4 ms·

Except in games, where it seems common to run games at resolutions other than native, which means that you have a choice between some pixels being different sha

Except in games, where it seems common to run games at resolutions other than native, which means that you have a choice between some pixels being different shape than others (nearest-neighbor) or even overlapping (interpolated). And when you dig in to LCD displays, you'll discover that treating pixels as uniform squares might get you in trouble still, because that blue vertical line turning into a red one is actually shifting horizontally. And if you look even deeper, you'll find specialized displays (like on cameras) which don't use a square grid at all. Oh, and that only covers the display side. Cameras also have pixels, but they are different from little uniform squares in new, exciting ways. Typically Bayer. To make matters worse, designers decided to hijack "pixel" to mean something else in the context of scaling, but don't be fooled. Those measures are not pixels.

desro 4y ago
I am keenly interested in everything you wrote here. Any links or even search terms for further reading?
- rhn_mk1 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering https://www.red.com/red-101/bayer-sensor-strategy https://www.red.com/red-101/bayer-sensor-strategy https://tech-algorithm.com/articles/nearest-neighbor-image-scaling/ https://tech-algorithm.com/articles/nearest-neighbor-image-s... Okay, I haven't found non-rectangular LCD displays. The ones I've seen were Bayr-like. Here's some other weird arragements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family
IIAOPSW 4y ago
And if you go all the way down the rabbit hole, oh shit the rods and cones in my eyes have different spacing!
- psychphysic 4y ago
  You can even take it further. Did my dad ever even love me?
- fsloth 4y ago
  Well, that's the part of the transform in the receiving end. Up to this point the discussion has been on the signal from the emission surface.
  - IIAOPSW 4y ago
    Yes but eventually you will run into weird artifacts or limitations which no matter how hard you debug you can never seem to resolve. It will take profound insight to notice the error is in the receiving end.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
coldtea 4y ago
>Except in games, where it seems common to run games at resolutions other than native Not just games. Same for desktops and apps, OS-wide with a compositor and whatever scaling factor ("Retina") etc.
- bzzzt 4y ago
  Is there a true 'native' resolution for 3D games? Seems the display resolution is arbitrary since the content is projected and filtered regardless. I'm surprised you consider retina 'non native' since it originally was intended to exactly double the resolution so old application could still render pixel-perfect without changes.
  - rhn_mk1 4y ago
    IIRC some Retina displays use fractional scaling like 2.1. I can't find any confirmation though.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    >since it originally was intended to exactly double the resolution so old application could still render pixel-perfect without changes Originally, because it just did pixel-doubling (or resolution-halving if you prefer). Later (since like 3-4 OS releases ago) macOS does rendering in higher resolutions and downscaling to non-pixel-double too. This non-pixel doubled, slightly higher than native/2 "Retina" is even the default since at least 2-3 years on Mac laptops.
account42 4y ago
Pixels always being perfect squares is of course not true but the square model is still a lot closer than the point samples on a grid model - that is, each pixel models the average color over an area. Cameras work that way because sampling light at a point would get you no signal (if you could sample a point, which you can't) and display's work that way because you can't physically emit light from a single point. In most cases that area is squarish or at least as much as the technology allows (e.g. subpixels and bayer pattern are used because you can't have the colors cover the same are, at least not without creating bigger issues). So yes, if you know the details of your display or sensor then you can use a better model to eek out more signal. But if you don't, the little squares model is close enough.

desro 4y ago

I am keenly interested in everything you wrote here. Any links or even search terms for further reading?

rhn_mk1 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering https://www.red.com/red-101/bayer-sensor-strategy https://www.red.com/red-101/bayer-sensor-strategy https://tech-algorithm.com/articles/nearest-neighbor-image-scaling/ https://tech-algorithm.com/articles/nearest-neighbor-image-s... Okay, I haven't found non-rectangular LCD displays. The ones I've seen were Bayr-like. Here's some other weird arragements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family

IIAOPSW 4y ago

And if you go all the way down the rabbit hole, oh shit the rods and cones in my eyes have different spacing!

psychphysic 4y ago
You can even take it further. Did my dad ever even love me?
fsloth 4y ago
Well, that's the part of the transform in the receiving end. Up to this point the discussion has been on the signal from the emission surface.
- IIAOPSW 4y ago
  Yes but eventually you will run into weird artifacts or limitations which no matter how hard you debug you can never seem to resolve. It will take profound insight to notice the error is in the receiving end.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

coldtea 4y ago

>Except in games, where it seems common to run games at resolutions other than native Not just games. Same for desktops and apps, OS-wide with a compositor and whatever scaling factor ("Retina") etc.

bzzzt 4y ago
Is there a true 'native' resolution for 3D games? Seems the display resolution is arbitrary since the content is projected and filtered regardless. I'm surprised you consider retina 'non native' since it originally was intended to exactly double the resolution so old application could still render pixel-perfect without changes.
- rhn_mk1 4y ago
  IIRC some Retina displays use fractional scaling like 2.1. I can't find any confirmation though.
- coldtea 4y ago
  >since it originally was intended to exactly double the resolution so old application could still render pixel-perfect without changes Originally, because it just did pixel-doubling (or resolution-halving if you prefer). Later (since like 3-4 OS releases ago) macOS does rendering in higher resolutions and downscaling to non-pixel-double too. This non-pixel doubled, slightly higher than native/2 "Retina" is even the default since at least 2-3 years on Mac laptops.

account42 4y ago

Pixels always being perfect squares is of course not true but the square model is still a lot closer than the point samples on a grid model - that is, each pixel models the average color over an area. Cameras work that way because sampling light at a point would get you no signal (if you could sample a point, which you can't) and display's work that way because you can't physically emit light from a single point. In most cases that area is squarish or at least as much as the technology allows (e.g. subpixels and bayer pattern are used because you can't have the colors cover the same are, at least not without creating bigger issues). So yes, if you know the details of your display or sensor then you can use a better model to eek out more signal. But if you don't, the little squares model is close enough.