European people: RGB vs HDMI

Discussion in 'Off Topic Discussion' started by veganx, May 6, 2012.

  1. veganx

    veganx Dauntless Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Brazil
    Hey people from Europe,

    Can you tell me, I'm looking forward to play some old memories from my PS1. Like Final Fantasy VII.
    How does the PS3 emulating the PS1 via HDMI into a plasma TV looks like compared to RGB in a CRT?
    Is it almost the same?
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  2. Bad_Ad84

    Bad_Ad84 Keyboard Error: Press F1 to Continue

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    This isnt a HDMI vs RGB question... Its Plasma vs CRT. Which has been answered a million times
     
  3. Lum

    Lum Site Soldier

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    USA
    Being in NTSC land where **** composite ruled so long, I can't relate too well yet. It's hard for me to shake off years of impression of CRTs as bulky fuzzy monsters.
    Even though I know first-hand they don't have to be. I've seen component on a CRT to understand how great things are supposed to look.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2012
  4. la-li-lu-le-lo

    la-li-lu-le-lo ラリルレロ

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    US
    CRTs kick ass for low-res video. You can play PS1 games on a PS2 over component on a CRT, and it looks pretty good. I can't vouch for the PS1's RGB video quality as I've never tried it.

    Then again, the PS1 emulation on the PS3 is pretty good. It's still crap compared to a CRT though.
     
  5. TheRedKnight

    TheRedKnight Spirited Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Finland
    PS1 RGB quality is nothing short of amazing. But like Bad_Ad84 said, this is about CRT vs plasma. I don't play PS1 games over HDMI on my PS3, instead I have my PS3 hooked up to a CRT TV with S-video. It's not a big deal to switch the video signal in the settings menu when you want to play some low-res stuff.Finally, I would like to point out that not all CRTs are the same. People who whine about composite quality have just been using piece of shit CRTs. A proper quality CRT TV with a comb filter can have a decent sharp picture through composite. This is just something consumer level TVs lack in certain parts of the world. And there are more solutions to that than component. Basically, playing video games on "Walmart TVs" and then whining about the picture quality is just ridiculous.
     
  6. Vosse

    Vosse Well Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,636
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Winchester, Oregon
    Pretty sure Plasma's are just about THE BEST quality Flatpanel TV's out there right now...For Video.
    They haven't been recommended as much vs LCD's for gaming and PC use. For various reasons.

    But trust me, PS1 games upscaled (With no stretching) over HDMI to 1080p with the PS3 look pretty darn nice.

    See: http://retrogaming.hazard-city.de/
    and Ctrl+F , Copypasta minus quotations, "Sony Playstation 3"
     
  7. Lum

    Lum Site Soldier

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    USA
    Indeed that's reality to a tee for the "stereotypical uninformed American" gaming environment. Somewhat like PAL slowdown, hideous video quality was an effect countless NTSC users had no idea isn't how most game developers created envisioned their work. We're mainly luckily our downside had less gameplay impact.
     
  8. veganx

    veganx Dauntless Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Brazil
    Well, it could not be a discussion about plasma vs crt but since there are a few crt (some widescreen) that can take HDMI, they are not that rare as I thought.

    My crt can't take component, it's a very good toshiba monitor 37" (huge) but unfortunately it only can take s-video max.
     
  9. Bad_Ad84

    Bad_Ad84 Keyboard Error: Press F1 to Continue

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    A Plasma via anything isnt going to be the same as a CRT. Your input doesnt matter when the screens are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. Its never going to look the same, no matter how you connect the console to the tv.

    That is why I said its a plasma vs crt discussion.
     
  10. veganx

    veganx Dauntless Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Brazil
    And that's why I replied that there are CRT that can take HDMI.
    Let's skip the plasma part, since I never saw, and probably never will see a RGB TV, I would like to know if someone ever experienced a CRT via HDMI vs CRT via RGB
     
  11. la-li-lu-le-lo

    la-li-lu-le-lo ラリルレロ

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    US
    Yeah, that's why playing NTSC consoles over RGB is the ideal way to play older games. It's certainly not what the manufacturers or the developers intended, in fact I doubt they even considered that people might do it, but I would argue that it's better than what they intended. It's true that developers would have been using RGB (or VGA) connections to create their games, but they would have known full well that most gamers would be using composite, and they probably tested it with composite. As has been mentioned before, some Genesis/Megadrive games actually made use of composite color bleeding to create fake transparency effects.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  12. TheRedKnight

    TheRedKnight Spirited Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Finland
    There have been CRTs since the early 90s that have such advanced comb filters in them that using S-video or even composite on them produces a sharp image with almost no colour bleeding. Video game developers unfortunately can't have an influence over the masses and tell them to stop buying shitty cheap TVs.
     
