Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!unmvax!uokmax!drtiller
From: drtiller@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Donald Richard Tillery Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: WB 2.0 and Flicker Fixer
Message-ID: <1991Mar28.152356.25504@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu>
Date: 28 Mar 91 15:23:56 GMT
References: <100482@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <1991Mar25.162342.26717@galois.mit.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Lines: 28

I don't know where the numbers you are using for overscan pixels is coming from,
but I get more than the number you site on my system.  With or without the
A2320 installed I get roughly 738 pixels.  With the Flicker-Fixer (which I
exchanged for the A2320) I got about 719 pixels.  All this was discovered while
I was checking to see if the 768 pixel mode used by Digi-View and the lo-res
equivalent (384) used by those overscan automobile images was necessary.  I
noted that the Firecracker uses a 768 mode while the Toaster uses 736 (both
multiples of 8).  The new Deluxe Paint III (upgrade for WB 2.0) has a 704
and a 736 mode.  On my monitor (a 1950) the 704 doesn't quite cover the screen.
768 extends beyond the edges of the actual video signal while 736 is just about
perfect (no extra bandwidth, but none of those nasty borders). 

Anyway, I don't know what WB (1.3 or 2.0) allows, but basing the hardware on
that is kind of short-sighted.  Microway based their hardware on morerows but
this screwed things up terribly.  The Flicker-Fixer displayed only the first
719 pixels in a row.  This meant that the non-overscanned image when centered
for a normal machine, was shifted to the far right of the video signal.
Overscan extended the image out of the visible video on the right.  If the
image was centered, HAM fringing was a problem in any but the 352 (704) mode
because the leftmost column was out of the video and couldn't be "held" for
Hold-And-Modify.  The A2320 has none of these problems because it covers as
much video as the standard video does and original centering works fine, even
in overscan.

These are just my own observations, but I just noticed that they didn't jive
with your own number.

Rick Tillery (drtiller@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu)