Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpfcso!hpfcdj!jayavant From: jayavant@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Rajeev Jayavant) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Better Amiga Graphics and HDTV Message-ID: <17190007@hpfcdj.HP.COM> Date: 17 Jul 90 21:24:28 GMT References: <1990Jun25.232058.9752@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Organization: Hewlett Packard -- Fort Collins, CO Lines: 85 >>/ hpfcdj:comp.sys.amiga / andrey@coil.caltech.edu (Andre T. Yew) / 12:30 pm Jul 15, 1990 / >>In article <3525@crash.cts.com> seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) writes: >>>In-Reply-To: message from seh@pmafire.UUCP >>> >>> >>>To me, a 32bit graphics board over a 24bit graphics board, or graphics >>>standard for that matter, isn't too important...the final image from either >>>would look the same, and would be made up of only 24bits. What WOULD be more >>>practical, would be a 32bit, or 48bit standard which used the uper 8bit/24bits >>>as a Z buffer for hidden surface removal when working with 3D. >>> >>>There are systems from Appolo and other workstation manufacturers with some 64 >>>and 96 bits of information PER PIXEL...but all are only 24bits for color >>>information. >>> >>>Sean I think we're really starting to get off track here. The original point being made was that the graphics library should not limit its support to 24 bit boards but rather consider a superset, e.g. 32 bit graphics. This is definitely the right way to go in the long run. Just because the library supports 32 (or 256 or whatever) number of bits does not mean that my graphics board should have to do the same. The library should either emulate missing functionality or provide some reasonable mapping for graphics devices with less features. A couple of examples from HP's Starbase library are emulation of 3D transformation functions when using 2D graphics devices and using dithering when running with a limited number of image planes. In some cases, emulation is not possible and the function must return an error status for the program to handle however it sees fit. >> Has anyone seen the Silicon Graphics Powervision series? I've heard >> that some machines have up to 268 (268 -- not a typo) bits per pixel. Now, >> what would one want to use 268 bits per pixel for? Well, I assume some of >> it goes to Z-buffering, but the more interesting uses I've heard for it are >> hardware texture mapping, hardware fog, and hardware motion-blur. All of these >> probably become real-time effects, too. I think the overriding thing here is >> real-time, and hence interactive. A board with such a big memory for its >> screen can probably have a real effect on Amiga programs. There's a lot more than memory out there (i.e. a lot more compute power than quite a few A3000's, though they are very specialized engines). For some really intense applications, I bet you could keep the 68030 pretty busy just feeding data to one of these Powervision engines. >> For example, >> instead of passively watching the next BADGE Killer Demo contest winner, >> we can also adjust the camera position and lighting real-time, or grab a corner >> of a room in the demo, and spin the whole scene around while the demo is still >> playing. IMHO, Amiga demos are neat right now, but they seem to be mostly >> the same -- passive -- and those demos I've seen that are interactive aren't >> really very interesting (press this button to make your figure jump), so >> if you want some neat ideas, find somebody with a SGI, and go bother them to >> let you play with it for a while. You might want to try the Jello demo first; >> it's sort of like Boing! except you have an icosohedron made out of Jello in >> a transparent cube that you spin around, and watch the Jello fall, jiggle, >> bounce, and roll around. There is no reason why the Amiga demos couldn't be made more interactive in the sense of allowing the user to move the camera around, etc. Just don't expect the kind of response you'd get from an SGI or HP box with a dedicated 3D geometry engine (or engines as the case may be). >> I know, I know, this is pretty unrealistic, expecting an Amiga to >> compete, on the very least, with a $32.5K machine, but I feel that current >> Amiga applications could go so much farther if programmers had more to look >> at for inspiration. I remember seeing a posting in comp.sys.amiga about a little company in Mass. that was building a 3D geometry engine for the Amiga based on the i-860. Expected price was somewhere around $10K with some very impressive specs. It'll be interesting to see if they actually have it at Siggraph as announced... >> - Andre >> andrey@tybalt.caltech.edu Rajeev ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rajeev Jayavant (rajeev@hpfcla.hp.com) Hewlett Packard - Graphics Technology Division