You too can do KILLER vectors at 15khz!!

[Hoopz]

Why the ---fudgesicle--- are you cross-posting this?

Cross posting or cross dressing?   

Seriously, it'd be fun to watch Genesim and Maximrecoil get into it.  Or Howard and Genesim.  It's like two great, ah interesting, sports teams that never play each other.  You're always wondering how things would go.....

[Hoopz]

Then you got jackasssses lik Cheffo and Hoopz who straight up lie saying I talked about the handicaps of kids???  LOW LIFE SCUM BUCKETS.   

You probably need to pay attention to the rules too.  You're not supposed to try and avoid the auto-censor as this is supposed to be a family friendly sight.  I realize your spelling skills are poor, but surely you realize that there aren't that many S's in jackass?  Notice how the auto-censor handles jackass?  Have you had a chance to read the rules?  I can post them if you like or show you how to find them.   

And yes I do realize that I don't need the apostrophe in "S's".  It's just something I did to show plural not possessive.  Don't try and grammar me to death, old buddy. 

 

[Hoopz]

And how come you posted it twice?  I realize you totally fubar'd the quote, but why not just go back in and edit the code?  It's not rocket (or dna) science!

 

[saint]

Per Gene's request his account will be deleted (actually in these cases I just institute a complete ban. If people really want to delete their account there is a delete button). I don't normally do this (think this is a first?) but since he posted my PM to him and subsequently has posted something along the lines of believing he'll be banned, I thought it prudent to do so:

Delete my account now.  Forget you and this board.

I held my tongue on the reply you made to me, but you have no concept of fair.   I will not have people lying on me and starting trouble with no policing from a worthless moderator.   

I have been totally treated unfair and you sit back on your butt and do nothing.

You say you are giving back to the community..take a good look.  You obviously pander to the majority and have no idea how detrimental that can be.   Enjoy your screwed up board, and I demand all accounts be wiped.

You say that this is not your first interest..obviously..not your second not your 3rd..not your tenth.   I suggest you retire and get someone real that knows how to moderate.   

You had trouble in the past with others....gee why?  Ever ask yourself that??   This has probably been said to you before.

So goodbye and I mean it, take out my account.  genesim does not want to exist anymore..you got your wish.

I regret it did not work out for Gene here.

--- saint

[CheffoJeffo]

 

[Malenko]

whats so unfair about the PM you sent him? sounds like the rules that I abide by everyday. 

[Ginsu Victim]

whats so unfair about the PM you sent him? sounds like the rules that I abide by everyday. 

Aside from the poll from the other day....   

[ChadTower]

He got way more chances here than he would have at most other forums, that's for sure.

[Ginsu Victim]

Wow, his number of ignores went up by two since the ban!

[DJ_Izumi]

All right!  We can talk about monitors with some sense of objectiveness and practical considderations agian!

[SirPeale]

For the record, I agree with Saint; if many people have a problem with one person, guess what?  It's that one that's the problem.  Take a look in the mirror.  You may not like what you see.

[HaRuMaN]

whats so unfair about the PM you sent him? sounds like the rules that I abide by everyday. 

Aside from the poll from the other day....   

Hey, I voted for Tommy / Hemi in that poll... 

[Ginsu Victim]

Then you voted OTHER, since they weren't listed. There was a time when Hemi would've got my vote, that's for sure, but we can't have polls like that.

[FrizzleFried]

Gene WHO?

[Jack Burton]

Oh happy day!

Now, perhaps a topic relevant post is in order.

Vectors on a 15khz monitor....hmmm.

Well, Ummon has pushed his monitor to the limit by using the extended resolution of 16.5.  He says this makes his vectors look better.  Why is this?

Well, for the uninformed, Vector monitors don't draw graphics like a regular monitor, which is side to side in lines of pixels.  That is called a raster monitor by the way.  They instead draw them straight from point to point.  At least that is my  understanding.

What does this mean?  It means that Vector graphics will appear very smooth and very bright.  There should be no visible "scanlines".  When Vector games are played through an emulator on a raster monitor they will be visible, and the image will be dim, and pixelated compared to a vector monitor.  What is the solution to this?  To try to remove as much interlacing and scanlines as possible.  Higher resolutions are the solution. 

This is what Ummon has done here.  He has pushed his monitor the highest resolution possible for the best Vector emulating effects. 

Well, that was my quick summary.  I'm sure someone else can do better, but I do think it should be added to the beginning of the thread for those who are not in the know and would like to know what is going on here.  Perhaps a new thread Ummon, and retire this corrupted one?

[Level42]

I never really liked Kiss anyway.....

[Xiaou2]

While Im not exactly unhappy that Genes moved on...

 "if many people have a problem with one person, guess what?  It's that one that's the problem.  Take a look in the mirror.  You may not like what you see."

 This statement is not necessarily truth.

 The Nazi party was quite Huge... and the few within their own countries that disagreed
were not the problem.

 Just as the majority of people thought the Earth was flat... and woah... They were
wrong too.

 We can see entire countries fighting endlessly with each other.  Perpetual hate and
revenge that continues to get passed down....  and yet, the few who can see past
this are Not the problem.

=====
 
 Btw Jack,  are you really so certain about that?  A scanline travels at split second
rates.  It appears that only a high speed shutter can capture the drawing process...
where as the eye can not clearly see it.

 (Exception,  ((If Im understanding things correctly))  : If the dot pitch of the monitor is much higher than the games resolutional size...  the graphics will be spaced apart
to spread the image.  There then will be larger spaces of emptiness that is visible) 

 I think many people mistake the Scanline effect for the actual Shadowmask itself.  The mask being actual Dark lines in between the phosphors themselves.   The older the monitor... the thicker the mask is... thus the more visible it is.

 Black and White vectors are the brightest... as they have no shadowmask.

 I think color vectors do actually have a shadowmask.  The main difference with them,
vs a typical crt, is the way in which the drawing takes place. (as you stated)

 Hmmm:  WikiPedia entry:

 =====

Vector displays or vector monitors is a display device used for early computers. It is a type of CRT similar to the oscilloscope but typically using magnetic, rather than electrostatic, deflection.[citation needed] Here, the beam traces straight lines between arbitrary points, repeatedly refreshing the display as quickly as possible.

Vector displays for computers did not noticeably suffer from the display artifacts of Aliasing and pixelation, but were limited in that they could display only a shape's outline (advanced vector systems could provide a limited amount of shading), and only a limited amount of crudely-drawn text (the number of shapes and/or textual characters drawn was severely limited, because the speed of refresh was roughly inversely proportional to how many vectors needed to be drawn).

Vector displays were used for head-up displays in fighter aircraft, because of the brighter displays that can be achieved by moving the electron beam more slowly across the phosphorus. Brightness is critical in this application because the display must be clearly visible to the pilot in direct sunlight.

Vector monitors were also used by some late-1970s to mid-1980s arcade games such as Asteroids.[1] Atari used the term Quadrascan to describe the technology when used in their games.

[edit] Color displays

Some vector monitors are capable of displaying multiple colors, using either a typical tri-color CRT, or two phosphor layers (so-called "penetration color").[citation needed] In these dual-layer tubes, by controlling the strength of the electron beam, electrons could be made to reach (and illuminate) either or both phosphor layers, typically producing a choice of green, orange, or red. Atari used the term Color Quadrascan to describe this colour version when used in their games.

[edit] References

   1. ^ Van Burnham (2001). Supercade: A Visual History of the Videogame Age, 1971-1984. MIT Press. ISBN 0262524201.

======

  Mame AFAIK, does not draw vectors in the same way as a real vector monitor.  It
would be interesting to see how it would effect the look of the picture if they did.
Obviously, it still wouldnt look anything like a true vector on a modern crt... but I do
wonder if there would be a noticeable difference...

[SirPeale]

The Nazi party was quite Huge... and the few within their own countries that disagreed
were not the problem.

And hence the argument is now over.  Thank you, Xiaou2.

[DJ_Izumi]

Yeah I'm pretty sure that there is no way for MAME to actually work with a real vector monitor.  The entire design of PC graphics from the ground up is built around the raster graphics idea.  Everything from the way the software stores the data to how the graphics card puts it out is entirely incompatable with a vector monitor.

I suppose you could come up with some crazy customized version of MAME and maybe there's some vector graphics cards out there but that'd require some serious ninjaing.  Failing that however, your vector games will be rastered.  Looking for the best presentation as accurate replication is impossible then is the way to go.  While it's true that a vector monitor would be the best way, the only practical way to get this would be to own the real machine.

