Might want to dig for something like that, or mod games yourself.Īim is based on movement in degrees, not pixels. If they have not, you are out of luck.Įdit: I recall 4k mods for some games, which force a bigger resolution for UI elements, by upscaling them and putting the texture back into the game. Usually games started implementing UI scaling because of this. If the game fixes elements based on resolution (which is the easiest way), you will get smaller UI with bigger resolutions. You render at 4k, the game thinks you are at 4k. Having two Pixels (or any other INTEGER) to average in each direction makes rasterizing easy and artifact free, so this is the only real way to imporve image quality without messy interpolation. If you "Only" want to double the area, you would have to choose Sides* square root(2). The geforce performance reviews are especially misleading.ĭoubling the sides quadrouples the area. Yes you are wrong in how this works, to be fair, nvidia marketed it wrong, as in to expect a linear increase in quality with each step of resolution increase. If you want more, you can force better algorithms in Nvidia Inspector.Įdit: *edit technically you have to anyway, but a shared divisor solves most problems, If you cannot pull of 4k, (and dsr is even heavier, due to multiple framebuffers being worked with and the aforementioned interpolation) just stick to 1080 and increase MSAA. That will solve the bulriness and give you increased quality. So mulitply your resolution by at LEAST 2 or an integer after that in each direciton and use that. And a small step in resolution from native is a massive step backwards, since you cannot properly interpolate in time. But even this will always give you either a sharp image and unnaccaptable aliasing or the lesser of two evils. If it is not an even number though, you have to interpolate, which is horrible.* Nvidia solved this rather awesomely, by doing billinear filtering, but with a scalable kernel. If you are on 1080p your only clean option is to scale to 4k, since then every pixel will have been quartered and rasterizing an immage from that is easy as pie. You have to scale to a shared divisor of your current resolution, or your screen will be a mess. The geforce performance reviews are especially misleading. OBS (NVENC encoder, 1080p 60fps, 12k kbps CBR, 29.48 MB) - Īction (NVENC encoder, 1080p, 60fps, 12 kbps CBR, 31.Click to expand.Yes you are wrong in how this works, to be fair, nvidia marketed it wrong, as in to expect a linear increase in quality with each step of resolution increase. My words probably can't describe the quality that well, so take a look at my test recordings: I have always praised Action for its sharp video quality, but how can OBS achieve this? Action's setting is simpler than OBS because it doesn't have these confusing downscale filters. I kept settings as similar as possible on both recorders. I'm not sure if this is a downscale filter issue, but I've tried every scaling filter option (bilinear, bicubic, lanczos) and still can't get the quality sharp.īelow, I am comparing OBS' video quality to Mirillis Action's. I have tried many different settings, but I can never achieve crisp quality. My OBS recordings look a bit blurry in the sense that the video quality is too smoothed out that the details kind of blend in with the background. Before anyone tells me to increase my bitrate, I'm fairly certain that it's not my bitrate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |