• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

PSP-3000 scanlines. Can you see them? Do they bug you?

Seraphis Cain

bad gameplay lol
Because right now, they're bugging the hell out of me. Just got a 3000 yesterday, to replace my broken 2000, and while the brighter colors are nice, the scanlines are SO annoying. And what makes it worse is that most of the people I talk to about it swear they can't see them. I guess my eyes are just more sensitive to this kind of thing. Will I eventually stop seeing them, or what? How about you, GAF, do they bug you? Please, share your thoughts! :D
 
I don't mean to derail your thread
but speaking of scanlines
I never understood why when it came to emulation for some older games, people preferred having them visible when playing them on their computer screens which were higher res and bigger overall... I think it makes things look ugly and old and defeated the purpose of emulation for me.
 
I didn't know about it til I read some impressions online. I then tried my friend's 3000 for the first time and yep,I'll just stick with my 2000. noticed the scanlines right away

@medallion
To emulate the tv feel I guess
 
Totally agree. I rebought a PSP to get the Peace Walker bundle but immediately regretted not keeping my 2000 :/ Ah well, a nice shiny Vita should help remedy that!
 
Very rarely. No.

And that's from owning three iterations (1000, 2000, & 3000). I game primarily on the 3000, and I guess it's a very minor detail for me considering the picture's the sharpest of the 3.
 
3000 was my first PSP. Definitely saw them every once in a while but really didn't detract from anything. Ignore them and focus on the game.
 
upgraded from 1000 to 3000, all i noticed was the light weight and plasticy feel of the unit. loved the screen though!

happy new years! :D
 
Definitely notice the scanlines. Haven't played anything with the 3000 though, as I only got it for my GF when the big bundle came on some ridiculous sale, so I can't say that they bother me during gameplay. But I definitely noticed them when I was installing HB on it for her. I've got a 1000, 2000, and Go myself and there's a big difference.
 
It didn't bug me, honestly. I really liked the PSP 3000 screen.

I've actually owned all four of the PSPs at one point or another, which is weird and sad. IMO the go has the best screen...
 
I don't mean to derail your thread
but speaking of scanlines
I never understood why when it came to emulation for some older games, people preferred having them visible when playing them on their computer screens which were higher res and bigger overall... I think it makes things look ugly and old and defeated the purpose of emulation for me.

Some effects in older games were coded with dependencies upon certain shortcomings of CRT technology--specific transparency effects on the SNES will not render correctly without either being displayed on an SD CRT or using a shadow mask emulation shader with a compatible program, such as bsnes.

Other than that, simply rendering a low res image on a high resolution monitor will intensify the "pixellation" of the image. Scanlines are meant to reduce that effect. This can be thought of that the low-res pixel art was intended to be displayed on a standard definition television set, and that the artists would work with this "deficiency" in mind.
 
I'm assuming you're talking about the interlacing, which is different than scanlines. Not really. Every once and a while when I'm staring at the screen up close in a 2d game like Trails of the Sky I see them for a second and then stop seeing them. Doesn't bother me, especially coming from a PSP-1000 where the 3000 screen is like 3000x better.
 
Somewhat related: the new ugly and wi-fi free E-1000 seems to have a better screen than the 3000:
Screen quality is something of an issue for us, bearing in mind how badly the PSP-3000 performed in this regard. The use of a wider colour gamut to enhance some PSP titles was appealing, but we weren't particularly thrilled with what looks for all the world like an interlaced display. Noticeable scanlines are visible on the screen during fast motion content, making games like Ridge Racer and Gran Turismo less fun to play as the additional artifacts tend to intrude on the action.

The good news with the E-1000 is that the screen is progressive, so the scanline problem of the 3000 model is completely gone. The wider colour gamut also appears to have gone too, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing as this led to some games looking unnaturally oversaturated when viewed on the PSP-3000's screen. However, colours on the E-1000 do appear pleasingly more vibrant than on the original 1000 model, without making things look overblown. Rather than featuring a wider colour gamut, calibration differences along with a lower gamma setting are the most likely causes here.

So, what we have here looks like a 'best of' when it comes to PSP screens. However, things aren't perfect. A dithering effect is present and seems to manifest itself as a series of noisy vertical strips across the screen, which can mainly be seen on plain backgrounds or artwork made up of single colours. There's also a noticeable screen-door effect which emphasises pixel structure more than previous PSP screens. In all fairness though, we easily rate the E-1000's screen over that of the 3000, but the 2000 Slim & Lite model perhaps offers up the best display by presenting us with the cleanest image and no interlacing/scan-lines.

Source
 
Not really. Only time I ever notice them are on the main menu. The more vibrant colors on the 3000 screen make up for any scanline issues. Compared to the 1000 and 2000 the 3000 has my favorite screen.
 
Somewhat related: the new ugly and wi-fi free E-1000 seems to have a better screen than the 3000:

Source
Related, but I find it amusing when people think it's REALLY interlacing and not just an interlacing-like effect. It's an LCD, it's not possible for it to actually HAVE interlacing, but the pixel substructure apparently creates that look. I wonder if it's type of pixel that'd work better at a higher DPI so the effect becomes much harder to notice, but I guess they changed that again for the 1000.

