pal filtered screenshots avaialable you're forcing an incomplete/incorrect image onto people as being THE correct one. All Ste and I wanted to see was that at least an untouched image was available as well.
Also, read my posts again, I've not said Pepto is "wrong". Starting to get a bit bored with having to repeat myself now ;) I've only said that once ANY palette including Pepto is combined with an incomplete pal emulation the resulting pixels are likely wrong to some degree NO MATTER how correct the palette is.
Pete |
| |
null
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2006
Posts: 645 |
Newsflash: the untouched image IS availble, unless you're too retarded and incompetent to download the attached .PRG/.D64 or whatever other format.
Is that really so hard to understand, even after it's been mentioned over 8000 time in this thread?
------------------------------------
http://zomgwtfbbq.info |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:This thread is about the fact that if you ONLY make pal filtered screenshots avaialable you're forcing an incomplete/incorrect image onto people as being THE correct one. All Ste and I wanted to see was that at least an untouched image was available as well.
a) the unfiltered screenshot is in no way more correct than the filtered one. at this point i can only encourage everyone again to make real screenshots from the real thing and challange anyone else to argue why these would be worse than an incorrect - filtered or not - one from an emulator.
b) i think you very much overestimate the importance of these screenshots. the purpose of the damned screenshot is to be able to quickly check wtf some program looks like. the purpose of the screenshot is NOT to serve as a repository for graphics people. those "people that want to download unmodified c64 art" mentioned in the first post can always do that, regardless if a screenshot even exists. the unmodified c64 art is in the prg file, period. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
@Knoeki
Of course we understand there are d64/prg files to download, you're also missing the point. I'll try to make it clearer below.. Also. If you'd like to infer that I'm retarded please come visit me to do so. I take offence to such talk on forums ;)
@Groepaz
I think you're still not understanding what me and Ste are getting at. I'll try to explain again.
PAL emulation is of course closest to what a real machine attached to a TV will produce BUT to upload EVERY image to this site with PAL emulation which is (I'm sure most people will agree) an incomplete emulation atm, means a) you're saying that doesn't matter it's right "for now" b) when a better one is written all the current "right" ones have to be fetched again from a prg/d64 and capped again with the new "better" pal emulation else they're all suddenly "wrong".
As it's already been agreed that there can be 2 images I don't see the problem and the need to continually argue about something and to just let people look at the ones they want, use the untouched one for re-conversion if ever needed and if an uploader thinks no pal emulation is the way to go on THEIR images, let them flag that.
That is what I mean when I say an unfiltered image is more correct than a filtered one. Yes, it's no more correct than the also available prg/d64 but it's not "broken" in any way and it's a damn site easier to do something with then trying to reverse engineer a PAL emulated image even if someone decided that one had the wrong palette..
One last thought, I'm not sure if you've actually tried capping with most of the hardware that people would have at home but surely most of the pretty crappy capture cards/devices may look more PAL'y but they'll be even further from what an emulator would produce. If you've seen/own a capture device capable of doing a decent job please let me know which as I've been looking for one for some other purposes ;)
Pete |
| |
Joe
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 224 |
"well in all honesty i think the pepto palette is complete cobblers.
no 64 palette i ever used has such dark and muted colours as what i see when i load a koala image into your app with that palette."
I have to disagree, for what I remember using the real c64 from 1986 up until 2003 (and then gradually changed to pc) with the 1084s monitor (with no tuning on the hue/saturation/contrast) the Pepto-palette is the closest thing to the real deal. In the old days I used the Amiga to try out animations and so forth in Deluxe Paint and I made a palette similar to the Pepto-palette.
As for the PAL emulation, I have to agree. It's easier if one can count the pixels and look at it as "clean" as possible. |
| |
null
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2006
Posts: 645 |
Quote:Also. If you'd like to infer that I'm retarded please come visit me to do so. I take offence to such talk on forums ;)
Oh noes, someone is offended on the internet. Call the whambulance.
Actually, now that I think of it, I'm sure this whole screenshot debacle has gone by before, where it was pleaded everyone uploaded PAL emulated screenshots. To me, it doesn't matter. I'd say, if you upload a release, then post the screenshot however you want. I personally use PAL emulation screenshots because they seem to come a hell of a lot closer to the real thing than without PAL emulation enabled. I think it was said that it doesn't, but I personally don't agree with that. Opinions, assholes, etc.
Why in gods name you'd want no PAL emulation to begin with goes over my head, because if you're not capable of seeing individual pixels on your modern PC, you may want to get your eyesight checked. In fact, even on my old 80s Philips monitor I can see the individual pixels. Maybe not as well as on any modern flatscreen, but.. yeah.
Anyway, this whole discussion is fucking pointless. The main message seems to be "Waah, I want everyone to conform to my screenshot standards", even though the majority of users here seems to be fine with how it is now. Hell, I'll bet some of them aren't, but just download the files and check them in an emulator set up in the exact way they want, or even on a real machine.
------------------------------------
http://zomgwtfbbq.info |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Quote:Also. If you'd like to infer that I'm retarded please come visit me to do so. I take offence to such talk on forums ;)
Oh noes, someone is offended on the internet. Call the whambulance.
Actually, now that I think of it, I'm sure this whole screenshot debacle has gone by before, where it was pleaded everyone uploaded PAL emulated screenshots. To me, it doesn't matter. I'd say, if you upload a release, then post the screenshot however you want. I personally use PAL emulation screenshots because they seem to come a hell of a lot closer to the real thing than without PAL emulation enabled. I think it was said that it doesn't, but I personally don't agree with that. Opinions, assholes, etc.
Why in gods name you'd want no PAL emulation to begin with goes over my head, because if you're not capable of seeing individual pixels on your modern PC, you may want to get your eyesight checked. In fact, even on my old 80s Philips monitor I can see the individual pixels. Maybe not as well as on any modern flatscreen, but.. yeah.
Anyway, this whole discussion is fucking pointless. The main message seems to be "Waah, I want everyone to conform to my screenshot standards", even though the majority of users here seems to be fine with how it is now. Hell, I'll bet some of them aren't, but just download the files and check them in an emulator set up in the exact way they want, or even on a real machine.
------------------------------------
http://zomgwtfbbq.info
Well, we all better do what you decide then eh? Only in that mess you seem to change your mind every other paragraph..
Once again you're missing the whole point to go off on a rant about how you don't care and how we should all want PAL emulation..
We've not asked for it to be LAW that no pal emulation is used, that's just what you read into it (fair enough Ste's original post was a bit ambiguous but it was soon explained) yet those not agreeing don't see the other side of it, instead you cloud it all with which palette is the right one etc.
If you didn't notice it was already agreed it was a decent idea to be able to upload two version, why you have to keep on and on about it now I don't know.
Pete
|
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3135 |
I don't even see why this all was started in first place, most of the screenshots are taken from Vice (or CCS) with no PAL emulation active. Where did STE see a PAL screenshot? |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
I believe someone was replacing Ste's recently uploaded versions of his images with ones from c64pixels.com. He thinks they looked like they had PAL filtering/emulation on, not totally sure but were different enough to what he'd just updated to make him think so (hard to tell on smaller images). That triggered off what was basically a request not to fiddle with existing files, especially to add PAL emulation to stuff when the uploader didn't apply it.
Like I said in my previous post, the orignal plea was somewhat ambiguous but within a couple of posts I think a solution to all the problems was found. Really didn't need to go on as long as it has...