  13. Lum

    Lum Site Soldier

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    USA
    Perhaps you're overthinking things, and TV makers actually are shipping inferior product to USA than Europe?
     
  14. la-li-lu-le-lo

    la-li-lu-le-lo ラリルレロ

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    US
    Even the best S-Video image is not as good as RGB.
     
  15. TheRedKnight

    TheRedKnight Spirited Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Finland
    For example, a JVC S-video monitor produces a better image than a consumer level Sony TV that takes RGB.
     
  16. Lum

    Lum Site Soldier

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    USA
    Well keep in mind the reason analog 15khz RGB failed here, is no physical interface was formally standardized for it. There's a few different connectors our few TVs or monitors that even accept the mode at all may use.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  17. Calpis

    Calpis Champion of the Forum

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,907
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    .ma.us
    No it never was introduced in the Americas because nobody cares but a few nerds online that discovered it last year (like almost everything else in life people are excited about). Millions of people to this day still watch TV via a RF modulator, afterall that's how Comcast, the US's largest cable provider, hooks up their STB (even *HD-DVR*) for people. In Europe the only reason RGB/SCART was introduced at all was out of necessity since SECAM isn't suitable for numerous tasks and PAL had to be used in its place without adding a tuner to the set, not because it's a continent of videophiles.

    YPbPr never would have been introduced if DVD players nor EDTV were released. S-video never would have been introduced to consumers if prosumer camcorders didn't force it on people. People like convenience and low cost over all else, RGB is neither.


    Back to the topic, there are many differences between RGB and HDMI:

    RGB - lossy transmission
    HDMI - lossless transmission

    RGB generally - full dynamic range
    HDMI generally - YCbCr transcoded or RGB with compressed dynamic range is typical though not a requirement
    HDMI theoretically - larger gamut possible, better colorspaces can be used

    RGB - gamma correction required for synthetic video (which consoles largely omit)
    HDMI - no gamma correction required for synthetic video, highly accurate digital NTSC/PAL gamma correction possible

    RGB - DAC non-linearities
    HDMI - linear "DAC" (transceiver)

    --

    Basically everything about HDMI is better, especially if you can set equipment to RGB with the "full range" of colors. As for which display is better, that depends on personal preferences.

    Do you want to see crisp pixel detail similar to an emulator solely limited by the image scaling/interpolation algorithms? Go with a fixed-pixel display.

    Do you want to see authentic "scanlines", barrel distortion, the shadow mask/aperture grille, raster bloom and interlacing flicker? Go with a CRT (though technically 1080p fixed-pixel displays can simulate these quite well for 240p video, not that the PS emulator does any of that).

    CRT - analog bandwidth limited, lots of visual distortion/"character", transmission issues

    non-CRT - damaged pixel aspect (when using an analog link), lossy video scaling is a necessity
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2012
  18. Bad_Ad84

    Bad_Ad84 Keyboard Error: Press F1 to Continue

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Fixed that for you. RGB is plenty cheap and convenient over here.
     
  19. Calpis

    Calpis Champion of the Forum

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,907
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    .ma.us
    Sure it's relatively cheap for you to buy SCART parts as a hobbyist 35 years after its introduction and after 15 years of Chinese production, but it's not cheap on a manufacturing scale, it's a very expensive connector, cable, input implementation compared to a 1-wire cable like a RCA phono plug. This is especially true back in discrete analog TV days. I know it was mandated in France but I think the only reason it caught on elsewhere was because until SCART Europe didn't have a consumer baseband input, right?

    Another thing I forgot is that all the different PAL systems had incompatible sound carriers and channel frequencies so RF interchange wasn't even an option. SCART fans can thank European dissension for its existence :)
     
  20. Bad_Ad84

    Bad_Ad84 Keyboard Error: Press F1 to Continue

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Scart has never been expensive for the consumer here. Pretty much all my TV's have had it for as long as I can remember. =/

    and price/ease for the consumer is what you said in your post :)

    It came with your TV, you didnt need to tune in your TV like you do with RF. Seems pretty easy to me and it was already on the TV - covers both of your issues with what consumers want.

    Hence me correcting your post, it seems a very American view point as its not common there. Here its came as standard for a long time.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2012

Share This Page