However so long as you have FUN with the game and can enjoy it, that's what counts, right?

[CheffoJeffo]

Yeah I'm pretty sure that there is no way for MAME to actually work with a real vector monitor.  The entire design of PC graphics from the ground up is built around the raster graphics idea.  Everything from the way the software stores the data to how the graphics card puts it out is entirely incompatable with a vector monitor.

I suppose you could come up with some crazy customized version of MAME and maybe there's some vector graphics cards out there but that'd require some serious ninjaing.  Failing that however, your vector games will be rastered.  Looking for the best presentation as accurate replication is impossible then is the way to go.  While it's true that a vector monitor would be the best way, the only practical way to get this would be to own the real machine.

Like, say, VectorMAME driving a Zektor ZVG card ?

 

[Xiaou2]

 Where there is a will, there is a way.  Mame probably 'Could'  have a 'switch' to enable true
vector output.  However, that is very unlikely to happen.

 What I was stating... is that mame emulate the way in which a vector
draws.   A vector monitor drawing is kinda like a  'Plotter'  or a  CNC Router.

 They draw a pathway,  in a single complete Pathway.. and lift the pen/router up on
the way to the next coordinate.   If you turn up the Vector monitors voltage, you can see the entire line pathway, if I recall correctly.

 This could be simulated using raster graphics.  However, not sure if its really
worth it...because the timing may be too slow to really create any visible effect. Not sure.

 It also would probably kick up the needed horsepower required to run the vector games.
Not sure...


 For a separate emulator like AAE, it may prove to be much better doing it in a
"Vector Path" way... because then vector 'effects' could be better controlled.  As it stands... trying to use a raster picture with filters does not lead to realistic representations of a true vector monitor.

[DJ_Izumi]

Zektor ZVG card

*Googles*  Wow... Printer port.  Not how I thought such a thing would work, but yeah.  Though I imagine few go this far as there are so many raster games they'd wanna play in their cab.  But that look s pretty neat for getting as close to the real deal as possible. o.O

[Ummon]

I'll restate....or whatever....what I was showing there and all: if you have a 15khz raster CRT, and wish to have decent vector display, or vector display at all, without having to use interlace....then Advancemame is the ticket. Regular mame produces immense overscan when displaying such games at or near their 'native resolution'. I don't know why. I also don't know how Advancemame gets around this.

For the record, my favorite configuration for vector games...especially for Tempest....is mame before the re-write, at XGA or SXGA, and fullscreen brightness at 1.5 . The vector lines are a little thicker, but on my monitors it produces the brightest, as well as thickest, 'glow'. (Newer mame is sharper, but can't match the luminosity....plus, the stars are, um, weird.)

However, there is something, brightness-wise, to be said for vectors (or even raster games - particularly when using scanline effects on a 25" or above CRT, or using a PC CRT) at VGA. And as Advancemame, for some odd reason, displays vectors rather dimly at higher resolutions (even with the intensity up, it about matches pre-re-write mame at stock settings), I let it select a 31khz mode.

Incidentally, I always remembered some kind of 'scan lines' on Tempest. I think RayB said this was due to the shadow mask, but they are there, as I saw a couple years ago on a local machine.

[Jack Burton]

Color vectors use shadow masks?  Fascinating.  But I should have suspected as much. 

I have only ever seen a few Vector monitors, and that was well before I was informed of their nature and would remember the differences. 

The only Vector monitor I have seen recently was in the form of a very little Vectrex console with had to be a 8 or 9" screen.  The graphics in Asteroids were quite startling to me though in their brightness and smoothness.  I'm guessing since it was a black and white CRT that there was no shadow mask.  I can very much see how someone would want to emulate that look if they could.

[Xiaou2]

Incidentally, I always remembered some kind of 'scan lines' on Tempest. I think RayB said this was due to the shadow mask, but they are there, as I saw a couple years ago on a local machine.

 *Slaps Head*      

 Scan Lines are kinda formed from drawing each Line in rows.  (simplified)
These are not present on vector monitors, because vectors can start drawing anywhere on the screen, and follow a  shape  'pathway'.    NOT a Uniform row or column. 

 A vector monitor does not make a picture out of individual pixels/dots.  It would draw a
square in 4 movements.  Not 20 pixels from left to right, top to bottom.. such as a raster
monitor would.

