Strange question about screens...
ZXNet echo conference «hardware.zx»
Hello, All
Tell me, dear sympathizers, the screen is 512x384 in size, but built in the same way,
like the original screen - is it good, is it necessary? Those. we have a screen of 64x48 acquaintances
with an attribute on a familiar place.
Hello icebear
ice> Tell me, dear sympathizers, the screen size is 512x384, but
ice> built the same as the original screen - is it good, is it necessary? Ie
ice> we have a screen of 64x48 familiarities with an attribute per familiarity.
Everything that is supported by the software is good. At least one (but useful) program.
Otherwise it's bad :-)
Hello Ronin
Ron> What's wrong with that :) It's good, for example, because it can
Ron> (circuitry, software) based on the original screen. and
Ron> will fit into 640*480 vga with a border.
This is closer to the body. Software support and standard screen support
- this is all self-evident. Another strange question: which is better to have -
320x200, 320x240, 400x300 or 512x384? And it is precisely in the context of the conclusion of this
economy within the standard 640x480 at 60Hz (with border, obviously). Request
For now, the most respectable public should just answer this question and not fan the flames.
It's too early ;)
Hello Alex Crush
What's wrong with that :) It's good, for example, because it can (circuitry,
programmatically) based on the original screen. and in 640*480 vga with border
will fit in.
Hello jdigreze
jdi> With 384 lines, you will have to interlace the output on TV, which with dynamics
jdi> images will look "glitchy"...
I apologize, I thought the indication “640x480 at 60Hz” already means that we are talking
about VGA. Thanks for your opinion.
Hello Ronin
With 384 lines, you will have to interlace the output on TV, which with dynamics
the image will look “glitchy”... But on progressive 640x480 it will be fine
looks beautiful. Those. you need to build on the current monitor settings:
if you plan to use VGA, then the mode is quite good, but if for
TV, it is better to limit yourself to a resolution of 512x192.
I remember I had an interlaced monitor on the PC, on it any horizontal
the movement of the image was “blurred” so that modern TFTs with their “delays”
seem like paintings from the Hermitage.
Hello icebear
I'm sorry... While I was writing my post, I missed the previous one ;)
Well, if VGA, then, IMHO, let it be 512x384...
Hello, acidrain
aci> Hmmm, how then does the Amiga display 240 lines of it without interlacing
aci> monitor (TV)?
What is important here is not the number of lines, but the shape and size of the pixel for given W and H
screen.
Hello jdigreze
jdi> for a TV, it is better to limit yourself to a resolution of 512x192.
Hmmm, how then does the Amiga display its 240 lines without interlace on the monitor?
(TV)?
Hello jdigreze
jdi> TV (PAL/SECAM) 240 lines Amigas fit very well into one
jdi> half-frame
Why 240? 256 :)
Hello, acidrain
aci> Hmmm, how then does the Amiga display 240 lines of it without interlacing
aci> monitor (TV)?
TV (PAL/SECAM) outputs/receives 625 lines in two half-frames, i.e. per frame
312.5 lines are allocated.
240 lines of the Amiga fit very well into one half-frame, even with quite
a large margin for the border, but one line of the computer is scanned twice, in
each of the half-frames. With this approach, there is interlace, but it is not visible...
But 384 lines clearly “do not fit”, and if you cram them in, then only in different
half frames 192 pieces each... ;)
Hello jdigreze
jdi> That is. you need to build on the current monitor settings: if
jdi> it is planned to use VGA, then the mode is quite good, and if for
jdi> TV, it is better to limit the resolution to 512x192.
but in the context of television modes, it just looks good in the lineup
256*192, 512*192, 256*384, 512*384.
Hello Ronin
From my own experience, I can say that 256 lines “fit” into a regular 50 Hz TV screen.
This is progressive scan at 50Hz frame rate. (60 Hz is even less)
20ms/64μs=312.5 lines
256lines*64μs=16384μs
20ms-16384μs=3616μs (56.5 lines for all sorts of CI+KGI)
To “fit in” more, you need to either do interlacing, or
reduce the line duration from 64 µs -> (for example) 32 µs - equivalent to doubling
number of progressive lines, and doubling the horizontal scanning frequency = full
monitor modification. :-(, or reduce the frame rate to 25 Hz :biggrin: