Question / Help Resolution issue

[dace]

Hello there!

So my problem is my base resolution is 1600x900, and i couldnt find to set the stream resolution of 1280x720. I want to stream in 720p, but when i want to downscale the resolution the first option is 1.50 (1066x600). Any idea how to get 720p with my 1600x900 base resolution?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Krazy]

you could set a custom resolution of 1920x1080 and then downscale to 720p

 

[dodgepong]

I think in this case, if your monitor is 1600x900, you should just change your base resolution to 1280x720. Your base resolution doesn't have to match your monitor resolution, but oftentimes that's what you want. In this case, though, you want to stream at 720p and the automatic downscale option isn't available for you, so just stream directly at 720p and resize the sources in your frame to fit inside 1280x720.

 

[Muf]

Note that dodgepong's solution will look slightly worse visually than Krazy's solution, so if your system can handle it that would probably be preferential.

 

[Xaraa]

So Muf, howcome when people have 1080p screens and want to stream 720p, they set 1280x720 as the base res ? they say it looks sharper than the downscale is this true ?

btw, i love that name "Muf" such a cool name :)

 

[XeiZ]

We just had the same discussion in IRC hehe...
Setting your base resolution instead of using downsample will look slightly worse.

 

[Muf]

So Muf, howcome when people have 1080p screens and want to stream 720p, they set 1280x720 as the base res ? they say it looks sharper than the downscale is this true ?

It does look sharper, but at the expense of scaling accuracy. For instance if you have small round text like the number 8 it will look softer with the downscale option, but stay round. When fitting 1080p to a base resolution of 720p, the roundness in the number 8 might get squared off or parts of the text may seem to disappear.

 

[Xaraa]

Okay, thanks Muf for sorting this out for me :)

 

[dodgepong]

Note that dodgepong's solution will look slightly worse visually than Krazy's solution, so if your system can handle it that would probably be preferential.

By how much? Because first he has to scale it up from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 before downscaling to 1280x720...

 

[Muf]

Note that dodgepong's solution will look slightly worse visually than Krazy's solution, so if your system can handle it that would probably be preferential.

By how much? Because first he has to scale it up from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 before downscaling to 1280x720...

By very little. As I said earlier, using a smaller base resolution will always result in a sharper picture, at the expense of jagged edges. Which one looks "better" is a subjective call (the downscale is mathematically superior).

Here's a comparison:

1600x900 "fit to screen" in 1280x720 base resolution

1600x900 "fit to screen" in 1920x1080 base resolution, downscaled to 1280x720

You can notice the standard Direct3D (bilinear) texture filtering failing on the minimap, the trapezoid becomes wobbly:

With the downscale pixel shader, the line stays straight:

 

[dodgepong]

Note that dodgepong's solution will look slightly worse visually than Krazy's solution, so if your system can handle it that would probably be preferential.

By how much? Because first he has to scale it up from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 before downscaling to 1280x720...

By very little. As I said earlier, using a smaller base resolution will always result in a sharper picture, at the expense of jagged edges. Which one looks "better" is a subjective call (the downscale is mathematically superior).

Here's a comparison:

1600x900 "fit to screen" in 1280x720 base resolution

1600x900 "fit to screen" in 1920x1080 base resolution, downscaled to 1280x720

The first one looks better to me :/

You can notice the standard Direct3D (bilinear) texture filtering failing on the minimap, the trapezoid becomes wobbly:

With the downscale pixel shader, the line stays straight:

I totally see what you mean, but on the whole, there's something about the jaggies that makes it look better to me, like it's "sharper" or more "in-focus" somehow. The downscaler pixel shader does make things more accurately downscaled, but it also means things are a bit fuzzy, like faux-antialiasing or something. Something about the jaggies on the models tells my brain that I am looking at the actual computer screen, rather than a compressed screenshot. I'm not sure how to explain it.

Like you said, it's subjective...and subjectively, I like the first one, jaggies and all.

 

[Muf]

I totally see what you mean, but on the whole, there's something about the jaggies that makes it look better to me, like it's "sharper" or more "in-focus" somehow. The downscaler pixel shader does make things more accurately downscaled, but it also means things are a bit fuzzy, like faux-antialiasing or something. Something about the jaggies on the models tells my brain that I am looking at the actual computer screen, rather than a compressed screenshot. I'm not sure how to explain it.

Like you said, it's subjective...and subjectively, I like the first one, jaggies and all.

This is a worst-case scenario though, as we're upscaling and then downscaling. It's blurrier than it should be.

Also, resize algorithms don't have to be this trade-off between fuzziness and wobbly lines. Here's a comparison between bilinear and something I invented:

As you can see, the image stays sharp AND the line is straight. I don't know how to write pixel shaders though, otherwise I'd take a crack at putting it in an OBS test build.

 

[austinmrs]

so, my monitor resolution is 1360 x 768.

im currently streaming with base resolution of 1280x720.

should i use base resolution at 1360x768? and downscale to 960x520? or should i set the base resolution to 1360 x 768 and stream like that?