Pete |
| |
v3to
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 150 |
the small pics at c64pixels.com have definitely no active pal emulation. all recently added ones are even png graphics, so no jpeg artefacts or such things.
please do not spread rumours. |
| |
Cresh
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 354 |
Who cares about screenshots?!
It is just a preview.
Run the file on c64 to see how does it really look like. |
| |
v3to
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 150 |
cresh: agree. csdb is no pixeljoint. |
| |
cba
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 933 |
It was me who modified the screen dumps, I really thought they were so horrible ugly and replaced them with
the standard VICE ones.
The VICE screen dump is practically standard here.
|
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1825 |
And CBA is right in going that way. A quick and dirty screenshot with VICE is just fine - no matter what VIC emulation is set. We should merely discuss _WHAT_ people capture sometimes.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:It was me who modified the screen dumps, I really thought they were so horrible ugly and replaced them with
the standard VICE ones.
and thats the hillarious part - standard vice screenshots dont use PAL emulation at all. and now i have to wonder if the original poster can tell apart active pal emulation from simply using a different palette. (and yes, the pepto palette is practically standard here, as are full screen screenshots including borders) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Yeah, first it's memory, then it's Ste can't tell the difference. At an unscaled size neither can I so that's fair enough but I'll bet most other people couldn't either. PAL emulation really comes into it's own on the bigger/scaled images imo and that's where c64pixels is getting it right, keep a "clean" copy, add pal emulation to bigger ones. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
please - recapitulate the facts.
fact is that the vast majority of screenshots does NOT use pal emulation at all. infact people usually only bother to do that seldomly, and only for certain pictures that simply look horrible without (you might want to browse through recent works of mermaid, hein, joe for example).
another fact is, that the screenshot made by cba in particular did not use pal emulation. it (most probably) DID use the pepto palette though, which kindof is the de facto standard.
now reread the first post. to me its obvious that someone mixed up the use of the pepto palette with actual pal emulation. (which i have to admit is easly possible if a picture doesnt really use/need the pal features for mixed colors). and that again tells me that whole complaint isn't so much about pal emulation at all, but about the personal favour for a certain palette.
and as said before, we dont have a rule for that here - for various reasons mentioned before in this thread.
in the unlikely event that we would some day introduce gallery features similar to what c64pixels has, there would be ofcourse the need to introduce much stricter standards, including the stuff you mentioned. and we would most likely require 16 color .png screenshots including borders, using the pepto palette, and no pal emulation :)
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
I totally get what you're saying, I think Ste was just a bit pissed that someone "thought they were so horrible ugly" that they thought replacing the uploaders own art with their version was ok and decided to have a complain ;) As you've said, Pepto/PAL can be easily confused so Ste presumed that's what had been done.
Ok, locking uploads is the way to go there but the original artist isn't always available to "handle" their own work.
Pete
|
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
Quoting CreshWho cares about screenshots?!
It is just a preview.
Run the file on c64 to see how does it really look like.
That doesn't always happen for gfx releases though. If I've spent hours working on a picture and I know that some people will judge it entirely on the screenshot, I want to make sure the screenshot looks as good as I can make it. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
WHOOPS!
I have now realised that what i took at first glance as "emulation" was in fact firefox doing its annoying "thing" and antialiasing the pepto (spit) palette.
sorry about the confusion but nothing and i do mean NOTHING will ever convince me to use that palette :)
but Pete was right in that i was really pissed off that my placeholder screenshots were all replaced by pepto ones.
anyway all have been replaced again now with new ones (u may need to refresh the pages. i had to). its taken me all day. Oswald if u read this put a bloody 16 colour Gif save in p1! :)
apologies
Steve |
| |
Skate
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 491 |
I couldn't read all of the posts but here is my suggestion.
* Users always upload unmodified images (no PAL emulation).
* Site automatically generates a PAL emulated copy using PHP's gd2 library.
* PAL emulation option is added to product pages.
I'm %50 serious. :) |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
then people can upload their gfx to devianart directly IMHO. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"sorry about the confusion but nothing and i do mean NOTHING will ever convince me to use that palette :)"
except we'd actually introduce standards for screenshots as you and JCB suggested =P |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "sorry about the confusion but nothing and i do mean NOTHING will ever convince me to use that palette :)"
except we'd actually introduce standards for screenshots as you and JCB suggested =P
That's not what we suggested and you know it ;)
We asked for "clean" images. Palette doesn't matter apart from to the owner/creator of the image who would like you to see it as he does. They should get to decide if it looks right, or would you recolour some classical art because you're used to seeing it only on TV and not in a gallery so that's how it looks to you?
I've got zero problem with Pepto as a palette, I don't use it because "to me" it doesn't look right but we know there are many reasons for that from VIC revision to TV/monitor settings. Hell, for all any of us know all our PC monitors are calibrated differently... then what? You'd have to send out a professionally printed palette card for everyone to test their monitors against :)
Pete |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
additionally the color perception differs dramatically from person to person (and in a way, from gender to gender)...
@groepaz: you heard it!
Add all sorts of dichromacy to the PAL emu!
And to quote Newton on the very subject: "rays are not colored". |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:That's not what we suggested and you know it ;)
We asked for "clean" images.
you asked for introducing a standard for screenshots. and the only way this would actually make sense, and allow various automatic processing steps, would be to not only agree on a common format and size, but also a common palette. and, beeing the de facto standard, this would be the pepto palette.
Quote:Palette doesn't matter apart from to the owner/creator of the image who would like you to see it as he does. They should get to decide if it looks right, or would you recolour some classical art because you're used to seeing it only on TV and not in a gallery so that's how it looks to you?
there is a big difference between a drawing and a c64 picture. *every* time you watch a c64 picture you "recolor" it. there is no way to watch it exactly the same way as the artist did except watching it on the artists setup. and one important aspect of c64 art actually is exactly that. just like sid tunes must be "designed" to sound ok on everyones chips, c64 pictures shouldnt be designed for someones specific setup. if i load up some picture on my setup and look at it, what i see is always "right" - even if the absolute colors may be totally different from what the original artist used.
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
How can there be a standard palette when it doesn't match what the artist saw? You're now saying you know better than them.
As for things being different on each machine, of course that's true, but that just means its more important "to the artist" to be able to use the palette they think matches the best.
With SIDs there's even a CD of Galways music as HE heard it from his machine. It's just an inconvenience to try to make music either without filters etc so it doesn't screw up but I'd imagine the musicians would prefer if it was possible for everyone to hear it as they did and to Ste the palette he's currently using on his Gifs is as close to what he saw as possible. You disagree, fine but it's not your art to screw with..
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:As for things being different on each machine, of course that's true, but that just means its more important "to the artist" to be able to use the palette they think matches the best.
quite the contrary. as said before, csdb is not an art gallery. screenshots are just that, screenshots.
i am with enthusi here, we should display them scaled 4:1 and in pink. should be enough to decide wether the prg is worth checking out.
what you demand equals the "need" to add an mp3 recording from the original artists machine to each sid entry. vaguely interesting maybe, but practically irrelevant - atleast here.
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Quote:As for things being different on each machine, of course that's true, but that just means its more important "to the artist" to be able to use the palette they think matches the best.
quite the contrary. as said before, csdb is not an art gallery. screenshots are just that, screenshots.
i am with enthusi here, we should display them scaled 4:1 and in pink. should be enough to decide wether the prg is worth checking out.
what you demand equals the "need" to add an mp3 recording from the original artists machine to each sid entry. vaguely interesting maybe, but practically irrelevant - atleast here.
