Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?

[Damion]

In addition, your point of view seems to confuse technology and aesthetics. If you think that refinement is just a matter of technology, I'm afraid it is nobody's business but yours. But I know you would not be the only one : in this Lemon64 thread I had a hard time trying to introduce some (strongly studied but obviously unorthodox) musical point of view on a computer forum among numerous people sharing a similar confusion that made them very touchy, which I didn't expect at all.

Yikes. I think some of those guys need to get out more. Is there anything more retarded than acting like that over c64 music...? LOL. (FWIW, I own an unopened copy of PSI-5, it's a classic IMHO and one of my favorites -- nothing wrong with thinking the music is great, it absolutey is!) And what's up with the guy trying to equate rock with classical music?? Just because some rock guitarists borrow (or loop) some baroque "riffs" hardly makes them identical. :/

Anyway, sorry to get off topic. I still maintain that (as someone put quite well earlier in the thread) the issue is largely subjective, some have eyes that are simply less sensitive than others. To mine, WinUAE set for PAL/50 FPS displayed at 60Hz absolutely does not look perfect, and smearing of some LCDs can amplify the effect even more. There are ways of getting WinUAE very close, running everything at 60 FPS (for LCDs) is not acceptable though (IMO). Just try running "Desert Dream" at those settings...

edit-- Just to clarify (my apologies if I'm sounding repetitive), WinUAE, running demos @ 50 or 100Hz on a CRT, in some cases does look nearly perfect to me. :-)

[Damion]

bloodline wrote:
That video is 50fps upsampled to 60fps using Apples H.264 encoder. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want the truth and will happily provide the evidence I used to support my position.

No offense intended, but that video looks like ass IMHO... I have yet to check it on a CRT (or LCD with "fast" response time), but the trees in particular don't scroll smoothly at all. :shrug:

[foleyjo]

@coldfish

Yeah Ive tried it. I have it on an SD card and do use it on my GP2X and do like using it but I think its far from better than the real thing.

bte,
-I found that games that worked previously stopped working in the most recent version. I also remember seeing a post or 2 on the Gp2X forums saying the same.
-the fact is a real amiga can do EHB and HAM modes making it better.
-Ive got good batteries they last for ages on everything but the amiga emulator just drains them.
-In addition you cant play Walker properly on the GP2X

I agree that its good having a handheld A500 (+the others and some you didnt mention) but to be fair the gp2x amiga emulator is not better than real thing

[bloodline]

-D- wrote:

bloodline wrote:
That video is 50fps upsampled to 60fps using Apples H.264 encoder. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want the truth and will happily provide the evidence I used to support my position.

No offense intended, but that video looks like ass IMHO... I have yet to check it on a CRT (or LCD with "fast" response time), but the trees in particular don't scroll smoothly at all. :shrug:

I grant you that it doesn't look as good as it does out of the Emulator (the uncompressed video is 400meg so I won't post it), but even as an mp4 it still looks better than my Amigas do on a real TV...

[arkpandora]

@bloodline

But it is rubbish when one speaks with authority on a subject about which they have no evidence to support.

You are right : I should have added one "to my knowledge" to the paragraph you quoted.  But my omission doesn't justify your vocabulary, and if I had no evidence I wouldn't say anything.  My experience is fact but is only experience.

WinUAE will provide the most accurate emulation.

I still have to buy a new PC - or install Windows on the Mac.  To date I have only tried Amiga emulation on my new Mac and others' PC (and on my 8 years old PC), so I may have skipped some settings.

That video is 50fps upsampled to 60fps using Apples H.264 encoder. I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I just want the truth and will happily provide the evidence I used to support my position.

OK - I thought you had managed to output exactly what you see.

I grant you that it doesn't look as good as it does out of the Emulator (the uncompressed video is 400meg so I won't post it), but even as an mp4 it still looks better than my Amigas do on a real TV...

This mp4's animation can only be worse than real Amiga animation, whatever the monitor or TV (this is not experience but indisputable fact).  Only the picture's sharpness and colours can be better depending on your screen.




@D

Thanks : I'm relieved at last somebody does not totally disagree with me on a question of music !

I still maintain that (as someone put quite well earlier in the thread) the issue is largely subjective, some have eyes that are simply less sensitive than others.

I agree that perception is individual, but in the case of a 50 Hz on 60 Hz projection it is at least an objective issue, since some original frames are displayed more times than others.

