Finding Proper 4:3 Correction for Vintage Video Games

[@RobotMasterSplash]

Excellent video, I am one of those obsessed with achieving perfectly round objects and this will be very helpful.

[@sanchopanza4538]

Many thanks for the tutorial, FirebrandX, it really helped me to understand how to find the proper correction. Awesome work.

[@onepiece190993]

Man, I got confused by thinking that the 8:7 Resolution Aspect Ratio was the same as the 8:7 Pixel Aspect Ratio (PAR). So in case someone is struggling like me, the Resolution Aspect Ratio is the image the Console generates [Square Pixels](ie SNES 256x224 is 8:7, Genesis 320x224 is 10:7) , which is wrongly assumed to be what you need to correct to 4:3, but in reality the CRT doesn't stretch the Image per se, it modify the length of each individual Pixel and that is what it's in the Dot Clock Rates Table, hence the Pixel Aspect Ratio [Rectangle Pixels] (ie SNES 256px is 8:7, Genesis 320px is 32:35). As a side note this PAR thing only apply to Analog/CRT connections, so with Handhelds this isn't needed since they connect to LCD/LED screens that can output at practically PAR 1:1 (pixel perfect, 1 square 1 pixel). The only exception is the Game Gear with resolution of 160×144 which is 10:9 like the Game Boy, but then the image is stretched to be 4:3 before outputting, so in this case you would need to correct the 160x144 as a 4:3 Resolution Aspect Ratio and not as a Pixel Aspect Ratio (PAR) so 144 x (4/3) = 192x144 and the PAR is (1:1)

[@rolen47]

Thank You! PAR and DAR always confused me, I always thought retro games had to be stretched to 4:3 to be corrected. Now I understand it's far more complicated.

[@RedArremer]

Thanks! Yeah unfortunately the 4:3 mistake has been perpetuated for so many years that even some emulator coders believed it to be gospel truth.

[@KazoWAR]

you can get integer scaling if you multiply horizontal by the first number, and vertical by the second number. this way every pixel is uniformly stretched.

[@RedArremer]

Yes you can, but that isn't practical for a lot of systems. Even with 8/7 for 4K displays, that would be 256 * 8 and 240 * 7, which leaves a lot of black bars. Some people prefer 10x vertical overscan for 4K output (think RetroTINK-4K), which means you take the horizontal 256 * 10 = 2560, and then multiply that by 8/7 to get 2926 horizontal for 2400 vertical.

[@TofumanFC3S]

Thanks for explaining this in detail 👍

[@---li4yn]

Another way to achieve the same result is to pad the NES image to 280 pixels horizontally, then stretch that to 320 pixels. (An actual NES outputs ~283 non-black pixels per line, the extra 27 being background color. Most/all emulators ignore that.)

[@philexile2954]

Great video, FBX! Do you think it would ever be possible for these devices to detect the correct resolutions and automatically make these adjustments on the fly depending on the “rules” outlined here?

[@TofumanFC3S]

I’d really hope OSSC Pro could do this

[@dudeguy7347]

seems to do this with the Retro Tink 5X. I have width and height set to +0 for both and I get the correct aspect ratio

[@TheA_Gamer554]

thank you for this video, i remember discussing about this specific topic with you on twitter and i'm sure this will be helpful

[@TheA_Gamer554]

after watching it i will probably scale it for me in integers for personal preference, but for reference i'll surely do this from now on

[@user-gh8ck9py8s]

First, Thanks for all you do in preserving video game history! Second, does using integer scaling (for pixel perfection) in emulators affect the aspect ratio in a negative way? Aside from showing a slightly smaller picture on my 4K TV. For example I use Mesen as my emulator for NES and SNES, and turn on Integer scaling, yet I'm not sure what aspect ratio to use. Auto, 8:7, or 4:3? Third, Do you do this for all your games when playing on a non CRT monitor/TV or do you have a set it and forget it method that is good enough. Thanks!

