Filters and shaders!

[MajesticSiN]

So without starting a war what is your stance on filters.
Do you use them?
If so what are your favorite?

I have had a stance on not using them for the longest now but that's because they didn't look right to me.
Now I have seen some that actually look pretty decent and if given the right circumstance I would use them.
When I do use them I just use crt filters. I'm still against smoothing filters.

 

[PhrawzT]

I typically stay away from them. I have tried to use them in the past, but they always look unnatural compared to the original graphics.

 

[syntheticErik]

In my opinion it depends, on the system, the era, sometimes game to game.

As a blanket statement I would say most fully 2D games benefit from a filter on a modern display. My opinion is literally the opposite though, I go straight to smoothing filters and completely bypass CRT filters and faux scanlines. Most fully 3D games benefit far more from resolution scaling and anti-aliasing than filtering, I very rarely feel the need to apply an additional filter on a PSX game at a 3X(or beyond) upscale.

It gets weird though, situational like I said. Take a game like Mario Kart 64 for instance, full 3D environment, 2D sprites. There's a fine balance between upscaling to get the environment looking crisp, and filtering to get the characters looking smooth.

As for favorites I'm pretty basic, I just start with a system specific border and shader from the Duimon Mega Bezel pack, then work backwards from there to turn off the scanlines and curvature as a starting point, then tweak from there on a per system/per game basis.

 

[Gorse]

Beyond Pixel Perfect, I don't use any filters – never have, never will. They fundamentally go against what I like about playing retro games: the experience of playing them as someone would have when the game was originally released. For the same reason, I don't use save states, rewinds, fast forward, or any of that BS hullaballoo that clogs up the RetroArch in-game menu – it's not really playing the same game that someone would be on an original copy. Also, frankly, I've never seen a filter that I've liked more than the original game, anyways, no matter what console it's on.

The only place for a filter? The aquarium!

 

[moonbits]

I like CRT shaders, smoothing filters look bad.

 

[syntheticErik]

Beyond Pixel Perfect, I don't use any filters – never have, never will. They fundamentally go against what I like about playing retro games: the experience of playing them as someone would have when the game was originally released. For the same reason, I don't use save states, rewinds, fast forward, or any of that BS hullaballoo that clogs up the RetroArch in-game menu – it's not really playing the same game that someone would be on an original copy. Also, frankly, I've never seen a filter that I've liked more than the original game, anyways, no matter what console it's on.

The only place for a filter? The aquarium!

Even as a fan of smoothing I can respect this.

"the experience of playing them as someone would have when the game was originally released."

Is why I use filters in a roundabout way; I need my games to look how I remember them looking, not how they actually looked

 

[Smiley Cat]

It really just comes down to making the game look as good as I can get it to look on the screen that I'm using.

I don't personally care to have super-sharp pixels on modern screens (because oldschool CRT's and TV's blurred the pixels, and games were often designed with this in mind).
Having said that, I also don't want ugly filters taking things to the other extreme.

So for me it really just depends on what looks good depending on the screen I'm using, and of course the individual game itself.

 

[DunkeyKong]

While most of us would say it's unnecessary, I think it can be quite reliable for some people that wants to play Retro games but doesn't like the pixel bits.

Despite the issues with the filters, some of them aren't that bad. For example, xBRZ (which is quite common), ScaleFX and glsl. These filters won't make it as accurate like the original of course, but in the end it all depends whether you like it or not.

I will stick to the original though since that is the best way to play and see all of the artwork, cutscenes and the game in it's original state or form

 

[Spike]

Beyond Pixel Perfect, I don't use any filters – never have, never will. They fundamentally go against what I like about playing retro games: the experience of playing them as someone would have when the game was originally released. For the same reason, I don't use save states, rewinds, fast forward, or any of that BS hullaballoo that clogs up the RetroArch in-game menu – it's not really playing the same game that someone would be on an original copy. Also, frankly, I've never seen a filter that I've liked more than the original game, anyways, no matter what console it's on.

