oh thank goodness, you figured it out. when I was watching yesterday I thought to myself "its because its set to mirror and not extend." happy to hear you got it sorted. Other then Chromecast, that I have no idea about. IF you want to try out a good scaler, you could always try an Extron DSC 301 HD. That gives you the scaling setting on the box itself.
When I saw the video yesterday, I was going to say the $15 ONN HDMI to Composite AV adapter from Wally World let me run 4:3 out over composite. I did the same thing you did in this video -- set Windows to extend & manually set the 4:3 resolution. The only difference is I set mine to 1280x960, so when I drag windows from the 1080p screen, it was less disorienting. For the Chromecast, it might be worth buying one of those HDMI splitters that do HDCP stripping on the second output and plug a cheap monitor, TV, or even a dummy plug on port 1.
I had a Samsung TV that would display that type of static on HDMI if you touched the Roku stick on the HDMI port. I still bought one of those converters and on modern Blue ray players like my grandma's Panasonic from last year that only has HDMI output dose have settings to change the aspect ratio to 4:3 and my Sony smart blue ray player which is still a current model can have aspect ratio changed too.
i had no clue about that! i always just stretched the 4:3 signal into 16:9 to make it look good on my crt i guess i've been doing it wrong this whole time p.s., remember me? i'm not dead! hooray
For pixel-to-pixel conversion (provided the RF modulator made of chinesium does what it should) you should select 720x480 resolution for NTSC and 720x576 for PAL.
720x480 is the DV format resolution, yes, but it's only 4:3 if you use non-square pixels. For square pixels, it would need to be 640x480. I just used 1024x768 just for convenience because it's 4:3 and still big enough to use in Windows.
@@probnotstech both PAL and NTSC have non-square (and different) pixel aspect ratios. Display aspect ratio is another thing - you can have 720x480 in 16:9 and 4:3 :) Using 720x480 and disabling overacan ensures you use all the available bandwidth without introducing aliasing. Everything above 480/576 is downscaled to fit the native analogue TV "resolutions".
Technically PAL and NTSC don't have *any* pixels. They have 625 and 525 lines of continues video signal (of with ~576/480 are typically visible with content). 720x480 was chosen as a digital storage standard since 720 pixels roughly equated to the horizontal bandwidth you saw in high end analog video. And yes, I love the idea of anamorphic widescreen - very clever trick to maximize detail in both aspect ratios. For this computer though, if I use a resolution of 720x480 then every 4:3 video will be slightly squished with pillarbars. Even videos that are stored in 720x480 will play back at 640x480 (or whatever 4:3 resolution) assuming they were encoded properly. At any rate, I'm not planning on using a computer for this anyway, which is why I bumbled so horribly with the resolution lol
@@probnotstech agreed - the player needs to know the display, pixel and sample aspect ratios to be able to reasonably fill the screen contents. I've been into streaming business since the analogue days and I still remember the pain we needed to go through to build a playout system that would take anything other than a native resolution&AR DV / MPEG-2 files...
@@probnotstech If the director of the FBI is a paranoid person with something to hide, we hardly need to blindly follow him. I think I'm not that important to be watched and if someone is, I'll show them my bare bottom 😂😂😂 But yeah, good video content 👍
If you remember on earlier cheap flat screens the HDMI inputs were picky about the device you plugged into them. Like my grandma had a Vizio TV that would not play sound on my Xbox 360 via HDMI but it would on a Roku. Also my JVC TV would not work with my Samsung blue ray player it would just go to black screen when the player went to play a blue ray but my Sony blue ray worked fine. The list goes on but I think mad my point so I will stop here.
Much respect for someone willing to correct previous mistakes in public.
oh thank goodness, you figured it out. when I was watching yesterday I thought to myself "its because its set to mirror and not extend." happy to hear you got it sorted. Other then Chromecast, that I have no idea about. IF you want to try out a good scaler, you could always try an Extron DSC 301 HD. That gives you the scaling setting on the box itself.
4:40 dude! You really meant it when you said on your previous video that you always pause on the worst frame every time!
When I saw the video yesterday, I was going to say the $15 ONN HDMI to Composite AV adapter from Wally World let me run 4:3 out over composite. I did the same thing you did in this video -- set Windows to extend & manually set the 4:3 resolution. The only difference is I set mine to 1280x960, so when I drag windows from the 1080p screen, it was less disorienting. For the Chromecast, it might be worth buying one of those HDMI splitters that do HDCP stripping on the second output and plug a cheap monitor, TV, or even a dummy plug on port 1.
You need an hdcp stripper. The audio extractor I use does it, but a lot of HDMI splitters will also do it.
I had a Samsung TV that would display that type of static on HDMI if you touched the Roku stick on the HDMI port. I still bought one of those converters and on modern Blue ray players like my grandma's Panasonic from last year that only has HDMI output dose have settings to change the aspect ratio to 4:3 and my Sony smart blue ray player which is still a current model can have aspect ratio changed too.
i had no clue about that! i always just stretched the 4:3 signal into 16:9 to make it look good on my crt
i guess i've been doing it wrong this whole time
p.s., remember me? i'm not dead! hooray
For pixel-to-pixel conversion (provided the RF modulator made of chinesium does what it should) you should select 720x480 resolution for NTSC and 720x576 for PAL.
720x480 is the DV format resolution, yes, but it's only 4:3 if you use non-square pixels. For square pixels, it would need to be 640x480.
I just used 1024x768 just for convenience because it's 4:3 and still big enough to use in Windows.
@@probnotstech both PAL and NTSC have non-square (and different) pixel aspect ratios. Display aspect ratio is another thing - you can have 720x480 in 16:9 and 4:3 :)
Using 720x480 and disabling overacan ensures you use all the available bandwidth without introducing aliasing. Everything above 480/576 is downscaled to fit the native analogue TV "resolutions".
Technically PAL and NTSC don't have *any* pixels. They have 625 and 525 lines of continues video signal (of with ~576/480 are typically visible with content). 720x480 was chosen as a digital storage standard since 720 pixels roughly equated to the horizontal bandwidth you saw in high end analog video. And yes, I love the idea of anamorphic widescreen - very clever trick to maximize detail in both aspect ratios.
For this computer though, if I use a resolution of 720x480 then every 4:3 video will be slightly squished with pillarbars. Even videos that are stored in 720x480 will play back at 640x480 (or whatever 4:3 resolution) assuming they were encoded properly. At any rate, I'm not planning on using a computer for this anyway, which is why I bumbled so horribly with the resolution lol
@@probnotstech agreed - the player needs to know the display, pixel and sample aspect ratios to be able to reasonably fill the screen contents. I've been into streaming business since the analogue days and I still remember the pain we needed to go through to build a playout system that would take anything other than a native resolution&AR DV / MPEG-2 files...
What's up with that webcam covering up situation!? 😉
If it's good enough for the director of the FBI, it's good enough for me.
@@probnotstech If the director of the FBI is a paranoid person with something to hide, we hardly need to blindly follow him. I think I'm not that important to be watched and if someone is, I'll show them my bare bottom 😂😂😂 But yeah, good video content 👍
If you remember on earlier cheap flat screens the HDMI inputs were picky about the device you plugged into them. Like my grandma had a Vizio TV that would not play sound on my Xbox 360 via HDMI but it would on a Roku. Also my JVC TV would not work with my Samsung blue ray player it would just go to black screen when the player went to play a blue ray but my Sony blue ray worked fine. The list goes on but I think mad my point so I will stop here.
Eh close enough 😜