 The lines you see "ARE" the Shadowmask lines.  The mask is a grill that holds the
individual color phosphors.   The black and white vector needs no mask, as the entire
monitor is simply coated in a single phosphor that glows white when excited.
 

[Level42]

Which shows that a lot of people simply don't understand how a vector monitor really works and that that is why it is impossible to recreate the look on anything other than a CRT.

I bet Genesim hadn't even ever SEEN a real vector.

What Xiaou2 says is correct. The fact that it doesn't create a raster gives a vector monitor it's impressive picture. A raster monitor scans each and every dot on the screen. Even if it gets the signal "completely dark" there is a very small signal which does light up the phosphor just a little bit.

On a vector that doesn't happen because the beam NEVER touches the phosphor where it is not steered over (that it, except for the "retrace" lines (the parts where the beam moves but is "turned off").

Because of the extremely dark picture where there's nothing on the screen compared to a raster monitor, vectors have a much more bright looking picture. This is further enhanced by either  slowing the beam down or drawing the same line quickly a couple of times. This makes that a vector has much more _contrast_ than a raster.

However, the CRT's used in a vector are _THE SAME_ as CRT's in a raster monitor. So yes, of course does a color vector have a shadow mask. How else would it be able to separate the colors ?

This also explains why a b/w vector looks more impressive than a color (IMHO). There's no shadow mask. It really looks very much like an oscilloscope.

Here is an excellent explanation by Jed Margolin, one of the creator's of games like Star Wars:

http://jedmargolin.com/xy/xymon.htm

[RandyT]

Because of the extremely dark picture where there's nothing on the screen compared to a raster monitor, vectors have a much more bright looking picture. This is further enhanced by either  slowing the beam down or drawing the same line quickly a couple of times. This makes that a vector has much more _contrast_ than a raster.

Not exactly.  A raster beam is never more than a dot...never.  When that dot needs to be in all possible places on a screen in a small fraction of a second, such as with a standard scanning display, this reduces the amount of time it can be in any one place at any given time, which reduces the duty cycle and limits brightness.   Vector monitors, on the other hand, simply paint the graphics with the raster.  This means it can spend more time energizing the phosphors and thus they glow brighter.

However, the CRT's used in a vector are _THE SAME_ as CRT's in a raster monitor. So yes, of course does a color vector have a shadow mask. How else would it be able to separate the colors ?

Don't forget "quadrascan" vector monitors.  Supposedly, there were two layers of phosphor on the things so you could get another color by pumping more energy into the phosphor and penetrating the first layer so the second would glow as well.

RandyT

[Bluedeath]

This is hard to keep up!   What is the advantage of LED backlight?

led back light can be zoned so you don't have light in the black areas, normal LCD backlight is a simple arrays of small fluorescent tubes. even the best LCD panel will allow a small percentage of light filters trough it, plus LED elements have a lifespan grater than fluorescent tubes.

But as Eldon Tyrrel would say "all of this is academic"

[Level42]

Because of the extremely dark picture where there's nothing on the screen compared to a raster monitor, vectors have a much more bright looking picture. This is further enhanced by either  slowing the beam down or drawing the same line quickly a couple of times. This makes that a vector has much more _contrast_ than a raster.

Not exactly.  A raster beam is never more than a dot...never.  When that dot needs to be in all possible places on a screen in a small fraction of a second, such as with a standard scanning display, this reduces the amount of time it can be in any one place at any given time, which reduces the duty cycle and limits brightness.   Vector monitors, on the other hand, simply paint the graphics with the raster.  This means it can spend more time energizing the phosphors and thus they glow brighter.

But........that is _exactly_ what I wrote 

Don't forget "quadrascan" vector monitors.  Supposedly, there were two layers of phosphor on the things so you could get another color by pumping more energy into the phosphor and penetrating the first layer so the second would glow as well.

Quadrascan was simply the name that Atari used for XY monitors (B/W and color). Because they were writing the "four quadrants" of the screen.

http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/ARCADE/S-Z/Wells%20Gardner%20Quadrascan%20%5BSpare%20Part%20List%5D%20%5BEnglish%5D.pdf

If those monitors with two phosphor layers existed, on which games were they used ?

