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.