Hold on a minute, you're the one who just said you would apply this standard to all images IF you turned it into more of an image repository/database.
As far as the SID stuff "needing" to be done, it would be nice, just as it would be nice if artists could upload images in the colour..... ohhh wait!
|
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1825 |
Quote: Hold on a minute, you're the one who just said you would apply this standard to all images IF you turned it into more of an image repository/database.
As far as the SID stuff "needing" to be done, it would be nice, just as it would be nice if artists could upload images in the colour..... ohhh wait!
Erm, no grp did not - he was merely pointing out what consequences and prerequisites are required for actually achieving a proper "gallery".
His first line on the match was: "CSDb is not an art repository".
All of groepaz' explanations are just fine - just get it straight, JCB.
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Sorry dude, you make no sense in the context of recent posts. He specifically said earlier in the thread that IF in the unlikely event a gallery was started... You can go read it if you want, then he turns it round to somehow be demands made by US about standards? wrong. We've made no demands apart from let artists upload images how THEY want them to look. Hell, it wasn't even a demand but a request.
Also, that word you used, match, just confirms what I think that some people see this type of shit as an argument to win and will twist things people say so they have something to attack. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
CSDB is democratic, so Groepaz is right when saying people should decide about standards. There's no twisting here, you're seem to be bringing too much fighting spirit from AA. It's all cool, we're just having a discussion :)
you should also realise Groepaz is talking with the database integrity, maintainability etc. foremost in mind.
ps: wow, I'm defending Groppie, strange things can happen.
ps2: and some nitpicking: "As for things being different on each machine, of course that's true, but that just means its more important "to the artist" to be able to use the palette they think matches the best." as artists had no way of adjusting people's TV sets back in the 80s, why should they be able to do it today? |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quoting OswaldCSDB is democratic, so Groepaz is right when saying people should decide about standards. There's no twisting here, you're seem to be bringing too much fighting spirit from AA. It's all cool, we're just having a discussion :)
Really? I'm not seeing much democracy here, a lot of this is the way we do it, though. Other people apart from me have expressed the need for "clean" screenshots in this thread as well. This is one of the things I'm getting pissed about, we all know 95% of the stuff IS like that anyway, it's all been resolved, it's a moot point but people keep bringing it up.
As for bringing the fighting spirit, it's not that at all, it's a defence against people continually dragging the thread back into an argument territory every time it's all been agreed. Constantly saying "you demanded" when we haven't or making out we've suggested things we haven't is just causing more argument. You know me by now, I'm quite happy to admit when I'm wrong but I won't let someone snipe at me for no reason and let it lie, so if people keep sniping I'll keep defending, there's no "fight" to it as far as I'm concerned. Once again our requests were agreed to by tlr a loooong way back and anything anyone else thinks we were after is just coming from their own head ;)
Quoting Oswald
you should also realise Groepaz is talking with the database integrity, maintainability etc. foremost in mind.
Did you not read all my posts? That was one of the reasons I suggested it. The only problem I could forsee in a "gallery" database or the database as it is atm is if there were loads of PAL filtered images that needed to be re-pal'd when there's a new emulation. Are you going to go through all the PRG/D64, rip the bitmaps to re-filter the images? How could letting an artist upload an image with their own palette effect it?
Quoting Oswald
ps: wow, I'm defending Groppie, strange things can happen.
ps2: and some nitpicking: "As for things being different on each machine, of course that's true, but that just means its more important "to the artist" to be able to use the palette they think matches the best." as artists had no way of adjusting people's TV sets back in the 80s, why should they be able to do it today?
That just sounds like a lack of respect for what the artist produced? As I said earlier, would you recolour the mona lisa for example because the image you have in your head is that of only seeing it on TV and never in real life? There should be (especially if the site gets classed as a repository for images) some way to see the image AS INTENDED, anyone wanting to see it with another palette or how they saw it on their machine can download the PRG and have whatever palette and whatever pal emulation setting they want. To do it the other way round would require some kind of ini file or instructions on what to set the emulator to. It's also fine for people to upload images with PAL emulation when I don't think that looks quite right but then there's nothing I can do about it? can't reverse engineer the image. I'd just have to download the prg to see it how I wanted.... ohh :)
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"How could letting an artist upload an image with their own palette effect it?"
to be able to automatically process the images your converter *must* know either
a) the exact palette order (eg, 16 colors in original c64 palette order) or
b) the exact colors in the palette (eg, the pepto palette)
for any screenshot standard that makes sense, one of the two *must* be enforced, or you simply can not process those images automatically in any useful way.
and since a) is completely unrealistic in the context of a website like this (eg the palette order in a png/gif depends pretty much on the software/library that creates it) and would be super annoying for everyone involved in the process it can only be b)
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
I can think of plenty of ways around that.
would you like me to write you some code that checks the palette against known ones? or you could borrow the Lemon code that does it? I could probably do you one that can pick the 16 colours out of any palette as long as they're not insanely wrong, I've got some quite advanced colour matching algorithms. Or failing all of that how about some code to allow someone to go manually pick the palette entry corresponding to the colour on screen.
How about a quick check using one of the above after upload and if no matching palette is found the upload is denied?
Any of that only has to be done once and alleviates all the problems but still allows for own settings.
Instead of enforcing things make it easy to conform. Suggest apps that won't dick with the palette order, supply palettes to people who have no clue, but generally in those cases it'll be people who are just uploaders not artists. Ste knows what he's doing for a start, he just sent me a new load of pics with the palette entries all correct.
All just suggestions not demands ;)
*Edit*
Besides all of that, the only images needing re-anything should be ones that need PAL emulation re-applied and from what I can make out anyone using that uses Pepto anyway. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1627 |
This must be the most sucky CSDb thread ever. UUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhh.....
C S Db makes me wanna smoke crack.
Fall out the window and never come back. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: This must be the most sucky CSDb thread ever. UUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhh.....
C S Db makes me wanna smoke crack.
Fall out the window and never come back.
Don't worry, you're not the only one ;) I'd much rather this thread stopped when it should have done after about 10 posts. Now I'm starting to recall why after registering years ago I didn't post again till last week. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
I would make a gallery like this: rip all pictures into standardized binary formats like koala, then you display them as you want.
"That just sounds like a lack of respect for what the artist produced?"
Using your own picture setup on your TV is a disrespect towards filmmakers? Your own equalizer setup on music...? |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Jesus this is all very simple really.
a) Please don't use adulterated images (which it has been admitted several posts back was a misjusdgement on my part)
b) please don't try to impress upon me a display palette which i never created my work in. and let me display my work in the manner and spirit it WAS created in. and let ME be the judge of that being as how i actually did it 25 years ago and may indeed have some recollection of what it looked like.
thank you.
Steve |
| |
TPM
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 109 |
The image is just a preview.. if the palette just sucks, you have the possibility to update the preview image. I see numerous fucked up previews; i don't care.. the preview usually makes me curious to watch it on the real thing or emu with your preferred palette :) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: Jesus this is all very simple really.
a) Please don't use adulterated images (which it has been admitted several posts back was a misjusdgement on my part)
b) please don't try to impress upon me a display palette which i never created my work in. and let me display my work in the manner and spirit it WAS created in. and let ME be the judge of that being as how i actually did it 25 years ago and may indeed have some recollection of what it looked like.
thank you.
Steve
b) A crystal clear display will never look like a blurry/noisy CRT carrying shitloads of artefacts. So please dont state it looks like as you saw it. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: b) A crystal clear display will never look like a blurry/noisy CRT carrying shitloads of artefacts. So please dont state it looks like as you saw it.
