Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

This is totally speculative. I doubt that the image would be perfect even on a high DPI display, especially in motion.
Plus, in many cases, good anti-aliasing is even important for IQ then a high native resolution, as the brain can detect even a slight shimmering.

But that's not even my point, the point is accuracy (!).
There are almost always side effects of this which people do not consider first hand.

Let's just assume 9xSSAA + high DPI display is absolutely perfect (!) in terms of edge resolution, texture shimmering etc., and texture sharpness in the distance just cannot be made better any further.
(All this i highly doubt!)
How can you exclude the possibility that there are rendering techniques or post processing effects that take advantage of a higher rendering accuracy?

An example:
How many people say the 24-bit color depth of their display is sufficient?
(There are many that even come up with bullshit like "the human eye cannot see the difference between more then 500 colors" and the like.)
Now hink of the color dithering in SweetFX, quote: "Applies dithering to simulate more colors than your monitor can display."
So why is this done, if the colors are already that "perfect" and no one can see the difference?
The anser is: "This lessens banding artifacts".

I hope this example made it somewhat clear what i mean.
There are sometimes some side effects in digitalisation accuracy that people do not consider at first glance.

I still don't think you understand what paul was getting at (and what I'm now trying to explain in his place, come on paul...) :p

Gabbyjay Wrote:I doubt that the image would be perfect even on a high DPI display, especially in motion.
Plus, in many cases, good anti-aliasing is even important for IQ then a high native resolution, as the brain can detect even a slight shimmering.

Then you're doubting the physics of how displays work. The DPI (or PPI if you prefer) dictates how many pixels are available in a given space. Combined with a high native resolution for the display, you will reduce all kinds of aliasing (edge/geometry, texture, light/shadow, temporal, etc). Imagine having two 21" displays, one at 1080p and another at 4K. Naturally since they're the same physical size, the 4K one is going to have to cram many times more pixels than the 1080p per inch. The only way to do this is physically make the pixels smaller; you're making the pixels "finer" in a sense. Aliasing occurs when you notice a sudden, jarring transition of color between certain groups of pixels, however, aliasing is going to be far less noticeable as the actually pixels get smaller and closer together as far as your eye can discern. The 4K monitor in the example has many more smaller pixels to work with, so there's less need to use AA methods to smooth out images.

Gabbyjay Wrote:But that's not even my point, the point is accuracy (!).

If you increase the DPI and the resolution, the resulting image is necessarily going to be more accurate (but not necessarily as accurate as it could be), because you have more pixels in the same space to display that given image. Why bring up SweetFX? We were talking about the need for AA as it concerns high DPI and resolutions (the point paul was making), not other aspects of IQ such as color gamut and fidelity.

Gabbyjay Wrote:Let's just assume 9xSSAA + high DPI display is absolutely perfect (!) in terms of edge resolution, texture shimmering etc., and texture sharpness in the distance just cannot be made better any further.
(All this i highly doubt!)
How can you exclude the possibility that there are rendering techniques or post processing effects that take advantage of a higher rendering accuracy?

Fwiw, no one ever said SweetFX would be useless or unneeded as we increase the DPI and resolution, just that it will reduce the need for AA. Avoiding color banding requires either adding more color information or simulating more color information to existing pixels rather than increasing pixel count

Quote: Combined with a high native resolution for the display, you will reduce all kinds of aliasing (edge/geometry, texture, light/shadow, temporal, etc).

Thats the point: It will reduce (!) it.
That it will make the image perfect, is totally speculative, as very few of us actually use 4K-displays, and even those barely can be considered high-DPI in the sense you meant.

Again, i doubt a limit where no improvement is possible can be reached in the next years.
Even less if you consider projectors, most of them will be 1080p for some time now, and even if 4K projectors can be bought for a reasonable price, the DPI will still be at a level where aliasing is far worse then on current monitors.

Quote: Why bring up SweetFX? We were talking about the need for AA as it concerns high DPI and resolutions (the point paul was making), not other aspects of IQ such as color gamut and fidelity.

I am talking about all advantages that higher resolutions or anti-aliasing methods can offer.
There are side effects outside of edges, shader or texture shimmering, one should consider those as well.

Quote: Fwiw, no one ever said SweetFX would be useless or unneeded as we increase the DPI and resolution, just that it will reduce the need for AA. Avoiding color banding requires either adding more color information or simulating more color information to existing pixels rather than increasing pixel count

As i said, it is an example of a side effect where visually the image quality is perfect so far, but then a rendering process is added that still profits from more accurate internal data processing.
So how can you deny the possibility that there are - or in the future there will be - techniques that take advantage of a higher resolution or a higher subpixel count, even if edge aliasing, texture or shader flimmer are already "perfect" visually?
That was my point.