The only place for a filter? The aquarium!

I'm gonna go ahead and be the unpopular opinion here.
As some may know, I used to think that way, but I've been converted.
The reason is 'CRT shaders' (not filters), and the misconception that seeing raw pixels is what the artist intended when creating the games or even the false memory that games looked like that growing up.
Ask yourself; were you supposed to see 'checkers pattern' or shadows? were you supposed to see rows of distinctly colored pixels or gradients? Big part of low res graphics was using your imagination to fill in what was missing, the TV itself helped create that illusion.

As that image quoted above shows, a lot of the hate comes from legacy filters like SuperEagle and Super2xSaI. Which looked awful but some people still used in the early days.

CRT shaders are an attempt to make things look they way they were supposed to look when played in a CRT screen but using a modern LCD.
Is it perfect? Nope. But they are huge step forward for those who don't own a CRT.

It boils down to personal preference, do you want to see sharp pixel do that. Do you want to see something that resembles a TV, use shaders.

 

[Gorse]

CRT shaders are an attempt to make things look they way they were supposed to look when played in a CRT screen but using a modern LCD.

CRT filters are the Achilles’ Heel of my argument, and you’ve made several good points, so let me be a bit clearer about my own position:

When playing a retro video game, I want the ideal version of the original experience. I want to be playing a game like a rich man in the 90s would — on the best possible TV, with the best possible controls, seeing the best possible version of the original game. Scanlines and CRT filters, to me, look cheap — they look like you’re playing on an authentic old TV, yes, but a crappy one that’s been running continuously for years and that needs you to fiddle with the antenna to watch a grainy version of ALF. High-quality, clear-picture screens existed back then, too, but they were more expensive, so most people didn’t own one. Today, they’re not expensive at all, so I want to enjoy their benefits.

I think of it like watching a Blu-Ray of a movie — a 1080p, clear-as-day picture of Project ALF wasn’t at all what it would look like to most people at the time, but it is what the highest-quality, most expensive version of the movie looked like, and that’s what I want. Filters, to me, are like when they “upscale” the animation of old cartoons to make them “smoother” — they change the actual image, and, in my opinion, always make them look uglier. We live in the future — I don’t have to accept a poor-quality video signal anymore, so I don’t want to. I want the highest-quality version of the original, unaltered game possible.

I don’t have any direct nostalgia for CRTs, because they were on their way out when I was young, and nobody I knew really used them. I do remember the era of atrociously-upscaled, cropped, incorrectly-coloured video on pre-HD flatscreens, though, and I hated them. That’s what filters are to me: a cheap, erroneous version of the original video. I don’t judge people who use them — even CRT filters — but they’re not something I would ever even consider. If that makes me an elitist, then I guess I am one!

 

[DunkeyKong]

I'm gonna go ahead and be the unpopular opinion here.
As some may know, I used to think that way, but I've been converted.
The reason is 'CRT shaders' (not filters), and the misconception that seeing raw pixels is what the artist intended when creating the games or even the false memory that games looked like that growing up.
Ask yourself; were you supposed to see 'checkers pattern' or shadows? were you supposed to see rows of distinctly colored pixels or gradients? Big part of low res graphics was using your imagination to fill in what was missing, the TV itself helped create that illusion.

As that image quoted above shows, a lot of the hate comes from legacy filters like SuperEagle and Super2xSaI. Which looked awful but some people still used in the early days.

CRT shaders are an attempt to make things look they way they were supposed to look when played in a CRT screen but using a modern LCD.
Is it perfect? Nope. But they are huge step forward for those who don't own a CRT.

It boils down to personal preference, do you want to see sharp pixel do that. Do you want to see something that resembles a TV, use shaders.

View attachment 1086
View attachment 1088
View attachment 1089
View attachment 1090
View attachment 1091

That's a really, really clean and easy to understand kind of explanation
It came from the man himself, why am I not surprised?

