Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:22001 comp.sys.amiga.tech:1570 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!mailrus!ames!elroy!gryphon!jdow From: jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM (J. Dow) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Message from designer of FlickerFixer Message-ID: <5750@gryphon.CTS.COM> Date: 20 Aug 88 22:31:36 GMT References: <3318@crash.cts.com> Reply-To: jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM (J. Dow) Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA Lines: 63 In article <3318@crash.cts.com> haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) writes: >My appologies to Peter Selverstone. > > > I did not intend to say that the flicker fixer itself is poorly >designed, and clearly miss-worded my sentance. What I meant to say was >that the way (I think) it works is a cludge. The cludge is needed to solve >a problem that is otherwise unreasonably expensive to correct. > > The flicker fixer clearly does what it was designed to do and in that >respect is a fine product. However I stand by the point that IDEALLY it >should not be mixing mis-matched fields (which I can definitly see it doing). >As stated before I think that given the cost of RAM the manner in which the >flicker fixer does function is reasonable. Who would buy it if it cost >a $1000 or more? > > Am I mistaken it beleiving that what you've done is to buffer each >video field (using video industry terminology) and then combine it with the >subsequent field to form a frame (de-interlaced display). Given this >methodology doesn't that mean that every other display update contains a >Frame composed of mis-matched feilds? If I am mistaken about this what is >the reason for the splitting up of images, most clearly seen by moveing the >mouse angularly across the screen at a rapid rate? > > Again, I am sorry for having implied that the design of the fF was >poor, which it is not. > Perhaps you would care to detail a correct design? With moving pictures you have two frames in succession - ANY two frames - that cannot possibly match perfectly unless the animation is done wrong. (Assuming you are talking about an interlaced animation. I have not noticed any particular problem with 200 line animations.) You get this effect on standard TV as well as the Amiga. Correcting it requires a great deal of video processing, I am afraid. For the price I do not think it is possible to do any significant bit better than the FlickerFixer. (I just wish it had three times the memory so that it could display a decently digitized TV picture overlayed genlock style on the Amiga graphics. (Then for REALLY nice TV I might just let screenblanker blank the Amiga screen and ..... Just think - Rambo with no flicker-make that Worf with no flicker.) > Sincerly, > > > Wade W. Bickel > > >UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex >ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil >INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM >Opionions expressed are mine, and not necessarily those of my employer. Equally sincerely, Joanne B. Dow -- Sometimes a bird in the hand leaves a sticky deposit. Perhaps it were best it remain there in the bush with the other one. {@_@} jdow@bix (where else?) Sometimes the dragon wins. Sometimes jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM the knight. Does the fair maiden ever {backbone}!gryphon!jdow win? Surely both the knight and dragon stink. Maybe the maiden should suicide? Better yet - she should get an Amiga and quit playing with dragons and knights.