robinson@renoir.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (04/07/87)
*<--[A line eater that doesn't start here is completely useless!]
Against my better judgement, I was thinking. I was thinking, it shouldn't
be to difficult to get a standard (say, the 1080) monitor to display a
progressively scanned "400 line" display. Instead of two interlaced
frames being sent out at 1/60th of a second per, which reduces the overall
flicker of the display while increasing the flicker of adjacent contrasting
scan lines (good for TV), there would be instead one frame being sent out
every 1/30th of a second, which increases the overall flicker, but reduces
line-by-line flicker (good for computer displays). Both have the same
bandwidth.
All that is needed to accomplish this is to remove the code that ups the
scan line modulo in interlace mode and (the biggie) somehow persuade the
monitor to halve the frequency of its vertical scan oscillator and sync on
every other sync pulse. Now the former is trivial (meaning even I could do
it if I tried). I don't have any idea how much work is required in the
latter. The hardware reference manual completely neglects all aspects of the
actual video signal it sends to a monitor, such as how it goes about telling
the monitor to sync or not to sync and to interlace or not to interlace.
So, could anyone who knows, has ideas, or just has opinions, please send me
comments by mail, and I will post a summary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you study the logistics and heuristics of the mystics,
You will find that their minds rarely move in a line"
Fifty percent of everything is below average.
Mike Robinson USENET: ucbvax!ernie!robinson
ARPA: robinson@ernie.berkeley.edu