2017-02-20 14:49 GMT+01:00 <email@example.com>: > > > On 2017-02-20, at 13:32, smf <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > >> The "dust" he writes about applies to my understanding only to the > "modern plasma TV" he used and which I expect does bad job handling off > specs signals. > > > > Old tv's are blurry > > Old TVs usually yes. CRTs in general not necessarily. I still use > well-kept hi-res studio displays, which give picture far from being blurry. > > > and uses anlogue processing. > > ... which is the key here. No quantisation into few bits of depth > resolution, no timing quantisation, trying to put square peg of > non-compliant signal into round hole of "expected" timing, etc. > > > Plasma TV's have crisper pixels & depending on the TV and how it's setup > could have less than 8 bits of colour resolution per channel. > > Exactly. That's one part of what I mean when writing that ADCs there may > do a job ranging from decent to horrible when given an off-specs output > from the 64. I have seen all of those. His plasma apparently fits into the > latter category. > > > This makes irregularities in the video signal more visible, which is > especially worse if the plasma TV has a much larger screen size. > > Upscaling the artefacts to big screen plays an important role too, but > when using a device that handles the signal gracefully, this is not that > much of a problem. Been there, seen that. > > Summing up - my initial comment applies to CRTs and well behaving > upscalers. The differences we started discussing about might be > substantially more pronounced when using a device that doesn't know how to > handle the signal but I would like to use such a device in the first place. > I would advise the guy to put a decent upscaler between the 64 and his > modern plasma TV instead. > > -- > SD! > > > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2017-02-20 14:02:49
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.