Just to clarify (my apologies if I'm sounding repetitive), WinUAE, running demos @ 50 or 100Hz on a CRT, in some cases does look nearly perfect to me.

In my experience it does not, as synchronization is not accurate - about C64 emulators some people say that Windows does not manage "VBLANK" synchronization accurately but I don't know what it means exactly.  At least I seem to remember that emulation speed has to be adapted to the exact refresh rate, as I seem to remember that the VGA rates don't exactly equal PAL's 50.12 Hz or its multiples.

No offense intended, but that video looks like ass IMHO... I have yet to check it on a CRT (or LCD with "fast" response time), but the trees in particular don't scroll smoothly at all.

To my knowledge CRT and fast response time only make things worse at the same refresh rate, as they make the problem even clearer.

[Damion]

In my experience it does not, as synchronization is not accurate - about C64 emulators some people say that Windows does not manage "VBLANK" synchronization accurately but I don't know what it means exactly.  At least I seem to remember that emulation speed has to be adapted to the exact refresh rate, as I seem to remember that the VGA rates don't exactly equal PAL's 50.12 Hz or its multiples.

Interesting. Admittedly, it's been a long time since I've used a CRT with WinUAE, I may have to give it another go now that I'm used to playing around with the old hardware again. I do remember it being fairly close, but I'm thinking some side-by-side comparison may be in order. ;-) I know that at 60Hz, scrolling is obviously wonky running PAL software on any LCD I've tried, including supposed "2ms" overdriven panels. And I agree, there is absolutely a technical reason for this -- I just wanted to point out that some people aren't as bothered by it as others. (On a personal level, it doesn't bug me for casual use, but for demos in particular I do prefer a real amiga + CRT.)

No offense intended, but that video looks like ass IMHO... I have yet to check it on a CRT (or LCD with "fast" response time), but the trees in particular don't scroll smoothly at all.

To my knowledge CRT and fast response time only make things worse at the same refresh rate, as they make the problem even clearer.[/quote]

Agreed, though I thought what I was seeing with the trees could have been some smearing on the relatively slow 20ms PVA panel I watched it on. I did fire the game up on an A1200/1084 (thinking perhaps the scrolling trees weren't "fullframe" or something, as it looked similar to, say, Ruff n' Tumble), but alas, all scrolling was flawless. (As an aside, the SOTB 3 title screen is another good one to check for scrolling issues.)

[arkpandora]

The best I could obtain in 100 Hz on a CRT monitor was C64 emulator CCS64 showing only one animation jump every second or so, but as far as C64 emulators are concerned I still have to try Hoxs64, which has a reputation for being more accurate.

As an aside, the SOTB 3 title screen is another good one to check for scrolling issues.)

Even the Workbench's mouse pointer is a good witness... Most horizontal or vertical text scrollings are strong - and common - indicators as well.

[Damion]

I went ahead and connected a CRT to the PC, and compared a few programs next to an A1200/1084 combo.

In brief, running the PC display at 100Hz, setting WinUAE for PAL/50 FPS, no filter, and no vsync seemed to provide the best quality. (Naturally, you will need to make sure everything is cleaned up on the Windows end of things to prevent hiccups.) While not 100% flawless, from the standpoint of an average user I think the results are acceptable. Some AGA demos (Impossible is one example) can actually be a bit smoother via emulation, as even an 80MHz 68060 (and possible Amiga chipset limitations?) is not enough to play them entirely perfect everywhere.

Pinball games seem to be a small exception, while they may look *almost* as fluid just watching the table scroll (especially from normal viewing distance), actually playing them is not nearly as nice IMHO. Also, you will not be able to correctly run a PAL demo/game at 60Hz and have good scrolling.

Just some casual observations from a non-expert... :-) While it's a hell of a lot of $$$ for that extra smidge of better scrolling, I think a perfectionist will be unhappy with anything other than an actual Amiga (especially a game or demoscene nut). As I said earlier in the thread, I use and enjoy both. I would have no problem running WinUAE exclusively (despite flaws) if I didn't have room for my computer hobby. YMMV.
 

edit -- Something I just thought of, I bet you could use Powerstrip to create some custom video modes with more "precise" frequencies for use with WinUAE, that might help dial in the scrolling a bit better. Something to fiddle with later in the week. :-)

[stefcep2]

bloodline wrote:

arkpandora wrote:

So, as far as 2D animation is concerned, your judgement is not true : the emulated Amiga is not more refined despite its differences, but less refined.  If it was more refined I would agree with you : but animation is essential, and it is the only reason why I still have to use a real Amiga although I would prefer to use emulators.

You speak such rubbish! I promise you that if you ever come to London, I can show you Perfect Amiga emulation on my MacBook Pro using WinUAE on WindowsXP SP2. I will use WinUAE as it's better than E-UAE.

I will gladly meet you and show you.

No he speaks the truth.

I run winua on Athlon X2 4800+ with geforce 8600 graphics card.  I still can't get PAL animations to play as smoothly as on an A1200.

Try running Scala under Winuae and watch the screen tear as it tries to scroll effects on and off.   Trying running SSA animations or anim8 formats and then you'll really see the emulator fall behind.

And I still think a 256-color PAL overscan hand drawn "scene" artwork on a 1084 looks far more vibrant than the same thing viewed on an emulator hires display.

Winuae gives a faster RTG Amiga, but the feel of the mouse pointer movement is miles off the real thing. If you use software that came from the time when the Amiga was trying to be a PC ie the era of 24 bit windowing graphics software like Arteffect, Photogenics, TV Paint, and 3d Doom-alikes  then the  emulator has the horsepower to perform faster, but the feel isn't the same.

[bloodline]

@stefcep2

Don't blame either your computer or UAE for your inability to configure UAE... Would you like me to send you a config?

[Hammer]

It can't magically make 24fps or 50fps fit into a 60fps framerate smoothly.

DScaler5 removes judder caused by 3:2 pulldown on a monitor with 60hz refreshrate (3:2 playback smoothing).

[Hammer]

AmigaHope wrote:

I was referring to a Classic Amiga PAL demo with smooth scrolling.

Super frog game is smooth on my ASUS G1S laptop (via WinUAE).

You might not be able to see the jerkiness -- different people have different tolerances for it. If you actually took video of your screen with a high speed camera and played it back slowly, you'd see the jerkiness. It really is happening.

An A/B comparison between a properly synced display and one that isn't would show the difference well -- you could probably see it then.

Are you claiming jerky frame rates while playing back 24FPS on 60hz LCD with PureVideo HD or Avivo HD video processor?

NVIDIA PureVideo HD (Geforce 8)covers the following(quoting nVIDIA)...

All of those features you're listing focus on *recovering the original frames* of the film. All of the features listed are basically motion-detection techniques to try to reconstruct the original frames from the fragments generated by various telecine conversions (including reconversion to progressive).

All this does though is recover the original frame! Once you have your nice original frames, it *still* has to perform a framerate conversion, which still leads to jerkiness unless the source frame rate can be evenly divided into the target framerate.

It *does* reduce jerkiness in the sense that it removes any jerkiness caused in the mastering of the source materal. The reconstructed video data that results is in fact not jerky. When you actually *DISPLAY* it though you're introducing jerkiness in your final pulldown conversion. It's just better than the much-worse jerkiness you'd get from cascaded pulldown conversions.

It can't magically make 24fps or 50fps fit into a 60fps framerate smoothly.

Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_interpolation

"Motion interpolation is a form of de-judder video processing used in various display devices such as HDTVs and video players. New frames are interpolated and inserted between standard frames to smooth the picture. Films are recorded at a frame rate of 24 frames per second (fps) and television is typically filmed at 30 or 60 fps. Display devices such as HDTVs have a refresh rate of 60 Hz or 120 Hz. The display device can repeat the standard frames or insert new frames that are interpolated on the fly."

WinDVD uses Philips' TrimensionDNM for frame interpolation.

Crystalplayer uses Motion Morphing MultiSampling for frame interpolation

[Hammer]

stefcep2 wrote:

bloodline wrote:

arkpandora wrote:

So, as far as 2D animation is concerned, your judgement is not true : the emulated Amiga is not more refined despite its differences, but less refined.  If it was more refined I would agree with you : but animation is essential, and it is the only reason why I still have to use a real Amiga although I would prefer to use emulators.

You speak such rubbish! I promise you that if you ever come to London, I can show you Perfect Amiga emulation on my MacBook Pro using WinUAE on WindowsXP SP2. I will use WinUAE as it's better than E-UAE.

I will gladly meet you and show you.

No he speaks the truth.

I run winua on Athlon X2 4800+ with geforce 8600 graphics card.  I still can't get PAL animations to play as smoothly as on an A1200.

Try running Scala under Winuae and watch the screen tear as it tries to scroll effects on and off.   Trying running SSA animations or anim8 formats and then you'll really see the emulator fall behind.

