November 29, 2016 at 7:31 PM #9979
I’ve read that you have to adjust the sample phase when using this mode and find the sweet spot. I’ve tried every possible sample phase setting but there is always a small region of the screen that has some kind of fuzziness effect. Is this just incompatibility with my monitor?November 29, 2016 at 10:16 PM #9982
Which console/game are you using that with? Default parameters are set for PSX 320×240 mode, most likely you need to also tweak H.samplerate for other sources, see examples hereDecember 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM #10028
I’m using NTSC Genesis. I played with the H.samplerate on 240p_L3M2 and it seems 427 does the trick. However it seems like 320×240 optimized mode cuts off part of the overscan on the right side. Any way to prevent that?
Edit: Seems like the H.active option is meant to address this, but I’m seeing discrepancies between the 240p test suite and actual gameplay with Generic 4:3 mode. In Generic 4:3 the full overscan in shown on the right, but in 320×240 optimized it will still get cut off even if I adjust the H.active value to make the overscan appear in the 240 test suite overscan test. You can also see this in the grid test by turning on the gray background.December 1, 2016 at 11:40 PM #10037
Actually you should adjust H.synclen and H.backporch for that. Genesis seems to have 320 and 256 pixel horizontal output modes so maybe the game is using the 256 pixel mode.March 14, 2017 at 12:42 AM #11786
A little late on this, but here’s what I mean about the overscan.
Here are the settings I changed:
Those settings produce this:
This is how it should look:
There should be a total width of 348 (28 additional pixels on top of the game’s 320 pixel width). I want this to show up on the OSSC, but if I change H.active to 348 it borks the aspect ratio.March 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM #11807
If your display cannot handle the 348 multiple, then no. The reason you can see it in generic mode is because it uses a multiple of the pixel aspect corrected horizontal length, 390. (427*(32/35) = 390.4)
Personally, I see no reason for that area to be visible anyway.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.