Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!crash!pnet01!haitex
From: haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Fixing flicker, & future frame rate issues
Message-ID: <2870@crash.cts.com>
Date: 24 Apr 88 07:16:21 GMT
Sender: news@crash.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA
Lines: 35

harald@leo.UUCP ( Harald Milne) writes:
>In article <869@gethen.UUCP>, farren@gethen.UUCP (Michael J. Farren) writes:
>> Thus, you get a total of only
>> 30 screens per second, each 400 lines tall.  There are no "lines without
>> information" in either mode.
>
>	To put it in better terminology, you get 30 video frames a second.
>In Non-Interlace mode, you get 60 duplicate "even" fields. In Interlaced mode,
>you get "odd and even" fields.
>
>	The bottom line is you get more information in Interlaced mode.
>
>	Did anything I said make sense? If it didn't, let me know. I'll try

        Uggg... My video Prof. would have failed you both :^).


        In general I'd say Harald is correct, execpt that it is totally false
      to imply that there is more information in iterlaced mode.  In
      interlaced mode the video beam is staggered 1/2 the line spacing on
      each successive video field and different information is displayed
      on each pass of the beam.  Thus in interlaced mode you can sort of show
      30 x 400 line displays per second as opposed to 60 x 200 lines, but
      the information transmition rate is still 12,000 lines per second in
      either case (no overscan considered).

                                                        Thanks,


                                                               Wade.


UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex
ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil
INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM