Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site uicsl Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!hr From: hr@uicsl.UUCP Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga Subject: Re: Interlaced monitor Message-ID: <151400002@uicsl> Date: Wed, 18-Sep-85 17:35:00 EDT Article-I.D.: uicsl.151400002 Posted: Wed Sep 18 17:35:00 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 06:24:47 EDT References: <6789@ucla-cs.ARPA> Lines: 24 Nf-ID: #R:ucla-cs.ARPA:-678900:uicsl:151400002:000:961 Nf-From: uicsl.UUCP!hr Sep 18 16:35:00 1985 <> "Is interlace *that* different in a video monitor than it is in a TV? ..What is different in the case of a video display monitor?" In a TV image, there are few horizontal lines that are 1 scan line high. Actually, many sets don't do interlace well, so this might help keep down flicker. On computer generated displays, single height lines occur more frequently. We used to use a 30HZ color system that had 480 lines displayable. When a horizontal line was at least 2 scan lines high, flicker wasn't too bad. When it was only 1, flicker got worse. About the worst viewing came from alternate black and white lines. My eyes would start watering after a minute or two. (These 'lines' may be only 1 dot wide.) I was once doing some work with dithered images. The dithering algorithm maximizes the difference between adjacent pixels. With 30HZ refresh, dithered images were pretty painful to watch. harold ravlin {ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!uicsl!hr