Closer than with all the wrong (to him) colours no matter if they're artefacts or not. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: I would make a gallery like this: rip all pictures into standardized binary formats like koala, then you display them as you want.
"That just sounds like a lack of respect for what the artist produced?"
Using your own picture setup on your TV is a disrespect towards filmmakers? Your own equalizer setup on music...?
Do you have the means to get closer to the original than you do? With an image, apart from your monitor setup maybe being wrong, yes you do, you view it as the artist has coloured it. You can at least buy prints of "art". Movies? well some people spend fortunes on home theater kit because that's how the movie was designed, to look as the director intended at the cinema... Ever hear of director's cut dvds? I wonder why people buy those? As for music, no I don't touch any settings, I listen to it presuming the artists care enough to be involved in the mastering process and the CD (or previously vinyl LP) I buy sounds as they intended if listened to "cleanly".
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
okay, but from now on, only view my demos with the pepto palette, will you ? As you say I have the right to force this on you, because I am the ARTIST. Dont disrespect how I saw it when I created it. From now on I have the control on how you watch my stuff. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: okay, but from now on, only view my demos with the pepto palette, will you ? As you say I have the right to force this on you, because I am the ARTIST. Dont disrespect how I saw it when I created it. From now on I have the control on how you watch my stuff.
I already do :P WITH.. ZOMG!!! PAL emulation!!?!!
As nobody uploads demos and tells us what palette to use, or makes screenshots of each frame of their demo or an AVI with the settings how they want them I defer to the standards which I've seen are pepto and pal emulation. As it's possible for an artist to show a still image and say "this is as close as I can get to how I saw it" that should be allowed. I'd personally be much happier watching an avi of a demo captured from the source machine.
It's different, I think you know it and I get the feeling you're being pedantic.
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
I was just exaggerating. My opinion is noone should force anyone to use this or that palette. If XY like palette Z let him use it. It doesnt bother me, but it bothers the hell outta me some1 telling me how should I view stuff. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: I was just exaggerating. My opinion is noone should force anyone to use this or that palette. If XY like palette Z let him use it. It doesnt bother me, but it bothers the hell outta me some1 telling me how should I view stuff.
And as you've said, download the koa/prg/d64 but there is no problem with allowing people to say, here's how I think it should look when it's THEIR art, only excuses to not do so. If there's a screenshot/preview, why not let the artist decide?
As for forcing people to use palettes, we've been told all the way through this thread it has to be pepto and been given "reasons" why. Other artists have said they upload their screenshots with pal emulation, I've got zero problem with that either, it's how THEY intended it.
|
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
only too happy to view your demos in a dark dingy palette if that what makes them look better and floats your boat oswald.
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:If there's a screenshot/preview, why not let the artist decide?
you can decide as you like, right now.
just if the creators of this website decide to change the standards they intend to use on the website they make, then it might eventually change. live with it. if you want to see a website that shows your pictures exactly as you want to show them, once and forever - i am afraid you have to create your own website. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Quote:If there's a screenshot/preview, why not let the artist decide?
you can decide as you like, right now.
just if the creators of this website decide to change the standards they intend to use on the website they make, then it might eventually change. live with it. if you want to see a website that shows your pictures exactly as you want to show them, once and forever - i am afraid you have to create your own website.
Oh, there's that democracy Oswald mentioned. |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2896 |
CSDb isn't a democracy ... ;)
---
Crimson Twilight Dev Updates [C64 CRPG] |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: Oh, there's that democracy Oswald mentioned.
Picking the nits for a cheap win. CSDb (Perff) almost always fullfills user requests for site changes, if there's enough demand, |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Picking the nits for a cheap win. CSDb (Perff) almost always fullfills user requests for site changes, if there's enough demand,
No "win" in it, I told you it's some of you guys seeing it as a competition to win, if you don't want people bringing up what you say in a discussion, don't say it.
|
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1825 |
So yawn to discuss with ppl that last saw a real machine months ago and dont own... snore...
Download the content! Display blurry preview images to all guests - flipped to all users!
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
Quote: No "win" in it, I told you it's some of you guys seeing it as a competition to win, if you don't want people bringing up what you say in a discussion, don't say it.
"I think that some people see this type of shit as an argument to win and will twist things people say so they have something to attack." -> "Oh, there's that democracy Oswald mentioned." |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "I think that some people see this type of shit as an argument to win and will twist things people say so they have something to attack." -> "Oh, there's that democracy Oswald mentioned."
That's not twisting what you said, just pointing out the ridiculous situation of you telling us it's a democracy and groepaz telling us we HAVE to do it a certain way and like it. It wasn't even aimed at you but you seem to have taken it that way, so be it.
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
This got stupidly out of hands. I have nothing against you Pete or STE personally, please accept from me a virtual beer, and let's keep it cool. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: This got stupidly out of hands. I have nothing against you Pete or STE personally, please accept from me a virtual beer, and let's keep it cool.
Agreed. You actually seem to have the mostly same opinions we're trying to get across, that people shouldn't be forced to look at things in a certain way, to us that just includes forcing palettes on artists, but somewhere along the line it's all gotten confused and tangled into some other stuff, probably due to all the noise being produced in the thread that really had nothing to do with what we were trying to talk about. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"That's not twisting what you said, just pointing out the ridiculous situation of you telling us it's a democracy and groepaz telling us we HAVE to do it a certain way and like it."
even in every democracy you have to live by the rules set up by someone one else. its the one and only way a society works. |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "That's not twisting what you said, just pointing out the ridiculous situation of you telling us it's a democracy and groepaz telling us we HAVE to do it a certain way and like it."
even in every democracy you have to live by the rules set up by someone one else. its the one and only way a society works.
Heeere we go again. A democracy at least denotes some kind of voting system, I've got no problem conforming to something there's a majority decision on as there's always the option to remove images if they're deemed to be "ruined" by the owner. You seem to just be saying we'll decide and you're stuck with it.
I've also seen no absolute reason for not doing it the way we asked, just excuses and it's all rhetorical/theoretical anyway so to keep starting this thread up again is perpetuating an argument for no actual reason.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
you just dont *accept* the reasons given. entirely your own problem.
and no, we dont have a voting system. we don't believe in the thousend monkey theory, go to wikipedia if you want that.
and as oswald says, we DO listen to the users. get the majority of users behind you, then come back. but please dont ask us to help you in the process. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
but nobody has actually asked for anything except "please dont screw with the pixels" have they?
and to be frank from an artistic point of view to ask people not to fck with MY uploads of MY screenshots of MY artwork in MY entry seems quite valid.
and if you arent happy with that then you most certainly have the option to delete my entry and all my art from your scene database completely.
which to also be perfectly honest wouldnt bother me one bloody iota atm, but it would leave your database less than complete.
Steve |
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: |
Why are we still discussing this, it has clearly been pointed out that there is no real rule how to properly upload screenshots, I would call it a guideline rather than a rule. Some of the diligent squirrels from the admin crowd sometimes spot a grossly out of standards preview pic and decide to replace it (like f.e. the ones that are downsized, upscaled or raped and mangled in real stupid ways).
STE replaced the replacement and locked the entry, and nobody objected or complained.
So, Pete, honestly: your point being? |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Why are we still discussing this, it has clearly been pointed out that there is no real rule how to properly upload screenshots, I would call it a guideline rather than a rule. Some of the diligent squirrels from the admin crowd sometimes spot a grossly out of standards preview pic and decide to replace it (like f.e. the ones that are downsized, upscaled or raped and mangled in real stupid ways).
STE replaced the replacement and locked the entry, and nobody objected or complained.
So, Pete, honestly: your point being?
Half of my point is exactly the same as the one you just made and I keep repeating it throughout the thread, it's all rhetorical, it was a "what if" question based on some peoples insistence that IF there was some kind of gallery Pepto palette would be enforced. As there isn't anything like that happening, as far as I was concerned the discussion was over a long time ago but certain people kept having to snipe at me and Ste and continue to turn a simple request or suggestion into an argument. Maybe they're used to people kowtowing. Maybe I should just let certain people have the last word as I've tried to this time.
As far as I'm concerned it's over.
|
| |
Steppe
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: |
Nah, I don't think so. You're just pretty stubborn in repeating your point over and over again. Which is probably to blame for the slight wave of negativity you noticed. But in fact, all's well, enjoy your stay here. |
| |
Deev
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206 |
If I were you I'd be proud at not having the last word in the internet-geekboy argument that this became. Next time just pull out a few days earlier :) |
| |
NecroPolo
Registered: Jun 2009
Posts: 231 |
Phew! :O
You folks have a stunning amount of time and energy for thinking about... Things... And stuff... You know.
With the fracture of the effort and time ran down to the sink here, I guess a dosen of new quality C64 pics could be created, at least, using PAL, non-PAL, PayPal, whatever palette that rocks your boat :) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: Phew! :O
You folks have a stunning amount of time and energy for thinking about... Things... And stuff... You know.
With the fracture of the effort and time ran down to the sink here, I guess a dosen of new quality C64 pics could be created, at least, using PAL, non-PAL, PayPal, whatever palette that rocks your boat :)
lol, trust me, you don't want to see my graphics :) No matter what palette ;)
|
| |
Joe
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 224 |
"Phew! :O
You folks have a stunning amount of time and energy for thinking about... Things... And stuff... You know."
Well, my guess and hope is that part from any nostalgia, we will see more of these people creating beautiful things again in the scene :)) ! |
| |
Sixx
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 229 |
Finally there's unmodified screenshots at CSDb! |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2896 |
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
That's how cold it is INSIDE my house during winter :( |
| |
molebrain
Account closed
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 4 |
We have weather like that in Pittsburgh too...seriously |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
Quote: First, that's not the point of what's being discussed ;)
Second, the filtered stuff is nothing like how Ste, myself and quite a few other people I know saw it. I think Ste would've noticed while he was drawing that magical new colours were appearing and while some stuff did attempt to use PAL blending the demos we saw with it in didn't actually produce the effect they had in mind.
If other people with different TVs saw different then that's the whole point we're getting at, you cant foist your memory of something on everyone else despite them disagreeing and still tell them they're wrong. That's why I'm happy that there's the possibility of a compromise.
Pete
"foist your memory"? Dude, what the hell are you talking about? My 1084 is right here! And it's actually *being used*, as hard as that may be for you to believe! And it shows the picture pretty much like an Emulator with PAL (not perfect, but much much much much better than without!)
I dunno about you, but *could* it be that after 20 years not using a c64 *your* memory might actually be somewhat misty? 8)
The PAL-Effect is there - always was, always will be. On Monitors or TVs, doesn't matter. There's no way in hell you had any output device without that effect, cause, like the name says, it is *inherent* in the technological concept of PAL (Phase ALTERNATING Lines - hence the colorblending!) for anything that has an FBAS-Plug... Or S-Video... Or HF....
Only RGB would not show any PAL-blending, and there is no c64 that is able to output RGB until Chameleon is finally released! ;-) |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
Quote: It's ok, my memory isn't so bad that I don't remember what I saw in front of me. PAL blending is a reality but I think sometimes the emulation version is WAY over what it should be.
Pete
Having worked on countless NUFLIs in both emulator and on real hardware, I actually agree with you on that. The current PAL emulation blurs too much horizontally, you notice this especially in Hires. But the point is that it *still* looks way more real than the emulator without PAL emulation! ;-)
There's also a lot of variation among different VIC-Chips and CRTs, you know, it also matters how you set the dials on your monitor. It's pretty much the same as with the SIDs varying sound... That's why there'll simply *never* be a consensus on what the perfect palette (or picture rendition) is. Still: Screenshots with PAL are still much closer to any c64 setup that ones without - since there simply is no c64 setup in the world that would show brown and blue alternating lines as such!
But I actually do agree there should be a 16color version. Maybe as an added download? I personally would prefer PAL any time as a screenshot... |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
@Deekay, to reply to your two previous posts ;) and for fear of repeating myself again...
Undeniably PAL blending occurs, I studied it and YUV encoding and some other image related stuff when I worked for Philips. I've also done a fair bit of Atari 800 coding recently and used it extensively on there to get software screen modes with lots of colours on screen (alternating the 16 hue mode with the 16 luma mode)
Yes, a lot of images look more "correct" with PAL emulation, some don't (with the current implementation at least) and the only thing we wanted to see was that the artist decides how something is supposed to look (be it with or without any blending or a certain palette) and that those raw pixels of an un-blended image not be lost by applying a filter to them that can't be reversed to re-apply at a later date.
I'm personally quite happy to look at any image in any mode/palette anyone tells me to as long as they think it looks right :)
*edit*
Just a little edit as I'm unsure why all the psychic or secretly spying on me people think it's been 20+ years since I last saw/owned/used a C64... :P |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
Quoting JCB
Just a little edit as I'm unsure why all the psychic or secretly spying on me people think it's been 20+ years since I last saw/owned/used a C64... :P
Oh, I dunno... Prolly all this talk about the good old times of Compunet and "back then" coupled with the fact that neither of you has released anything on the c64 for 20 years! ;-) In general, all the past tense in your postings is a bit irritating when you're an active user..
That said, I'd really love to see some new STE stuff. Lethal Weapon 2 is damn fine pixel craftsmanship! |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Well, as far as being active or producing anything, This is nearly finished (I should upload a new video really) as well as some other stuff and it seems like you're saying my having produced most of my C64 stuff in 87 makes my opinion less valid than certain people on here who may even have only started in the last couple of years? I've even said a few times through the thread that despite not producing new prods I still owned a C64 in one form or another till quite recently.
And it's all past tense because that's when this stuff (that this thread was about) was done, sorry for being an old guy :P
|
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
now that is weird. i thought i had done 250 odd frames of c64 capable POP sprite animation. enough for a whole game that was never released on a 64, at the end of last year. perhaps i entered an alternate reality. how strange.
oh and just for the record. i still have my original c64, 1541 and koalapad, in my desk 2 feet from my right knee as i type this. its the one machine i have that would never get binned. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
"you're saying my having produced most of my C64 stuff in 87 makes my opinion less valid than certain people on here who may even have only started in the last couple of years?"
lemme help you, he said this:
"the past tense in your postings is a bit irritating when you're an active user.." |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
Thanks, Oswald! ;-)
You wanted to know why everybody thought that, I told you why I did. Simple as that. And yes, when you are/were actively involved in developing the Pepto-Palette (we used a damn vectorscope to measure this!) and PAL-emulation and even getting something like black bleed (see emusuxX0r ) emulated, always in search for the perfect emulation quality, it is a bit strange when some oldschoolers come around to tell you that they never saw all this back then 20 years ago.
Memory can be hazy, eyes are better - electronic measuring equipment is even better! 8)
You prefer 16-color screenshots, that's okay, it's your perfect right, there are good arguments for it and like said above I'm even with you on this somewhat. But don't tell me these effects are not there and that 16col screenshots look more like the real thing! ;-) |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Oswald i will be a lot more likely to respect your "current" status when u get off your arse and give me a usable project one yeah? :P |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
@Deekay
Ok, fair enough but as I pointed out, as I'm actually coding on the C64 atm I consider myself active, the fact that you didn't know that isn't your fault of course. ;) If you want a release to make it valid I'll upload a preview of Knightlore or the SCPU fix I just did for Bubbler for one of the guys over at commodore bounty site. I've also released C64 related stuff in 2002 so I haven't been inactive since 88..
As for the 2nd paragraph of your post, and "But don't tell me these effects are not there.." that's not what I'm trying to do, I've just said so in my previous posts last night.
The point has been all along that if Ste didn't see an actual difference to his image produced by the extra blurring/new colours that the current PAL emulation (possibly using certain palettes) produces on his images then to him, at the time he did them (that pesky past tense again) those pixels/new colours didn't exist so the unfiltered image actually looks closer despite being technically incorrect as far as blending goes.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
the point is: those new/mixed colors exist. on all and every pal display on the planet. there is no single way to not have them. end of story =) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: the point is: those new/mixed colors exist. on all and every pal display on the planet. there is no single way to not have them. end of story =)
Deekay seems to disagree somewhat. You know PAL emulation (which is what we're supposed to be talking about here) isn't correct so if ONE pixel is wrong compared to how it would look on hardware that means that colour DOES NOT exist. Trying to boil this stuff down to PAL blending yes/no is pointless because everyone would answer yes, but yes to the wrong question.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
thing is, the mixed colors part is 100% correct infact. only the horizontal blur is wrong (luma and chroma not handled seperately).
still kinda funny that we are still argueing about it, when in reality its most likely something completely different: old lumas vs new lumas. all of STEs pics look more "correct" with old lumas :) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: thing is, the mixed colors part is 100% correct infact. only the horizontal blur is wrong (luma and chroma not handled seperately).
still kinda funny that we are still argueing about it, when in reality its most likely something completely different: old lumas vs new lumas. all of STEs pics look more "correct" with old lumas :)
Hey, I'm not the one who keeps bringing it up :P
Do the settings in the new VICE builds allow for old lumas etc?
|
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
excuse me but why exactly has this old thread been ressurected again anyway? surely as a mod groepaz you should be discouraging this not adding fuel to it?
and the whole point of the thread was i seem to remember "please don't store screenshots with pal emulation on them" this proved not to be the case in fact.
however the request is still valid as pics stored with PAL emulation on them can never be restored if their source is lost to their c64 state.
and to retrieve some of the older stuff thats exactly whats happened over the years. i personally have converted alot of 16 colour indexed gifs back to koala format to get a c64 file again.
so please feel free to apply whatever effect you want to the source image but dont archive like that or its useless.
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"Do the settings in the new VICE builds allow for old lumas etc?"
ofcourse. vice 1.2 allowed it already =) in x64sc choose the old vic modell (that will also select old lumas), in x64 select old lumas in the vic settings (no idea where exactly in the windows version). and dont use an external palette ofcourse, then it wont work.
"excuse me but why exactly has this old thread been ressurectwed again anyway?"
lol? it has been started 4 weeks ago, thats hardly old =P
"surely as a mod groepaz you should be discouraging this not adding fuel to it?"
no? as a mod i am supposed to make sure that people follow the rules, not to step into a discussion which is hardly breaking rules at all.
"however the request is still valid as pics stored with PAL emulation on them can never be restored if their source is lost to their c64 state."
*sigh* not again =P screenshots arent ment for this, screenshots are solely there so you can see wth you are going to download. for anything else there is the binary. infact, if the todo list wouldnt already be long enough, the site might even be changed to create and render screenshots automatically, in a fixed palette, in whatever format. they are part of the presentation layer, not part of the archive.
and despite the entries without files from 10 years ago where files couldnt be uploaded - there is hardly a reason these days to have an entry with a screenshot and no file. which makes the whole "we might recreate pictures from screenshots" thing a bit pointless.
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quoting Groepaz"Do the settings in the new VICE builds allow for old lumas etc?"
ofcourse. vice 1.2 allowed it already =) in x64sc choose the old vic modell (that will also select old lumas), in x64 select old lumas in the vic settings (no idea where exactly in the windows version). and dont use an external palette ofcourse, then it wont work.
K, I'll have a play around with that. Of course it doesn't solve the problem of monitor calibration but at least lumas should be relative and ok.
Quoting Groepaz
and despite the entries without files from 10 years ago where files couldnt be uploaded - there is hardly a reason these days to have an entry with a screenshot and no file. which makes the whole "we might recreate pictures from screenshots" thing a bit pointless.
Unless of course they're converted from gif to koala and then run through a koa to prg maker. Now would that be allowed? The picture was released at some point but the method of delivery has changed by creating a new prg from it... |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
"Unless of course they're converted from gif to koala and then run through a koa to prg maker. Now would that be allowed? The picture was released at some point but the method of delivery has changed by creating a new prg from it..."
i have seriously no idea what you are trying to say with that. if the koala is there, then there is no reason to make a screenshot so you can recreate the koala from the screenshot. or did i miss something? |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: "Unless of course they're converted from gif to koala and then run through a koa to prg maker. Now would that be allowed? The picture was released at some point but the method of delivery has changed by creating a new prg from it..."
i have seriously no idea what you are trying to say with that. if the koala is there, then there is no reason to make a screenshot so you can recreate the koala from the screenshot. or did i miss something?
err, yes I think you did.
Ste said he's converted gifs to koa because there are no C64 files of those missing pictures... the rest kind of logically follows from that and your reply to his post.
Read:
"and to retrieve some of the older stuff thats exactly whats happened over the years. i personally have converted alot of 16 colour indexed gifs back to koala format to get a c64 file again" |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
<Post edited by chatGPZ on 19/8-2010 10:30>
sure, it might have happened. he might have had gifs from koalas that dont exist anymore.
the point is, i cant see how it applies to this site. if you add the prg, beeing able to recreate it from a screenshot is a pointless exercise. and if you dont have the prg, but do have the gif... you can recreate the prg and upload it.
so again, what am i missing?
(and as a sidenote - adding such recreated prg files in place of the original releases isnt considered best practise either, and should generally be avoided, as we want the actual files from back then, not something lookalike) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Quote: sure, it might have happened. he might have had gifs from koalas that dont exist anymore.
the point is, i cant see how it applies to this site. if you add the prg, beeing able to recreate it from a screenshot is a pointless exercise. and if you dont have the prg, but do have the gif... you can recreate the prg and upload it.
so again, what am i missing?
(and as a sidenote - adding such recreated prg files in place of the original releases isnt considered best practise either, and should generally be avoided, as we want the actual files from back then, not something lookalike)
"Now would that be allowed? The picture was released at some point but the method of delivery has changed by creating a new prg from it..."
With all the rules about releases I just wanted to know if no C64 file existed "would it be allowed" to convert a gif to a prg and upload both to create a release as that prg is NOT the originally released file.
|
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
btw: I demand all Cruise pictures to be "greenized", since that's how the artist saw it on his greenscreen monitor when he made them! ;-)
But that's not how the world at large saw it... And this is what a screenshot should look like!
Nonetheless: Like with Galways special-filtercurve-SID it would however be interesting to see the artist's original rendition when he made it.... But it should *not* be the default, just like Galway's filtercurve is not the default in SIDplay! ;-) |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Nice post-reply edit there Groepaz ;) |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
Quote: btw: I demand all Cruise pictures to be "greenized", since that's how the artist saw it on his greenscreen monitor when he made them! ;-)
But that's not how the world at large saw it... And this is what a screenshot should look like!
Nonetheless: Like with Galways special-filtercurve-SID it would however be interesting to see the artist's original rendition when he made it.... But it should *not* be the default, just like Galway's filtercurve is not the default in SIDplay! ;-)
Now i really do dispute that "the whole world" viewed their c64s like vice shows it now with the pepto palette (or at least it's version of it) but logically if that were true the ALL the c64 emus and uploaded screenshots over the years would have a palette in them that was at least "a bit" like pepto.
but none of them do do they?
in fact despite all the claims to authenticity, vice is actually the odd one out palette wise. all the other palettes i have ever seen on gifs from many many other sources and emus until vice are much brighter and colour saturated.
so for almost 20 years, every artist who did their palettes by eye is wrong and vice is spot on? Now i realise that virtually no 2 self generated palettes match, but the law of averages says that out of say 10 artists then at least 5 would create a palette of roughly similar appearance to pepto for their stuff if thats what they saw.
but they havent, have they?
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
do you still dont get that there is no single pepto palette, and making it brighter and more saturated is a simple matter of using the user interface of the emulator and... make it brighter and more saturated, just like you did back in the day with your monitor or tv? *sigh*
both ccs64 and vice have had pal emulation (and palette generation) for many years btw. there is only one emu worth mentioning besides that (hoxs64) which doesnt. and yes, the pc64 and c64s and whatnot palettes are truely horrible and wrong.
and i still think your c64 is a 5 luma one =) |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
so if you want me to tune my output with vice because the base pepto palette is not as i knew it, it begs the question why i am being bitched at for doing the same thing for my screenshots but using photoshop and a palette i feel is more representative of what i saw than the "base" pepto palette is?
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
because tweaking the palette in the emu, ie generating it using proper relations, will always result in a palette which is correct.
on the other hand tweaking it by eye and manually comparing it using two monitors and all that almost certainly wont. most existing handmade palettes dont even manage to meet basic properties like the fact that there always exist 2 colors with exactly the same luminance (if you have a 9 luma vic). or even the basic fact that all colors have exactly the same saturation (thats quite hard to get right when dealing with rgb colors manually).
there ARE good reasons for why people stopped doing that roughly 15 years ago you know :)
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
So where's the 5 luma palette for those of us who may have had that VIC revision? I can't specifically find that as an option for VICE, commandline or otherwise but having had a google around I saw someone mention having a 5 luma machine and that colours 9,8,7,1,7,8,9 (presumably a colour bar or similar grouping of pixels) looks like gold, which I think is probably about right.
Is it just a combination of selecting old vic and switching off "new luminances" from the VIC-II settings on the GUI?
And doesn't the fact that there are machines with only 5 lumas also mean the possible combinations of colours produced by PAL blending is lower?
|
| |
Devia
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 401 |
Quote: so if you want me to tune my output with vice because the base pepto palette is not as i knew it, it begs the question why i am being bitched at for doing the same thing for my screenshots but using photoshop and a palette i feel is more representative of what i saw than the "base" pepto palette is?
Steve
Did you consider that ALL LCD/TFT/WHATEVERNONCRT monitors are crap? -and maybe it's your monitor/gfx-card-driver/photoshop/whatever that needs adjusting and maybe not Vice?
If you calibrate your c64 monitor and your PC monitor to have as similar color/brightness/contrast as possible using the SAME reference picture(s), then how does Vice look compared to the c64?
If they don't look the same, is it then safe to assume that Vice's default is wrong?
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:So where's the 5 luma palette for those of us who may have had that VIC revision? I can't specifically find that as an option for VICE
-newluminance for new lumas
+newluminance for old lumas
and as said before, you must NOT use an external palette for this. it wont work then (how could it?)
Quote:Is it just a combination of selecting old vic and switching off "new luminances" from the VIC-II settings on the GUI?
that, and using the internally generated palette, yes. like i said before =P
Quote:And doesn't the fact that there are machines with only 5 lumas also mean the possible combinations of colours produced by PAL blending is lower?
not at all, the number of possibly produced colors is infinite either way :)
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
Ok, I thought the luma had an effect on the produced colour as well as the colour combo itself. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
no, luma has no effect on color at all :) luma == "brightness" chroma == "color". the chroma part is identical for old/new vic, only the luma levels for certain colors differ (see peptos webpage). |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
ofcourse the different lumas have an effect on the colors and their combinations!
The point about the ageold discussion of new-vs-old-lumas is that there weren't many machines produced with the old VIC. And even less are still in use today (yes, relatively speaking), since, being the oldest, they're more likely to die (e.g. failing PSU caps frying them)..
Hence most websites, programs etc. in the PC age are based on the new Lumas, hell, we don't even have an old luma palette in Mufflon! ;-)
I personally never tested my pictures, our demos etc on an old luma machine - simply because i could never find one! ;-) My neighbour had one (at the time i didn't know about the old/new VIC thing, so I thought his dark grey being darker than brown was due to him using a greenscreen with his c64, somehow "burning" out the VIC by not using colors or sth! ;-), but i missed it when he sold it/threw it out... |
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
I do know what chroma and luma are :P but, a chroma with different lumas = another perceived colour, else there wouldn't be many colours around ;)
*edit*
that was in reply to groepaz |
| |
DeeKay
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 362 |
Quote: no, luma has no effect on color at all :) luma == "brightness" chroma == "color". the chroma part is identical for old/new vic, only the luma levels for certain colors differ (see peptos webpage).
Meh. Since there is no color without luma (just black) i strongly object to this definition! 8)
Luma is an integral part of the color. Color != chroma.
I know, the greek word prolly means the same thing, but there simply is no color without luma, just like there is no color when there is no light...
Chroma is the tint, while luma is the brightness. Only *together* both form the actual color!
You wouldn't say Purple is the same color as pink, just because pink is a brighter version of purple, now would you? 8) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
the pepto palette is based on exact measurements of the c64's signal, which findings were converted to RGB from YUV. It will never get much better than that, it can only be slightly more accurate. As gpz says use Vice's settings to get the contrast/etc or even the blur factor to your likings.(settings, video settings). Old luma: settings, vicII setting, take check off from new luminances. |
| |
Ed
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 173 |
PNG to c64 koala conversion using for instance Project One is definitely a great way to preserve images and also making it easy to work with (throwing files back and forth, in and out of different software or even hardware, for that matter).
Some 10 years ago Joe made a palette similar to the pepto palette on the Amiga, which with the proper saturation, brightness and contrast looked as close to as possible without further manipulation as the c64 output. Oddly enough this was never reproducible on the PC. One reason perhaps was that the higher bits required for generating the graphics but there are probably other reasons concerned with hardware, etc. We never figured it out, and then all of a sudden there was Pepto.
The first sid-players sounded like crap and for almost a decade I was strongly against the emulation of the c64 in many aspects. Nothing sounded like it had on my various machines and it is only by today I am starting to find "how it sounded like" due the large pack of sid settings made available for the emulators. I still miss the horrible hiss which created an aura of authenticity and ambience to the otherwise very minimalist sound I am known for.
Graphic-wise I am still not content with how the emulator works with images such as for instance single-color graphics, etc. And the way I see it there are multiple more ways this database can develop into without loosing its original meaning. Limitations are made to be explored.