[Edit]OK those kind of CRT's existed when they started to experiment with color TV and later they were used in avionics, but I really don't know about any games using it ?
Here's some technical info, it's called Penetron (sounds like something completely different..... ):
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Penetron

I think these tubes were probably more expensive than a regular color CRT and limited in color use. At least, the WG6100 and Amplifone's didn't use them. Of course, the Amplifone is mid-res, but it's still a regular CRT (the same CRT has been used in mid-res raster games).

[Ummon]

Incidentally, I always remembered some kind of 'scan lines' on Tempest. I think RayB said this was due to the shadow mask, but they are there, as I saw a couple years ago on a local machine.

 *Slaps Head*     

 Scan Lines are kinda formed from drawing each Line in rows.  (simplified)
These are not present on vector monitors, because vectors can start drawing anywhere on the screen, and follow a  shape  'pathway'.    NOT a Uniform row or column. 

 A vector monitor does not make a picture out of individual pixels/dots.  It would draw a
square in 4 movements.  Not 20 pixels from left to right, top to bottom.. such as a raster
monitor would.

 The lines you see "ARE" the Shadowmask lines.  The mask is a grill that holds the
individual color phosphors.   The black and white vector needs no mask, as the entire
monitor is simply coated in a single phosphor that glows white when excited.
 

I think you misunderstood that I was saying I saw something that seemed similar in appearance.

[RandyT]

But........that is _exactly_ what I wrote 

Well, not really.  Even if the vector display had phosphor so light in color that it approximated the worst raster scanning CRT in the black areas, the vector display would still far outshine it in brightness in the areas where graphics were displayed.  Your explanation seemed to focus on this difference between the bright and dark areas as being the primary reason for the enhanced display characteristics, when it is almost 100% due to the reasons I outlined.  That is why I stated "not exactly", instead of "incorrect".  Also, I could be wrong, but I highly doubt that they "slow the gun".  Doing so would cause terrible flicker on everything that wasn't bright, and they were constantly battling this as more objects were placed on screen.  It's far more likely that the entire screen refreshed at a constant time-base, with brighter objects simply getting more power from the gun(s).  The reason brighter objects flicker less at the same refresh rate is because the long persistence phosphor ( the reason everything had a "trail") glows longer when blasted with more electrons.

Quadrascan was simply the name that Atari used for XY monitors (B/W and color). Because they were writing the "four quadrants" of the screen.

Then the wiki is wrong.  You should probably correct it if you know better.

Color displays

Some vector monitors are capable of displaying multiple colors, using either a typical tri-color CRT, or two phosphor layers (so-called "penetration color").[citation needed] In these dual-layer tubes, by controlling the strength of the electron beam, electrons could be made to reach (and illuminate) either or both phosphor layers, typically producing a choice of green, orange, or red. Atari used the term Color Quadrascan to describe this colour version when used in their games.

RandyT

[CheffoJeffo]

Atari used the term QuadraScan to refer to their vector monitors in general -- to my knowledge, the term QuadraScan has nothing to do with dual-layer phosphors (as evidenced by the fact that they refer to their BW vectors the same way). A quick reading of the memo to ops for the WG Color QuadraScan confirms that it uses three beams.

The particular reference that RandyT cites is WikiPedia, not the BYOAC wiki, and is written poorly enough that it seems to imply something that I don't think is true.

My understanding of the dual-layer phosphor (and I can't recall where I read about it) is that it was limited in terms of the number of colours that could be produced (which would make sense since there are only two layers, hence only two colours to blend).

[RandyT]

My understanding of the dual-layer phosphor (and I can't recall where I read about it) is that it was limited in terms of the number of colours that could be produced (which would make sense since there are only two layers, hence only two colours to blend).

Like I said, someone should change that Wiki if they know better.  The odd thing is that this is not the only reference I found stating this while digging, so it may be a wider misconception.

Also keep in mind that this could still produce quite a few colors.  The guns are analog, so a number of variations of green, yellow, orange and red could be produced with only two colors.  But no blues or violets without a third color.  So looking at it from that perspective, and unless Atari shifted gears somewhere, it doesn't seem likely that this is accurate.

Could be that someone just assumed it was different because of the different name and that the "quadra" came from X, Y and 2 levels of Z (Quad=4)

[Ummon]

Like I said, someone should change that Wiki if they know better. 

That's why relative to here I say 'the wiki', but for Wikipedia say 'Wiki', no 'the'.