Raphael Jacquot wrote:
Dieter wrote:
Yes, I believe in TV style video, "lines" really means "line pairs"
(e.g. a black line plus a white line) if you are talking about horizontal
resolution, but the same as pixels if you are talking about vertical
resolution. Nice and confusing.
not exactly.
tv is interlaced 50 (or 60) fields per second.
for instance scrolling text usually ends up looking like
EEEEEEE
E
EEEE
E
EEEEEEE
instead of
EEEEEEE
E
EEEE
E
EEEEEEE
because the lines where the vertical bars are actually occur later, and
the lines where the horizontal lines are are not visible anymore.
This occurs only when you do progressive-scan rendering and try to show
it 1:1 on interlaced device. You can't do that.
For OGP: I hope we can do proper (native) interlaced 3D rendering -
render at 50/60 fps, where each frame will have the original resolution,
but only each other scanline will be rendered by the card (once even,
once odd lines).
For 2D: any moving thing has to move at 50/60 fps so that the image can
be properly outputted to the interlaced device. Question: does X
architecture support some synchronization with the output's Vsync (e.g.
when you move a window) ?
This will get better picture on the television comparing to current
graphic cards, which do not care about the "nativeness" of interlaced
output, just scale down the progressive framebuffer from 2D/3D output.
Daniel
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
