Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!elroy!cit-vax!ucla-cs!zen!cory.Berkeley.EDU!waterman
From: waterman@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Bitplanes from Hell
Message-ID: <5005@zen.berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 20-Nov-87 02:38:10 EST
Article-I.D.: zen.5005
Posted: Fri Nov 20 02:38:10 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Nov-87 03:17:42 EST
References: <74@mothra> <33314@sunnny.side.up> <2213@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Sender: news@zen.berkeley.edu
Reply-To: waterman@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (T.S. Alan Waterman)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 35

In article  klm@atkins.UUCP (Kevin [Being Weird Isn't Enough] McBride) writes:
>[Kent, you totally weird man from xanth, this Bud's for you too!]

>Make the display wider and taller, not deeper.  Use a better monitor.
>
>Like I said, if you have a clue about the human eye's psychometric color
>response, you can do a lot of interesting things without having to go to
>a brute force solution.

>  At 640 x 400 it's still gonna 
>have aliasing problems.  I'll take 1280x1024x12 over 640x400x24 any day.

  I would too, but with at least an order of magnitude cost difference, I'll
be very happy with that 640x400xWhatever.

  If you figure out what you're doing as far as spacial frequency and sampling
theory go, you can get just as good as display out of the 640x400, and save
yourself quite a lot of computing along the way. The anti-aliasing is cheaper
than the 6 times more display points.  Like you say, brute force isn't always
the way to go (but it's a lot more fun, if you've got the bucks :-)



>the display on the Eikonix Designmaster 8000.  12 bits and very impressive.
>
>YOW!  I'm having visions of HIGHER SPATIAL RESOLUTION!!
	Is that anything like the "non-fractal resolution" pass
    in Joel Hagen's  "Focus" ??

	(for those of you who weren't there, or haven't gotten your disks
	from Tom yet, Joel Hagen entered some wild film loops in the
	BADGE Killer Demo contest.)


---TS