[@RedArremer]

Hi there! Lets get these knocked out: 1. Thanks so much! 2. Yes, using square pixels can drastically affect the aspect ratio depending on the console. For NES and SNES, the square pixel image is notably narrower than original DAR (display aspect ratio). If you intend to use square pixels, then 8:7 is the mode to use. In this case, "8:7" refers to the typically active and centered 256x224 pixel resolution's aspect ratio when displayed in square pixels. 3. I use upscalers with profiles I can customize and save on a per console basis, and quite often per resolution mode basis in each console. So on the Genesis, I will have a 256 DAR profile long with a 320 square pixel profile since I prefer square pixels on 320-mode Genesis games. Cheers!

[@larsendx9708]

This got me thinking so I fired up PS1 SFA3 on my BVM 2010p and I do see letterboxing. PS1 runs at 384x240, not 384x224. That's not CPS2 resolution as claimed in this video. Sorry.

[@RedArremer]

The 240 lines past 224 are blank and considered overscan. Thus, the actual lit pixels in SFAIII is 384x224, just like the arcade. Again, all you have to do is count the pixels.

[@miltiadiskoutsokeras9189]

@@RedArremer 384x224 are drawn with color, 384x240 are contained in the video signal, ~362x240 or less visible in consumer CRT TVs due to overscan, 384x240 should be considered for scaler optimization. The Capcom ports have borders in vertical axis and extra irrelevant stuff in the edges of horizontal axis. Can we all agree now?

[@larsendx9708]

@@miltiadiskoutsokeras9189 Well put, Miltiadis.

[@larsendx9708]

@@RedArremer What Miltiadis said.

[@larsendx9708]

@@RedArremer I captured SFA3 on PS1 off-screen my BVM 2010P twitter.com/LaurentBaum/status/1392206272364261382?s=20

[@JBalmoreS]

First off! Thank you! But let me get this formula straight. If you multiply the original exact PAR (pixel aspect ratio) by the number of horizontal pixels you scale up to, round it to the nearest even number, then you have the correct 4:3 ratio? So the only thing you are changing is the amount of horizontal pixels on a HD display based on that PAR right? This math is like withcraft to me!

[@DragonQuarter]

Sorry if this is a dumb question. Multiplying the horizontal by 8/7 through Paint Shop Pro in this 1080p video was for showing how the stretch works on a CRT, right? So if you happened to have a captured 256x224 SNES screenshot on your PC and wanted to present that on a website or video with proper aspect ratio correction, would you multiply the horizontal by 4/3 instead since most people are viewing on a widescreen monitor or phone? The dot clock rates page says "multiply the pixel aspect ratios by 4/3 if stretching the picture on a widescreen TV", so I wanted to make sure. EDIT: Or maybe I'm misunderstanding that sentence? Is it implying 16:9 CRTs?

[@RedArremer]

Yeah they meant on 16:9 CRTs. For any digital display that makes use of square pixels, you would correct various 256x240 console modes by 8/7 on the horizontal after scaling. So say you captured a 256x240 SNES (it sends 240 even when most games on it letterbox to 224) and you want to scale it to 9x on a 4K display. So multiply 240 by 9x (or 224 by 9x if you cropped the vertical to 224). Then take the horizontal and multiply that by 9x to get 2304. Now multiply 2304 by 8/7. In a calculator, you divide 8 by 7 first, then multiply the result by 2304 for a new width of 2634 (rounded to the nearest even pixel).

[@DragonQuarter]

@RedArremer Thank you! For years I was using the Ste formula that RetroRGB suggested using for scaling native game captures (i.e. scaling horizontally for 256 with 12.75% percent stretch) so when I saw this video I suddenly felt like maybe I've been doing it wrong. I guess both methods work, but yours seems to have a lot more intensive research.