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Chessboard pixels melting the screen like barf. A time when white text on black background created a hiss. Raster-bars flickered and sounds stuttered whilst running the discs. All those moments are lost in time, like posts on csdb... |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5020 |
nice poetry at the end Ed :) but afterall like someone here already said we spent serious amount of time trying to get rid of all those artefacts. I always hated the constant noise with the rf cable, often very slight tech-tech waving, noises coming for weird color combos, screen shifting where there is a lot of white etc. etc. I'm glad they are gone in emus. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
lol yes i remember all that well, in the days before decently priced phillips monitors :)
thats why most of us used to avoid the use of white on our greyscale stuff.
one small area of white and all the greys would visibly drop back in brightness by about 50%, and the white would leap out.
we used to call it "blowing the screen"
and i remember tvs that used to buzz like an angry bee if u flood filled white on a black background :)
ah the good old days :)
Steve |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:Meh. Since there is no color without luma (just black) i strongly object to this definition! 8)
doh. ofcourse. now we are at the point where terms used by "normal people" and "technical people" clash - and which is one of the primary reasons for this type of discussion often going in circles =)
i am, when speaking about analog video, using the technical terms that apply to just that. and in analog video - by definition - the terms refer to what i said.
the actual *percieved* color ofcourse consists of both. and at the same time "red" and "light red" are - in terms of analog video - the same color, with different luma :)
Quote:Oddly enough this was never reproducible on the PC. One reason perhaps was that the higher bits required for generating the graphics but there are probably other reasons concerned with hardware, etc. We never figured it out, and then all of a sudden there was Pepto.
one important aspect that is often forgotten is also, that PAL and VGA (or better: YUV and RGB) work in very different color spaces, and because of that it isnt even possible to convert every color properly from one to the other. like the much higher white level in PAL cant be reproduced by VGA at all (and on the other hand, PAL can not produce true 0;0;0 black). thats another reason why to some peptos example palette looks a bit "dull".
|
| |
JCB
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 241 |
@Ed, you've watched too much Blade Runner ;)
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:and i remember tvs that used to buzz like an angry bee if u flood filled white on a black background :)
thats one of the things at the top of my "to be emulated" list infact :) |
| |
null
Account closed
Registered: Jun 2006
Posts: 645 |
Quote: Quote:and i remember tvs that used to buzz like an angry bee if u flood filled white on a black background :)
thats one of the things at the top of my "to be emulated" list infact :)
That would rule so much. Along with diskdrive sound emulation and beamer emulation ;_)
------------------------------------
http://zomgwtfbbq.info |
| |
Ed
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 173 |
Quote: Quote:Meh. Since there is no color without luma (just black) i strongly object to this definition! 8)
doh. ofcourse. now we are at the point where terms used by "normal people" and "technical people" clash - and which is one of the primary reasons for this type of discussion often going in circles =)
i am, when speaking about analog video, using the technical terms that apply to just that. and in analog video - by definition - the terms refer to what i said.
the actual *percieved* color ofcourse consists of both. and at the same time "red" and "light red" are - in terms of analog video - the same color, with different luma :)
Quote:Oddly enough this was never reproducible on the PC. One reason perhaps was that the higher bits required for generating the graphics but there are probably other reasons concerned with hardware, etc. We never figured it out, and then all of a sudden there was Pepto.
one important aspect that is often forgotten is also, that PAL and VGA (or better: YUV and RGB) work in very different color spaces, and because of that it isnt even possible to convert every color properly from one to the other. like the much higher white level in PAL cant be reproduced by VGA at all (and on the other hand, PAL can not produce true 0;0;0 black). thats another reason why to some peptos example palette looks a bit "dull".
I remember the bug and kind of miss it in emulator land.
Some images have been drawn, just like you say, with that specific bug in mind.
Never really got to understand how Dragon could draw his women using orange with a clear white background
when it would look like nothing more but a black figure on the big screen.
Nothing wrong about Orange figures though. Seen them plenty before and some after. |
| |
PAL
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 269 |
I think Dragon did that because he had done it so many times before, and it worked... I must say that when his images were shown at parties and so on back in the days I never saw it as black... they where like they are in here... |
| |
Ed
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 173 |
Yeah, you are prolly right. They looked all right on most equipment. On old tellys etc, it looked like crap of course. Just like some screendumps do around here....
By the way. Did people ever follow the ancient CBM advice on colors when making art? Sometimes I wonder why some of the older artists worked with simpler schemes of blue/light blue,white or red, light red, white, etc? Whereas something happens in the late 1980s and early 1990s resulting in combinations of 0,9,6,b,2,4,8,c,e,a,5,f,3,7,d,1
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
simple.... old lumas, new lumas =) |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
old lumas players to new lumas fools
csdb keep it jumpin like kangaroos
but skew it on the bar-b we aint tryin to lose
say i'll be god damnit they done changed the rules |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
LOL |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3035 |
hm.. once or twice a year I dream about making a C64 spirit based hip hop band. besides of other things... |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1627 |
/me recommends "Bittner Rap" by Jochen Hippel.. ;) |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Just to be clear: those lyrics above are of course by Outkast (with some minor changes, can you spot them?). |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
LOOOOL omg =D
/me puts on the battle loops vinyl ....
edit: sneaky as i am i made a screendump (as you know they are called like that!). tdj mc ftw =D |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
:) and thank you for that. I deleted the rest of my post as I felt the lyrics kinda sucked, even for a keystyle.
Still, since it's out there anyway, here goes nothing:
When old heroes return you kinda taste the burn
pal-emulated, feels degraded, what is your concern
did ya earn the right, to stay outta sight
come back, talk some smack, even start a fight
check out my plight, 20+ years on the job
stayin' expressive, keepin' Focus, so much style to drop
plus meaner than your team, never runnin' out of steam
as I Trans*form my words of wisdom into a giant laser beam
and blow ya away |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11121 |
Quote:as I felt the lyrics kinda sucked, even for a keystyle.
ehehe, hey, it rhymes, and it has proper metrics - thats already more than a lot of so called "mcs" are able to do =D |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3035 |
Quote: :) and thank you for that. I deleted the rest of my post as I felt the lyrics kinda sucked, even for a keystyle.
Still, since it's out there anyway, here goes nothing:
When old heroes return you kinda taste the burn
pal-emulated, feels degraded, what is your concern
did ya earn the right, to stay outta sight
come back, talk some smack, even start a fight
check out my plight, 20+ years on the job
stayin' expressive, keepin' Focus, so much style to drop
plus meaner than your team, never runnin' out of steam
as I Trans*form my words of wisdom into a giant laser beam
and blow ya away
Where's teh fokin' like buttonz.. when yo need 'em ;-) |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Quote: Quote:as I felt the lyrics kinda sucked, even for a keystyle.
ehehe, hey, it rhymes, and it has proper metrics - thats already more than a lot of so called "mcs" are able to do =D
Well, I *have* been writing lyrics for over 20 years now, and there was a time when I was as active on hip-hop boards as I was here. And that's exactly the reason why I deleted those lines - they are not up to my normal standard, by far :) Then again, keystyles seldom are. Plus, I'm as rusty writing lyrics as I am with coding on the c64 I'm afraid.
Oh, and I'm not an MC - couldn't rap to save my life I'm afraid. Not that I didn't try, but those recordings are locked away, for the safety of all humankind. |
| |
Perplex
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 254 |
Quote: @Ed, you've watched too much Blade Runner ;)
Not possible.
?ILLEGAL QUANTITY ERROR
|