As for the question: I notice them, but they don't bug me that much. Those dark dots that developed on my 2000 bugged me way, way more as it made it look like the screen had been stained.
 
I have a Go, but I don't use its unique features (which I bought it for) much, so I wish I had just gotten a 2000. Prefer that form factor and the bigger screen.
 
Related, but I find it amusing when people think it's REALLY interlacing and not just an interlacing-like effect. It's an LCD, it's not possible for it to actually HAVE interlacing

Interlacing means only odd lines are shown first and after that only the even lines (or vice-versa, depending on the used format). If you only show one field on a CRT, you will see black lines, it is perfectly possible for an LCD display to be used interlaced. Normally the goal for this is to save bandwidth, Nintendo's handhelds use interlaced displays to save performance (I don't think the 3DS does, probably because it would mess up 3D). I have had mobile phones with interlaced displays. With the 3000 I guess the aim of the interlacing effect is to somehow reduce smearing.
 
I see them occasionally but it doesn't bother me. What did bother me was the awful ghosting on the 2000, which nobody seems to want to acknowledge.
 
I see them occasionally and sometimes I do say to myself "fucking Sony" but the screen is oh so much better than my 1000.
 
See, for me, it's the exact opposite situation with the ghosting. I never once noticed it on my 2000. Not saying it's not there, I've seen screenshots that prove it is. But I just never saw it.

It's so weird. Some people notice the scanlines while others don't, and some people notice the ghosting while others don't.
 
Interlacing means only odd lines are shown first and after that only the even lines (or vice-versa, depending on the used format). If you only show one field on a CRT, you will see black lines, it is perfectly possible for an LCD display to be used interlaced. Normally the goal for this is to save bandwidth, Nintendo's handhelds use interlaced displays to save performance (I don't think the 3DS does, probably because it would mess up 3D). I have had mobile phones with interlaced displays. With the 3000 I guess the aim of the interlacing effect is to somehow reduce smearing.
I know that much, I was just under the impression interlacing was more inherent to what CRTs COULD do and not something LCDs really do, I'd need to see some videos highlighting this in action. It is possible ghosting masked it on the Nintendo handhelds though, and if it weren't disproven I'd wonder if the reduced ghosting on the PSP showed this whereas it wouldn't be seen on the 1000/2000 screens.

By the way, I messed up, apparently it's the sub-pixel structure rather than pixel substructure, and there's an image on Wikipedia comparing the 2000 and 3000 there.
 
Some effects in older games were coded with dependencies upon certain shortcomings of CRT technology--specific transparency effects on the SNES will not render correctly without either being displayed on an SD CRT or using a shadow mask emulation shader with a compatible program, such as bsnes.

Other than that, simply rendering a low res image on a high resolution monitor will intensify the "pixellation" of the image. Scanlines are meant to reduce that effect. This can be thought of that the low-res pixel art was intended to be displayed on a standard definition television set, and that the artists would work with this "deficiency" in mind.
I can understand and respect actions taken to fully replicate the function of old hardware via emulation. That is, after all, pretty much the entire point of emulation to begin with. Almost all of the scanline filters I've ever seen in console emulators are just jarring, though. I rarely, if ever, noticed scanlines when I was gaming on 16-bit consoles on CRT televisions, unless I put my face right up next to the screen and looked for them specifically. They stick out like a sore thumb in almost any emulator I've used though; it's distracting as hell. I will never understand the scanline fetishists that prefer these filters.
 
I only seem to notice them in certain games with 2D graphics, like Lunar and Star Ocean 2. I never notice it with 3D games.
 
I can understand and respect actions taken to fully replicate the function of old hardware via emulation. That is, after all, pretty much the entire point of emulation to begin with. Almost all of the scanline filters I've ever seen in console emulators are just jarring, though. I rarely, if ever, noticed scanlines when I was gaming on 16-bit consoles on CRT televisions, unless I put my face right up next to the screen and looked for them specifically. They stick out like a sore thumb in almost any emulator I've used though; it's distracting as hell. I will never understand the scanline fetishists that prefer these filters.

Yes, that's true. I actually don't prefer the standard way of implementing scanlines, because it's just so fake looking. It's distracting, as you said. But with the more recent developments in CRT shadow mask/electron beam emulation, you can have a much more realistic experience. Instead of being essentially just lines overlaid onto the window, CRT emulation will reproduce the line bleed and blooming that help to blur the rows of pixels together, as on a real CRT.

Example:

tYw4K.jpg


Taken from this page, where there's a comparison of a lot of different shaders:

http://filthypants.blogspot.com/2011/05/more-emulator-pixel-shaders-crt-updated.html
 
Yes i notice it too, but it didn't really bother me. The color difference is so much better than the 1000 and 2000 models anyway.
 
Every time I've used a 3000, I've seen them instantly. They're god-awful, and the reason I'm still stuck with my PSP-1000.
 
Top Bottom