Gabbyjay Wrote:Thats the point: It will reduce (!) it.
That it will make the image perfect, is totally speculative, as very few of us actually use 4K-displays, and even those barely can be considered high-DPI in the sense you meant.

The point is that it's possible to reduce it enough to the point where our eyes won't care about the amount of aliasing, because it would be unnoticeable. No one here ever claimed anything, much less the image quality, would be perfect. We don't have to wait for 4K monitors either. We've have several people come here with Retina displays already and they've noted exactly what I've said: a reduced need for AA. On lightweight games (SSBB for example) a number of people simply set their IR to 4X and did not see the need to add AA. It's going to be the same once displays with high DPIs and high resolutions start increasing and become available at more affordable prices.

Gabbyjay Wrote:I am talking about all advantages that higher resolutions or anti-aliasing methods can offer.
There are side effects outside of edges, shader or texture shimmering, one should consider those as well.

Which is all irrelevant as far as it concerns the ability of high DPIs and high resolution to reduce aliasing. Again, no one ever said things like SweetFX should be discounted in terms of overall IQ, but we have said the need for AA is going to be reduced with high DPIs and high resolutions.

Gabbyjay Wrote:So how can you deny the possibility that there are - or in the future there will be - techniques that take advantage of a higher resolution or a higher subpixel count, even if edge aliasing, texture or shader flimmer are already "perfect" visually?
That was my point.

No one ever denied that techniques like SweetFX wouldn't be useful or unable to take advantage of higher resolutions/subpixel counts. The only thing that paul was trying to establish was that we're going to be less reliant on AA. No one ever said high DPIs and high resolutions would lead to perfect IQ either. If you believe so, use the forum's quote features.

So now your talking about "reducing the need for AA".

But his original quote was: "you guys are gonna stop giving a shit about any variety of AA more specific than "9x SSAA"."

No one said higher DPI screens would not reduce the need for AA; my point is that even then, you might still get advantage of Anti Aliasing other/higher than 9xSSAA.

Quote:"Again, no one ever said things like SweetFX should be discounted in terms of overall IQ, but we have said the need for AA is going to be reduced with high DPIs and high resolutions."

He says, no one would care about any other form of AA other than 9xSSAA.

I say, aside from IQ visible at first glance (texture/edges/shader aliasing) there are also rendering effects which take advantage of the accuracy of other/higher forms of AA.

So whats your problem with that?

Gabbyjay Wrote:But his original quote was: "you guys are gonna stop giving a shit about any variety of AA more specific than "9x SSAA"."

Give a bit of thought to his words. If the aliasing in the native image is already reduced to an unnoticeable point, a lot of people are going to stop caring about more complex or advanced forms of AA. The differences between 9xSSAA and everything else is going to be less and less apparent, specifically because the display itself has reduced aliasing.

Gabbyjay Wrote:No one said higher DPI screens would not reduce the need for AA;

And that's not the point I'm contending against.

Gabbyjay Wrote:my point is that even then, you might still get advantage of Anti Aliasing other/higher than 9xSSAA.

And his point was that there isn't going to be a lot of difference to distinguish between 9xSSAA and other forms of AA once you start taking care of aliasing with the display itself.

Gabbyjay Wrote:I say, aside from IQ visible at first glance (texture/edges/shader aliasing) there are also rendering effects which take advantage of the accuracy of other/higher forms of AA.

So whats your problem with that?

I don't have a problem with that and I never have. You've claimed that we would still need good AA methods (better than SSAA?) for achieving good IQ:

Gabbyjay Wrote:While 9xSSAA might be enough for some cases (edges, for example), other scenarios (like textures or post processing filters) still might take advantage of further refined anti aliasing methods.

Gabbyjay Wrote:This is totally speculative. I doubt that the image would be perfect even on a high DPI display, especially in motion.
Plus, in many cases, good anti-aliasing is even important for IQ then a high native resolution, as the brain can detect even a slight shimmering.

This is the point I'm contending. With a high enough DPI and resolution, there are going to be minimal differences detectable by the human eye in when it comes to SSAA vs. more advanced forms of AA, simply because the display itself has already reduced the visible aliasing.

Quote:If the aliasing in the native image is already reduced to an unnoticeable point, a lot of people are going to stop caring about more complex or advanced forms of AA.

So?
A lot of people already don't care if a console game does not even support any AA at all, and there are always people who have a higher standard in terms of IQ or who consider side/future factors as well.

When he says, people won't care about any other form of AA, this is not exactly what is motivating devs to continue supporting or working on a feature like this.
Please consider sometimes as a dev you come to a point where you barely can make the decicion: "This feature would be nice to have, but if no one will use it, i wont make the effort to include it."
So I say "hey, there are some people who DO care (due to the reasons already pointed out)! Count me in!"

