[quote=98427]Funnily enough, you had but just after this debate and my explanations revised your overlays.
Just yesterday. I have posted my settings for a softer image, you’re talking about it just bad and ask again assertions that are simply contrived only to the hair, but änderst suddenly your overlays … haha[/quote]

Let me first observe that you are quickly becoming very rude. If it’s too much for you to have this conversation in a civil manner, don’t participate.

Now, on to your claim that image quality is a matter of personal taste.

This is not true. As I’ve pointed out numerous times, a good quality picture does not depend on the viewer being unaware of flaws or not noticing the flaws. “Picture quality” actually refers to a set of standards which you might not be aware of. For example, when someone calibrates a monitor they have a specific color standard that they are trying to replicate, among other things.

We can show that image quality is not merely dependent on the observer through a reductio ad absurdum. Let’s say I just scribble some lines on my tv with a pen. My nearly-blind grandmother doesn’t see that the lines are there and says “that looks so good!” We can see from this example that a good quality image is not a mere matter of opinion and is not really dependent on the viewer.

Your settings add actual, technical flaws to the picture. Artifacts are technically flaws. Maybe you can just shrug your shoulders and say “oh I don’t see the flaws so it must be a good image.” That’s not how good picture quality works. A good picture stands up to scrutiny and does not contain such flaws in the first place. A good picture does not depend on the viewer being ignorant of the flaws in the picture. A good picture is one which can be heavily scrutinized by someone familiar with picture quality and stand up to such scrutiny. You are saying, essentially, “don’t look at my image too closely, it looks good until you really start to look at it.” A good picture is one which will stand up to the scrutiny of experts who are familiar with all the aspects of picture quality, not one which grandma looks at and says “gee that looks so good sweety.”

I’m sorry but the personal preference of your wife does not determine image quality. Let’s use an analogy:

My dad has pretty poor eyesight and needs to crank up the backlight/brightness on his TV. That’s what looks better *to him.* But objectively speaking the image is worse with his settings because when you crank up the brightness as he does there is a loss of detail. The TV had actually been professionally calibrated to the THX standard, so an change in the settings is an objective loss of image quality.

So with your wife. Is she a professional calibrator or emulator author? How is she supposed to know what good image quality is? She’s like my dad in the above example.

“That you do not know too much about resolution, you have shown, because you do not even knew why your first Scanlines the image only darkened. Why that was the case, I have explained to you in the thread as if you wanted me and all people realize the first time that can not be good only your picture settings handsome and all settings.
I could go on to list examples which show that you have as you pretend less idea.”

This paragraph makes almost no sense but I’ll try to reply anyway. Now you are trying to personally slander and insult me for some reason by accusing me of “not knowing about resolutions?” Huh? What happened is that I accidentally uploaded the included scanline overlay that came with Retroarch rather than the new one I made that had the same file name. You do know that the one that just darkened the screen was the one included with retroarch, right? And that the corrected versions are ones I made and uploaded? I guess those retroarch developers don’t know too much about resolutions, either. :)

Anyway, it’s strange behavior that it should darken anyway- most computers will take a larger overlay and scale it down using nearest neighbor or something. So really, even if it had been my fault it would have been an honest mistake resulting from not knowing the eccentricities of the raspberry pi.

So you can drop this attempt to slander and insult me right away.

Let me say that you are taking this all way too personally. There are real flaws in your picture settings and this is not a matter of mere opinion. Me pointing out these flaws should not evoke this kind of reaction in you. It’s really not appropriate to be so defensive. Now you’ve gone to great lengths to draw my character into question, which is really crossing a line and quite ludicrous.

As a final observation, my suggested settings look identical to using an XRGB-mini with an actual console on an lcd or plasma screen. The XRGB-mini is a $400 device that die hard retro gamers buy to make their retro games look better.