 

[It's Thinking 2]

Smoothers never work so i usually use pixel perfect.

 

[tselinoyarsk]

Definitely for gba games so they look nicer on a 32 inch display. I like to make them look a bit like a water painting, so I'll typically cycle through the xBrz options and just choose whichever one I think looks the best

 

[Kacho]

I prefer to 8/16 bit console games with CRT filter if possible. I'm so used to seeing the games without any filters or shaders since I've been emulating games since around '99, so if it's too much bother or if the hardware can't runt it I'm fine without it or I'm not very picky as long as it's not one of the sprite smooth filters. When it comes to 3D games it's very case by case. I couldn't care less on PS2 since I mostly played that console with LCD monitor, but for gamecube I would like some filters since I pretty much used CRT during the entire Gamecube and Wii era.

 

[Sayo]

I don't know how many of you are familiarized with Mednaffe's (which is a Mednafen frontend) wonderful NTSC

filters that simulate color generation and blitter with relatively good results. I've attached some examples here. Otherwise I am geenrally opposed to most filters, particularly anything that smooths out the visuals. Don't get me started on those scanline filters and shaders that many commercial re-releases of retro games ship with, they often look terrible.

Spoiler: examples

 

[It's Thinking 2]

I don't know how many of you are familiarized with Mednaffe's (which is a Mednafen frontend) wonderful NTSC View attachment 1349]]][[filters that simulate color generation and blitter with relatively good results. I've attached some examples here. Otherwise I am geenrally opposed to most filters, particularly anything that smooths out the visuals. Don't get me started on those scanline filters and shaders that many commercial re-releases of retro games ship with, they often look terrible.

Spoiler: examples

View attachment 1346
View attachment 1347

it looks like it's on a real tv!

 

[Sayo]

it looks like it's on a real tv!

Yeah it's awesome, I heavily recommend it

 

[Yankee]

I will never go back to un-shadered emulation on LCDs. Those early filters are gross and look like you smeared Vaseline on your screen so I never used them, but once I was properly introduced to CRT shaders and color correction it changed my perception forever.

You were absolutely not meant to see raw pixel. The artists knew this when they were drawing the sprites and intentionally developed techniques for shading and lighting and color combining that take advantage of the medium to display their art. This is how they intended you to see it. This is the best you would have gotten at the time.

I can not understand how anyone can legitimately think otherwise. They did not want you to see the dithering and dots as if you were playing the game in MS Paint. They want you to see the smooth gradients, the transparency effects, and the glow on the highlights from the phosphors.
LCDs with fixed pixel displays were not the planned medium. How a game looks on those is unintentional, not "true".

 

[Don Patch]

@TrepieGroupie#1 and @Sayo nailed it.
That's essentially my take as well.

 

[Waffles]

That's not something I ever voluntarily mess with.

 

[Mopeybloke]

I use CRT shaders, most often CRT-royale. Also I don't up-res 3D games.

 

[Yukyon]

I usally don`t use them since most of the time they look a bit off... The Castlevania Anniversary collection however, has great filters tho, probably the best I´ve seen

 

[Adrastia]

I usually use something like nearest neighbor. I might play around with filters for fun. But I can't play through a whole game with filters that badly distort the graphics.

 

[CRTRebel]

CRT scanlines filters have never appealed to me as they drastically darken images, in contrast I have always greatly appreciated smoothing filters and use them all the time. It then seems very logical to me, as this effect was naturally present when I played with my pal consoles connected to the antenna cable of my CRT TV.

 

[Eris]

I used a CRT up until 2014 so I'm used to that kind of image. Raw pixels were never appealing to me and even in the old times using emulators, I preferred to make use of blargg's TV filter + 25% scanlines. Now CRT shaders are better than ever and very configurable, so I make use of a handful emulating different looks —low TVL, high TVL, RGB, Composite, whatever I feel like at any given moment. They're a requisite for playing 5th gen games with pre-rendered backgrounds.