And I still think a 256-color PAL overscan hand drawn "scene" artwork on a 1084 looks far more vibrant than the same thing viewed on an emulator hires display.

Winuae gives a faster RTG Amiga, but the feel of the mouse pointer movement is miles off the real thing. If you use software that came from the time when the Amiga was trying to be a PC ie the era of 24 bit windowing graphics software like Arteffect, Photogenics, TV Paint, and 3d Doom-alikes  then the  emulator has the horsepower to perform faster, but the feel isn't the same.

Note that an Amiga 3000 can use SVGA monitors without add-on Gfx board.

 

[arkpandora]

@D

Thanks for these details.  What you say corresponds to what I have experienced until now.

I tried Powerstrip : all it did was crashing the computer so I didn't insist, but this may be an option indeed.


@stefcep2

Thanks for your comments.

I would not say that the Amiga once tried to be a PC, as the PC wasn't more suitable than the Amiga for the kind of software you quote (except maybe the "chunky" vs "planar" processing but I suppose that processing power could compensate) : the PC was favoured for marketing reasons rather than technical reasons.


@Hammer

If I understand well, such an interpolation is usefeul in films or wholly moving screens because it suppresses the "pauses" that occur when a frame is repeated.

But if it only adds frames it can't improve 2D animation, especially for objects that moves on the screen without changing shape, because in it motion must be regular.  Every added frame will just slow animation down instead of stopping it, so instead of getting jerky animation you will just get wavy animation : it won't make the motion regular.  In order to reproduce 2D animation accurately on a different refresh rate, you would need to redraw every frame to make it correspond to what the eye would see at the same moment if the display's frame rate was right.

[Hammer]

arkpandora wrote:
@persia

"Collectors/historians" may recognize themselves in your comparison, but as far as the animation problem is concerned, I think that your comment is irrelevant.

It would be relevant if it was a question of subjectivity, but it's not : the animation problem is an objective technical incompatibility.

It would be relevant too if it was about an incidental detail, for example the look and feel of a real Amiga being missing in Amiga emulators.  But it's not : animation is one of the principal qualities of the Amiga, so that it is an essential quality of numerous games (and demos).  Without normal animation, numerous games' (and demos) aesthetics are hidden : it's like condemning any music masterpiece to arbitrary chaotic rythmics.  As a result, not only is the best works' aesthetic identity lost, but the work of art itself is harmed in such a process, and - in my opinion - destroyed.

So, as far as 2D animation is concerned, your judgement is not true : the emulated Amiga is not more refined despite its differences, but less refined.  If it was more refined I would agree with you : but animation is essential, and it is the only reason why I still have to use a real Amiga although I would prefer to use emulators.

Your judgement is not true even if we consider the whole 2D animation on PC and Mac computers : I have never seen any good 2D animation on a PC or Mac, whatever the era and computing power,
.

Sorry, my laptop can play H.264/DIVX/WMV-HD 1080p 2D video titles just fine.
 

except a few text scrollings in a few old pirate intros and one - only one ! but there may be more - MS-Dos PC game of the early 90s (I think it was "Magic Pockets" but it must be confirmed), while most Amiga games have perfect animation.  The Amiga is not the only one : some other computers or consoles using video screen modes (hence offering an easy way to synchronize animation with the refresh rate) had perfect animation, especially the Commodore 64 and the Sega Megadrive/Genesis.  The appearance of DirectX could have been the time to make 2D animation easier on a PC, but instead it favoured 3D animation for good, which is another subject.

The 3D hardware i.e. shaders aids with video processing.

  So as far as 2D animation is concerned, what you call refinement is in fact both technical and aesthetic regression, since the PC and Mac have won the game although 2D animation has always been neglected on these systems.  

Are seriously comparing AGA vs AVIVO HD or PureVideo HD?

What is AGA's HQV score again?

[Hammer]

If I understand well, such an interpolation is usefeul in films or wholly moving screens because it suppresses the "pauses" that occur when a frame is repeated.

But if it only adds frames it can't improve 2D animation, especially for objects that moves on the screen without changing shape, because in it motion must be regular. Every added frame will just slow animation down instead of stopping it, so instead of getting jerky animation you will just get wavy animation : it won't make the motion regular. In order to reproduce 2D animation accurately on a different refresh rate, you would need to redraw every frame to make it correspond to what the eye would see at the same moment if the display's frame rate was right..

The whole point about "motion interpolation" is to avoid judder issues e.g. playing 24FPS video on 60hz/120hz display.