cmcmanis%pepper@Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (08/04/88)
In article <2191@ihlpm.ATT.COM> jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) writes: >Having priced flicker fixers at $550 I am wondering, "Isn't this >a bit silly?" No, it isn't. The FlickerFixer (TM) gives flicker free 640 X 400 displays without a loss of animation capability or color saturation. I have a long persistence monitor on my 1000 and the colors are a) less saturated, and b) easier to smear. Now for many things this is no problem at all, with starglider two I am starting to see some trails following various bits of debris. Graphics in general : When I was working on Intel's graphics chip the 82786 (and the 82716 to some extent) the marketing people divided graphics into essentiall 4 camps. o None - These are the people who can and do get by with little ascii characters or VT100 graphics characters. Really boring. o Scientific - Black and white graphics. The more points addressable the better. The minimum was 640 X 400, most preferred the 1024 X 768 of the Tek 4010, then the 4016 hit and that was all the rage. For these guys and gals resolution is everything. o Business - 8 color graphics. Why 8? Because thats how many pens there are on your basic HP plotter. The business people want _impact_ but don't care as much about rendering. They want to plot profits in black and losses in red and maybe draw a border in yellow. They use color to convey additional information. 640 X 350 is probably their minimum, but they really like the output of those plotters. o Professionals - 16,000,000 color graphics. These are the image processing and graphics arts types folks. They want to display color photographs. Generally 512 X 512 is a minimum for these folks, although the current state of the art is more like 1600 X 1200. Now this was how Intel saw it and I agree with their assesment to a large extent. Generally, they believed the 256 out of 16M colors was the best compromise for the business/professional crowds. Why ? Because while the systems were generally more expensive they weren't so much so that the business people wouldn't buy them, and while they weren't as capable as the pros wanted they were sufficient for the grunge work. Clearly there is a lot of middle ground here and most system designers know it. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
Chad_The-Walrus_Netzer@cup.portal.com (08/07/88)
In a previous article <Chuck 'The Man!' McManis) (Just kidding Chuck) writes:
)No, it isn't. The FlickerFixer (TM) gives flicker free 640 X 400 displays
)without a loss of animation capability or color saturation. I have a
)long persistence monitor on my 1000 and the colors are a) less saturated,
)and b) easier to smear. Now for many things this is no problem at all,
)with starglider two I am starting to see some trails following various bits
)of debris.
Well, FlickerFixer doesn't run animation too well either, since it
buffers the last frame (basically), you'll generally have 'left_overs' after
anything moves a significant amount between frames. These 'Left_overs' take
the form of little 'lines' that are still buffered. It can actually be worse
(at times) than the phospher decay of a long persistence monitor (an opinion,
of course). Next time you go down to HT Electronics, try moving the mouse
semi-rapidly on their FlixerFix'ed 2000, and you'll see what I mean.
Therefore, it is hard to say what is better... In non-interlace, the
flicker fixer may not buffer the display (I'm not sure), and thus the problem
will disappear. this, of course, is not the case on the long-persistence
monitor...
Hmmm. I had no idea you worked on the 82786... All in all, it was a
very nice little graphics processor, and probably would have done much better
had Texas Instruments not done something dynamite! (Being the 34720(?) or
whatever) BTW, is that where the 'pepper' comes from in your mailer (ie.
related to the 'Pepper' board?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chad 'The_Walrus' Netzer -> AmigaManiac++