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

NewHome Forums OSSC & OSSC Pro OSSC – Feature Requests Is outputting to a frame/proper de-interlacing possible on the 1.6 hardware?

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #25770

    There are two big problems with the OSSC that can only be ignored for so long: 1. The lack of proper de-interlacing, and 2.) the lack of outputting to a frame/framebuffer.

    Right now, people who purchase the OSSC are borderline required to find these forums, lookup numerous tutorial guides, or watch any and every video they can find in order to setup their OSSCs and even then – when people post their results – 90% of the time are somehow still not set up properly. (FBX ended up making a name for himself because this situation was so bad)

    To say the OSSC is complete would be a bit of an overstatement, if 90% of the people who are using it have to run their consoles through a retrotink first, then to the OSSC, then into a framemeister – virtually defeating it’s purpose.

    To give you an example of how poorly the OSSC handles interlaced content, the following videos show the eye-strainingly awful jitter/flicker/what have you when running said content through the 1.6 hardware:

    -PS1 jitter (really noticeable after 1:41 during the title screen/gameplay): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FnsPAxVeuw

    -PS2 jitter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMdRZCMBI-k

    -Sega Saturn jitter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBEtDfryDTc

    I mean the guy in the last video even said in the comments that he had to throw motion blur onto the video in order to tone it down and it still flickered that much. Hell the PS2 guy has an entire series of videos testing out the different de-interlacing modes of the OSSC and the only one that didn’t flicker was when he ran it through a framemeister (which does have proper de-interlacing)

    The other question is whether or not it’s possible to add a feature to the 1.6 revision that displays the upscaled content inside of a frame – even if it adds a frame or two of lag. Meaning, giving people the option to run at 1080p60/59.94 so that compatibility with televisions isn’t an issue/consoles that switch resolutions during gameplay wouldn’t “no signal” during the handshake.

    Analogues SuperNT/NT Mini/MegaSG hardware does this – offering “Fully Buffered/Single Buffered/Zero Lag” modes that make their devices compatible with 99% of displays while giving people the option to be either:

    A) Fully Buffered: Device outputs a 60Hz signal without screen tearing, but once in a while a full frame is dropped

    B) Single Buffer: Device outputs a 60Hz signal but once in a while suffers some screen tearing

    or

    C) Zero Lag: What the OSSC does now.

    The technology is there, but whether or not said technology is in the OSSC revision 1.6 hardware is another story. Does anyone know if these features are something that can be added via a firmware update? Or would it require a new hardware revision? (OSSC 1.7?) Thanks in advance.

    #25776
    nmalinoski
    Participant

    What, exactly, is the problem here? The OSSC’s weaknesses are no secret. If the OSSC doesn’t do something you need or doesn’t do it to your satisfaction, you’re using the wrong tool for the job. If you need a framebuffered scaler that can deinterlace well, you’d get a Framemeister. If you need a no-perceptible-lag line multiplier, you’d get an OSSC.

    You wouldn’t buy an adjustable wrench to hammer nails, nor buy a road car for a day out on the lake, would you?

    #25791

    ..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.

    #25795
    James-F
    Participant

    Self righteous much?

    The TVP7002 (OSSC digitizer chip) does only one kind of deinterlacing, deal with it.

    To say the OSSC is complete would be a bit of an overstatement

    Do you expect marqs to answer you with that attitude?

    #25798
    Harrumph
    Participant

    If you had taken some time to search the forum, you would have found this answer already: yes framebuffer requires hardware revision.

    if 90% of the people who are using it have to run their consoles through a retrotink first, then to the OSSC, then into a framemeister – virtually defeating it’s purpose.

    This is simply incorrect as a description of the typical use case.

    #25804
    nmalinoski
    Participant

    ..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.

    #25806

    *checks the title of the subforum*

    *is in the right place*

    *the people who replied couldn’t think their way out of a paper bag*

    Thanks for the response.

    #25823
    marqs
    Participant

    Support for composite and fancy de-interlacing was conciously left out when OSSC was designed, and lack of those features should become apparent when reading wiki or other introduction materials. That said, the former becomes a limitation only with a few machines like C64 (not likely to be 90% of potential users) while the latter is a problem mostly with PS2 or PAL GC games (most PS1 / Saturn games do not use interlace).

    #25839
    BuckoA51
    Keymaster

    To say the OSSC is complete would be a bit of an overstatement

    It really wouldn’t.

    OSSC was conceived as a replacement for the ageing XRGB2 and 3 processors rather than a replacement for something like a Framemeister. I always chuckle when we get the odd return because “it doesn’t work in 3x mode”. No line doubler ever tried line tripling in the past. You either used your monitors scaling to go from 480p to native res or a second processor.

    As for transoders and s-video support, we’ll have a better option for OSSC users soon.

    #25846
    maxtherabbit
    Participant

    Yeah op sounds like a real winner

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.