gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) (09/11/90)
I read a posting a bit back concerning the Toaster. Apparently somebody was rendering at a resolution of 1500x900 on it. Is this true? Is there going to be a different toaster for higher resolutions? X would look great (even better than the Stellar I'm using right now 8-) if used on it. Speaking of X, has Commodore got plans of introducing an Intuition window manager for use with Dale Luck's implementation of X? iwm? This would allow us to use the beautiful new look and feel of 2.0 under X. Personally, I'm fond of Motif. Dale, have you got 11 R4 running yet? Thanks, Ralph gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu Ralph_Seguin@ub.cc.umich.edu gilgalad@sparky.eecs.umich.edu USER6TUN@UMICHUB.BITNET Ralph Seguin | In order to get infinitely many monkeys to type 565 South Zeeb Rd. | something that actually makes sense, you need to Ann Arbor, MI 48103 | have infinitely many monkey editors as well. (313) 662-1506
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) (09/11/90)
In article <1990Sep11.033542.1886@zip.eecs.umich.edu> gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: >I read a posting a bit back concerning the Toaster. Apparently >somebody was rendering at a resolution of 1500x900 on it. Is >this true? Is there going to be a different toaster for higher >resolutions? The current incarnation of LightWave 3D (the renderer for the Toaster) renders to three resolutions. The normal resolution is that of the Toaster which is 768x484. There is also a low-res output and what is termed an antialias-res output. In antialias mode, the images are rendered to roughly 1500x900 and then filtered down to Toaster resolution. There is no current capability to render to resolutions greater than the Toaster's 768x484. When I last spoke to Allen Hastings and asked him why no higher resolution output, he replied that it was strictly a video product therefore the higher resolutions are unecessary. I hope this changes. Given sufficient memory, I would like to take my video animations and output selected hi-res stills for use with an image recorder (say around 2K x 2K). Disclaimer: I ain't no NewTek employee! +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mark Thompson | | mark@westford.ccur.com | | ...!{decvax,uunet}!masscomp!mark Designing high performance graphics | | (508)392-2480 engines today for a better tomorrow. | +------------------------------------------------------------------------- +
donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) (09/12/90)
In article <54331@masscomp.ccur.com> mark@calvin.westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) writes: >In article <1990Sep11.033542.1886@zip.eecs.umich.edu> gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: >>I read a posting a bit back concerning the Toaster. Apparently >>somebody was rendering at a resolution of 1500x900 on it. Is >>this true? Is there going to be a different toaster for higher >>resolutions? > >The current incarnation of LightWave 3D (the renderer for the Toaster) >renders to three resolutions. The normal resolution is that of the Toaster >which is 768x484. There is also a low-res output and what is termed an >antialias-res output. In antialias mode, the images are rendered to >roughly 1500x900 and then filtered down to Toaster resolution. There >is no current capability to render to resolutions greater than the Toaster's >768x484. When I last spoke to Allen Hastings and asked him why no higher >resolution output, he replied that it was strictly a video product therefore >the higher resolutions are unecessary. I hope this changes. Given sufficient >memory, I would like to take my video animations and output selected >hi-res stills for use with an image recorder (say around 2K x 2K). > >Disclaimer: I ain't no NewTek employee! >+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >| Mark Thompson | >| mark@westford.ccur.com | >| ...!{decvax,uunet}!masscomp!mark Designing high performance graphics | >| (508)392-2480 engines today for a better tomorrow. | >+------------------------------------------------------------------------- + It was my understanding that the toaster actually didn't use PIXEL ratings for it's resolution. I thought it worked just with "scanlines", or at least that's what one of the newtek employees was saying at AmiExpo this summer. -- **************************************************************** ********* donb@bushido.uucp ****** ********* "My Opinions are my own, not anyone else's ****** ********* Organizational Affiliations ****** ********* CreativEdge Systems, the Multimedia Solution ****** ********* The Computer Shoppe, Ypsilanti-Ann Arbor, MI's ****** ********* Commodore-Amiga Education Dealer ******
mark@calvin..westford.ccur.com (Mark Thompson) (09/13/90)
In article <1990Sep11.205400.1680@bushido.uucp> donb@bushido.uucp (Donald Burnett) writes: >It was my understanding that the toaster actually didn't use PIXEL ratings >for it's resolution. I thought it worked just with "scanlines", or at least >that's what one of the newtek employees was saying at AmiExpo this summer. Not true. Although it is spec'd as: Lum. Resolution: >400 lines This is with regard to the output video and not the internal resolution of the digital data which does equate to pixels. Also, lines of video resolution does not equal the number of "scanlines" in the frame buffer though they are related. The Toaster's internal digital resolution in the two frame buffers is 768 x 484. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Mark Thompson | | mark@westford.ccur.com | | ...!{decvax,uunet}!masscomp!mark Designing high performance graphics | | (508)392-2480 engines today for a better tomorrow. | +------------------------------------------------------------------------- +