Reply To: Is outputting to a frame/proper de-interlacing possible on the 1.6 hardware?

[nmalinoski]

..That may have been the least thought out response I’ve ever had the displeasure of reading.

Anyway my questions still stand @marqs, do you know if it’s possible to enhance the OSSC 1.6 with these features? Or would these options require a new hardware revision? Thanks again.

What I said is ultimately what this boils down to. Had you done even the briefest of searches on these forums, as Harrumph said, you would’ve seen multiple posts stating that the OSSC only has a linebuffer and is incapable of buffering full frames. You may have even come across the one or two posts where marqs stated that the kind of hardware upgrades required to make the OSSC do what the Framemeister does would make it just as expensive, if not more so; and then the OSSC is no longer the zero-lag, line-multiplying digitizer that it is now.

Thus, if you need Framemeister capabilities, buy a Framemeister; you’re not going to find anything as capable for less money. If you want an OSSC that does it, it’s open source–you are always free to take the existing designs and redesign them to your needs or pay someone to do that for you.

I also take issue with your characterization of the OSSC’s purpose and application. First, while you could buy all of the RT2X, OSSC, and Framemeister and use them together, there’s no good reason to do so. The RT2X, with an HDMI to VGA converter, can compliment an OSSC, but it operates just fine on its own; and, if you have a Framemeister, you need neither the OSSC nor the RT2X. Suggesting 90% of OSSC owners need or are expected to have all of these devices is nonsense; no one is making that recommendation.

Secondly, it doesn’t make sense to compare standalone line multipliers or scalers to clone consoles, because those clone consoles cannot function as standalone scalers; maybe if those clone consoles had AV-in ports and allowed their scaling features to be used for external sources, but none of them do.