Search options (Page 12 of 137)

When you rotate the polarizing film 90 degrees you get increased contrast on a backlit screen. Nobody says this aint so, just that it's already a known fact. I will also admit that your tutorial was nicely done. But, I take a scientific approach to things and I'm not, to put it frankly, in the business of stroking people's egos one way or the other. So when you're claiming that you have seen a biverted backlight and yours was better, you may actually be right! Maybe you're using a better LED panel or a better polarizing film material than what you have seen before. But if it's true, it's true for physical reasons and not because you said so. My advice is to try to approach the issue rationally instead of emotionally. You don't need your account deleted because someone disagrees with you on the internet.

When you invert the screen by rotating the polarizing film, you don't just invert the black and white image, but also the spectrum of the light admittance. In the normal position, the screen has a green tint, and in the inverted position, the screen has a blue tint, or more toward pink as the case is on a DMG. This affects the way it looks using different light sources or lighting methods. This is especially true for a green backlight, as the contrast between the brightest and the darkest shade increases with the inverted polarization.

This isn't really anything new or unexpected per se. LCDs in the early days typically used the green position because it works better in ambient light. I have seen one or two monochrome LCDs in the wild (ie, not on Gameboys) using the inverted position and a white backlight.

Really though, I think what Apeshit was reacting to, and now me, is giving it a fancy name. You could give it a name that is simply descriptive, for example "Backlit screen with inverted polarization".

That's a Fortune/Bitman clone with a different labeling. Interesting however how they also tried to make a variant which tried to look genuine.

I could do it for you.

This is still true. What's referred to is that the phase isn't reset to 0. What is reset when restarting the channel is the phase accumulator, so the phase is only reset back to the previous (iirc) 1/16 of a complete cycle.

Yeah, sorry I did mean FF25.

The real problem here actually isn't as much GB emulation accuracy, as audio oversampling.

Posted on March 32nd. Definitely real.

How do you suppose that would work on 32k?