|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 2, 2017 11:41:21 GMT
Also stick with 2Mhz C128 rather than switching to SCPU@20Mhz.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 2, 2017 11:40:20 GMT
Miro, it would be more useful for diagnosis if you can tell me the h.total, h.displayed h.sync position and display enable start/end values instead of CPU speed and type when showing those photos. Thats the values of registers: 0,1,2,34 and 35.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 21:46:13 GMT
Yeah, it was pushing the frequency down a bit. Thats the problem with using a versatile CRT multisync for testing. Not sure how practical all this is going to be for most users. Maybe I should just stick with a more attainable 1024 horizontal pixels and play around with the v. freq.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 19:27:34 GMT
On a more productive note...
It looks like not getting too close to the h.sync pulse by increasing the h.total results in less character corruption!
Early days still, but I noticed a far worse corruption when testing on the PVM by moving closer to the h.sync pulse.
Possibly more testing tomorrow...
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 19:23:46 GMT
Ok, Ive located the RGBi>RGBa lead for my PVM monitor. Bad news Im afraid Miro. The new method of increasing the h. total chars while shifting the h.pulse in small increments doesnt work any better than the old method. In fact it seems worse This means it wont be any use on your 1084S. It seems that although the C=Ranger is more fragile than the PVM (in regards to displaying chars closer to the sync pulse on both sides), the PVM will not sway very much from the 15.625Khz/50 PAL standard. It completely lost sync on the first register entry when I tried changing the h.total to 145(as described in the previous post on page 1). As a result, I will have to continue tests on the Ranger. However, this brings me back to the old problem of who can benefit from this display? I would hope that a CGA>CVID converter should be the most compatible to an extent. But I dont know how much sway each adapter manufacturer or home made system would allow...? It looks like we are close with your CGA>VGA adapter Miro. Perhaps go in smaller steps to avoid de-sync.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 16:04:06 GMT
Thanks Miro. I will try to work it out. I think the Ranger monitor may be too forgiving when compared to the C= fixed sync models. I think I will have to break out the Sony PVM to get a truer PAL 15Khz characteristic.
Also, the converter youn are using may be part of the loss of sync. It would be better (as a common denominator at least) if we concentrate on your C=1084S instead. At least I dont have to contend with 2 possible problem areas then.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 15:26:19 GMT
@miro:
You seem to be losing sync about halfway through the v.display cycle, as if the sync is changed after displaying a full frame?!
I will look into it, possibly tomorrow evening if I cheer up a bit after the last post here.
Im not feeling like doing much this weekend now though.
I can see the pixels starting to get unstable on the last picture the best. What converter are you using to get this display? Maybe this will hold a clue. Also, did the display look ok before you got to the highest total displayed h. char amount?
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Apr 1, 2017 15:19:06 GMT
@ Hydrophilic\: Lame??! Fake??!
Have you found the reason for why you are getting such 'low quality' photos yet? I posted fairly large pictures in all my posts about reaching beyond 800 horizontal pixels. There was character corruption (as was explained with the photos) and the screen display was wrongly aligned as it was set up for a 80 column display, but you should be able to count the number of characters in the horizontal axis and this should correlate to the related resolution number.
Is anyone else having trouble viewing my pictures?
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Mar 29, 2017 6:00:42 GMT
It would be hilarious if we could match/beat highest Amiga modes with MORE colours on screen too! I can do some more testing this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by mrbombermillzy on Mar 28, 2017 22:09:32 GMT
Thanks Miro ...I appreciate that. As for the C=900 machine you keep writing about... 1024x800 is a rather non standard resolution. Horizontal pixel count can be pretty much anything and will still manage to comply with the PAL/NTSC standards (e.g. Amiga ECS super Hi- res /laced @ 1280x256/512i PAL or 1280x200/400i NTSC, and I think the Amiga can do up to ~1440x200/256). I can try setting these and it should still work on a PAL/ C=128 CGA monitor as originally intended (1084,ect). Its the vertical resolution of 900 non interlaced pixels that makes this resolution rather non standard...but... Theres no reason why I couldnt apply my new method to the vertical total/displayed (set to 38/25 as standard). Im quite happy to do this, but are theret many people with a setup that can display a CGA type C128 VDC output? Out of these, how many, I wonder, have a true CRT multisync? Is anyone using a CGA to composite video converter? Maybe I can try setting some 'standard' VGA type modes for people who have digital to analog RGB adapters and a modern PC flatscreen? (e.g. 1024x600, 1280x800, 1280x1024??).
|
|