[@leonardobenitodevalle814]

Have you updated your settings for Mega SD and Super NT after the firmware update from Kevtris? The missing line is sorted. I do not seem to able to find your final settings! Kind regards

[@mjc0961]

I hear if you get the aspect ratio correct, you can start your Dragster in second gear 😋

[@linuxlover_8436]

A little over my head, but I plan to periodically revisit this info as I mostly game on pc via RetroArch & am constantly trying to get as close to o.g feel and look of older arcade/console games. The aspect ratio and shader stuff has been the most time consuming when it comes to setup and every game is different (even if same console) so I don't always use generic/universal settings per game. I play it by sight (like u mentioned about how scanlines are not equal but should be) as some things just seem off. Another example of things being off beyond scanlines are when Mario got the star in Mario 1--on a decent CRT, the flashing colors seemed more reflective/shiny or "shimmery" for lack of better description. The Bowser/Castle stages had a better look when it came to the texture/look of the metal ground. I discovered a trio of shaders in RetroArch I though best demonstrated true upscaling of that classic game and seemed to properly display the quickly flashing colors of Star Mario and the better metal texture of castle stages and its firesticks, but it crushed performance of my PC. I got a better GPU recently, so I will attempt to run that shader trio again. Thanks and longtime hearer of you via RetroRGB. Subbed.

[@frankjaeger9588]

So if we suse 720p for Super NT and NT mini, we should set 4:3 for 16:9 for width and 720pixels for height?

[@dudeguy7347]

yes

[@EunosXX]

Excellent video. Looking for clarification about 320px games and your always keeping 1:1 PAR for those. Is that strictly because you've only come across games running in 320 mode with art that makes the most sense in square pixels? I knew only one game to look at: Final Fantasy Tactics, which runs in 320 mode for the title, movies, and maybe the world map, and runs in 256 mode for the battle scenes. Again with FFT, I think it's easier to support that the 320px mode art was meant for square pixels. The title screen "FINAL FANTASY TACTICS" lines up with box art using square pixels, and the circular shapes are much closer to round in 1:1 than 4:5 PAR. Though, interestingly, using 4:5 pixels causes the proportions in the title letters to more closely match the ratios that are found in the title letters for FF4, 5, and 6 on SNES. Another tidbit you were close to: The Triforce on The Legend of Zelda's title screen is equilateral with 8:7 PAR.

[@WNKLER]

Most consoles don’t match exactly the 59.94Hz/15.73425kHz specified by NTSC. Does this have any bearing on PAR/DAR? If so, does the table you reference at the beginning of the video take each consoles’ individual scan rate into account?

[@mattjcwig]

Can you edit the figures on an OSSC json to give you correct aspect ratios on there?

[@DerekMoore82]

Outstanding!

[@brett20000000009]

I prefer integer horizontal when possible It has the advanatge of not requiring horizontal interpolation. If you play on digital display capable of low persistence at 60hz shimmer will be easy to spot with sharp interpolation. you end up having to use very blurry interpolation to hide the shimmer completlely. mostly not a problem for 60hz sample and hold displays because they sorta hide the shimmer with persistence blur. If i can get close enough to my desired a/r with integer horizontal i'll take it.

[@s0nnyblaz32]

How would it be possible to make those correctios on a consumer grade crt?

[@dudeguy7347]

i dont wanna answer for him but in my experience, most consumer CRTs wont let you. PVMs do and some of the Sonys do if you can access the service menu

[@constantlycorrect8550]

Regarding nes and snes..... Why is this correct, instead of simply multiplying 240 by 1.33333?

[@constantlycorrect8550]

Edit: Got it. Never mind. The entire purpose of this is NOT to scale the entire display image. The purpose of this is to "stretch" the non-square pixels into being square pixels.

[@RedArremer]

@@constantlycorrect8550 The purpose is to stretch the pixels to exactly how they would appear on a properly calibrated CRT. For many years, it was assumed vintage game consoles were stretched to "4:3" by a CRT. With new/recovered understanding of how these console signals actually worked, we know that virtually none of them were merely stretched to 4:3 on CRT's. Many of them actually had black boarders on the sides, like the NES and SNES if the CRT is perfectly calibrated to the NTSC standard.