(10-03-2013, 02:31 AM)Shonumi Wrote: [ -> ]This is the point I'm contending. With a high enough DPI and resolution, there are going to be minimal differences detectable by the human eye in when it comes to SSAA vs. more advanced forms of AA, simply because the display itself has already reduced the visible aliasing.

Higher DPI will reduce aliasing.
The degree how much it will reduce it, is debatable.
All you can say is, that it will be better then on current 1080p displays (for example).
Will it be perfect? Surely not.
Will aliasing be unnoticable? Perhaps.
Will aliasing get improved a lot, but some aliasing will still be visible, even if ever so slightly? I consider this the most likely scenario.

Now, if i can choose between a picture where most people dont notice aliasing, and a picture that fights any AA to the maximum which is technically possible, i will choose the latter any day.

Gabbyjay Wrote:there are always people who have a higher standard in terms of IQ or who consider side/future factors as well.

And they are in the minority. Just like so-called audiophiles and videophiles, you will have enthusiasts who want the highest IQ for games. Paul wasn't talking about them, and neither was I. For most people high DPIs and high resolutions will be enough for many. Adding 9xSSAA for those people still sensitive to aliasing will widen that number. A majority of people already don't care about advanced AA, and that's unlikely to change as our displays reduce visible aliasing. To everyone else, advanced AA is a big "so what?" to them.

Gabbyjay Wrote:"This feature would be nice to have, but if no one will use it, i wont make the effort to include it."

Having known some of the Dolphin devs myself for a while, I can tell you, they're already like that. They have strong inclinations against feature-creep or adding functions that are only useful to a handful of users. You only have to spend so much time here to find that out (look at the Feature Request thread, or feature requests on the Google Code project page under Issues)

Gabbyjay Wrote:Now, if i can choose between a picture where most people dont notice AA, and a picture that fights any AA to the maximum which is technically possible, i will choose the latter any day.

That's what makes you an enthusiast (nothing wrong in that). :p

Quote:And they are in the minority.

So what?
The same could be said about console emulation users in general: They are a minority (compared to players playing games on real console).
So are emulators only written to please a majority?
Not neccessarily, as there's not money interests involved.
It might as well be about personal interests: If one dev sees an advantage of a feature, he might include it.

Quote: Just like so-called audiophiles and videophiles, you will have enthusiasts who want the highest IQ for games.

Many console emulation users are some kind of enthusiasts, as there are three major groups here: Those who just want any opportunity to play their old games when they do not own the original system any more; those who want their games appear as close to the original as possible; and those who want to see their games in full glory, as beautiful as possible. This is the group aiming for IQ and those can be considered enthusiasts in this case.
And if no one posts here what he wants, how can someone determine whats a minority here and what is not?
So i point out what i want while Paul more ore less thinks no one would care.

Quote: Paul wasn't talking about them, and neither was I.

Yo wait a minute here!

He said: " you guys are gonna stop giving a shit about any variety of AA more specific than "9x SSAA"."
That includes me (especially as he replied to me), and i said i do care and why.
So whats your point?

Quote: Having known some of the Dolphin devs myself for a while, I can tell you, they're already like that. They have strong inclinations against feature-creep or adding functions that are only useful to a handful of users.

Which makes it even more important that users point out what they want and why they do care, as i did here in this thread.
Someone said:
"Unneccessary as you guys won't give a shit a bout it!"
And i said:
"Yes i do!"

(10-03-2013, 03:11 AM)Shonumi Wrote: [ -> ]That's what makes you an enthusiast (nothing wrong in that). :p

I can live with that and i hope I'm not the only one here.

@Gabbyjay - On phone, can't quote atm. Anyway, you completely missed the point I was making about your being in the minority of gamers. It was that such a minority is unconcerned with high DPIs and resolutions as they still want advanced AA. Likewise the majority well be unconcerned about advanced AA. That's the only thing I'm trying to demonstrate, not if emulators are for certain groups or whether emulation is an enthusiast activity or not. The point was that there always is a minority of enthusiasts, but the aren't a consideration for the topic high DPIs and high resolutions as it pertains to reducing AA, since they may not care, whereas a majority of others will.

Paul was talking to everyone here with an interest in advanced AA. This extends to both enthusiasts and regular gamers alike (I am interested in advanced AA algorithms, but not necessarily using them for gaming). He didn't quote you or directly reference you, so it appears you be broad address.

Even when people are vocal about certain changes, the devs still consider how useful it is to the average Dolphim user. If they don't.believe it is useful to all or most, it doesn't make.the cut usually, despite how.vocal some.users are about it.