Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: ... : My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! ...
[begin Public Service Announcement]
Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are overpriced.
If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
: >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: : >: > > Well, I'm running an ATI mach64 turbo with 4 meg of ram. Have had : >: absolutely NO problems at all. My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY : >: problems! I think that you are having a problem configuring your monitor : >: to the Diamond card. Check your refresh rates and see if you have them set : >: in compliance with your card. I'm running a NEC MultiSync 4FGe at 1024 x 768, : >: 24 bit, 67 million colors and graphics are displayed beautifully.
: >WOW! 67 million colors? That's a pretty cool card. ;)
: Yeah...26-bit color....(he he he)
: With the Mach 64 VRAM version under Win95 you can actually do 32-bit : color (4.3 billion). I'm not iure of the last 8-bits are actually : used, though...if they aren't you can ditch that last claim...
: ----Charles Thiele----| Why can't someone come out with a real : ---- PsychoTech / ----| movie like "Driver King" about a guy : ---- Tweak Freak -----| who collects hoardes of hardware : -cthi...@uniserve.com-| drivers and finally diefies..or : ----------------------| whatever.......... Nothing special at all... My diamond stealth 64 3000 with 2 mb vram does 32 bit color as well... but the last eight bits are usually for transparency stuff (at least they were in the nextstep workstations and in tga pictures) this stealth thing I had no problems with whatsoever, by the way...
In article <30fd8705.2455...@news.synapse.net>, btur...@synapse.net (Brian Turner) says: [...]
>Why are you unhappy with your ATI video card, I am running an ATI >Turbo Pro PCI on a P120 with ATIs new drivers Ver 2.08 and it is ROCK >solid, When I had an diamond card and changed to an ATI. With the >Diamond card I had blooming on the outer edges of the screen, When I >installed the ATI card the blooming went away, the edges of my screen >are straight.
[...]
Have you ever had a problem with the mouse pointer prior to the 2.08 drivers? Anything like "The pointer is jumping up and down" or "I point to like 1 but click goes to line 3"? I have had this problems with the 2.01 drivers, so i'm interested if the 2.08 drivers have this problem solved.
bkval...@fletch.fix.net (Brian Kvalstad) wrote: >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: >: > > Well, I'm running an ATI mach64 turbo with 4 meg of ram. Have had >: absolutely NO problems at all. My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY >: problems! I think that you are having a problem configuring your monitor >: to the Diamond card. Check your refresh rates and see if you have them set >: in compliance with your card. I'm running a NEC MultiSync 4FGe at 1024 x 768, >: 24 bit, 67 million colors and graphics are displayed beautifully. >WOW! 67 million colors? That's a pretty cool card. ;)
Yeah...26-bit color....(he he he)
With the Mach 64 VRAM version under Win95 you can actually do 32-bit color (4.3 billion). I'm not iure of the last 8-bits are actually used, though...if they aren't you can ditch that last claim...
----Charles Thiele----| Why can't someone come out with a real ---- PsychoTech / ----| movie like "Driver King" about a guy ---- Tweak Freak -----| who collects hoardes of hardware -cthi...@uniserve.com-| drivers and finally diefies..or ----------------------| whatever..........
>In article <30fd8705.2455...@news.synapse.net>, btur...@synapse.net (Brian Turne >r) says: >[...] >>Why are you unhappy with your ATI video card, I am running an ATI >>Turbo Pro PCI on a P120 with ATIs new drivers Ver 2.08 and it is ROCK >>solid, When I had an diamond card and changed to an ATI. With the >>Diamond card I had blooming on the outer edges of the screen, When I >>installed the ATI card the blooming went away, the edges of my screen >>are straight. >[...]
>Have you ever had a problem with the mouse pointer prior to >the 2.08 drivers? Anything like "The pointer is jumping up and down" or >"I point to like 1 but click goes to line 3"? >I have had this problems with the 2.01 drivers, so i'm interested if the >2.08 drivers have this problem solved.
>Thanks for your help
>Michael Klar
>PS: Please reply by email! Thanx
My mouse seems much more stable with the 2.08 drivers. It hasn't gone into the background yet at all.
> In article <4dubv6$...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, > ez058...@boris.ucdavis.edu (Phillip Geiger) wrote: > >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: > > ... > >: My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! > > ...
> >[begin Public Service Announcement]
> >Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to > >speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has > >the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* > >screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are > >overpriced.
> >If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a > >Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I > >pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
>What's the deal with 4.3 billion colors? I can't tell the difference between > 16 bit (64 000 colors) and 24 bit (16.7 millon colors) color. Maybe I'm > color-perception-challenged, but 4.3 billion colors has to be pushing the > limits of human perception. I read a long time ago in Dr. Dobbs Journal > about some unspecified research (attributed to the US Navy - I think) that > claimed that the threshhold for a normal human was 16 million shades. Anybody > know anything about this?
I've read the human eye can't differentiate between more than 256 greylevels.
32-bit colour is only used because 32-bits is easier to shift than 24bits (3bytes), and hence should give faster performance.
Anyway, I always think what's point of so many colours when there aren't enough pixels on the screen to display them!
>Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: > ... >: My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! > ...
>[begin Public Service Announcement]
>Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to >speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has >the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* >screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are >overpriced.
>If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a >Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I >pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
nap...@theory.chem.ubc.ca (Duncan Napier) wrote: >In article <1996Jan22.201158.16...@paramount.nikhefk.nikhef.nl> nata...@paramount.nikhefk.nikhef.nl (Natalia Kruszynska-Straszewicz) writes: >>Charles Thiele (cthi...@uniserve.com) wrote: >>: bkval...@fletch.fix.net (Brian Kvalstad) wrote: >>: >: in compliance with your card. I'm running a NEC MultiSync 4FGe at 1024 x 768, >>: >: 24 bit, 67 million colors and graphics are displayed beautifully.
>>: >WOW! 67 million colors? That's a pretty cool card. ;)
>>: Yeah...26-bit color....(he he he)
>>: With the Mach 64 VRAM version under Win95 you can actually do 32-bit >>: color (4.3 billion).
>What's the deal with 4.3 billion colors? I can't tell the difference between > 16 bit (64 000 colors) and 24 bit (16.7 millon colors) color. Maybe I'm > color-perception-challenged, but 4.3 billion colors has to be pushing the > limits of human perception. I read a long time ago in Dr. Dobbs Journal > about some unspecified research (attributed to the US Navy - I think) that > claimed that the threshhold for a normal human was 16 million shades. Anybody > know anything about this?
> Fighting for the rights of the color-perception-challenged minority,
> Duncan Napier, > "What color is that, again?", > University of British Columbia.
>_________________________________________________________________________ >The University of British Columbia supports color-perception-deficiency > employment equity.
If you hop over to sci.optics, there is currently a discussion on this very topic. Phil
: > : >What's the deal with 4.3 billion colors? I can't tell the difference between : > 16 bit (64 000 colors) and 24 bit (16.7 millon colors) color. Maybe I'm : > color-perception-challenged, but 4.3 billion colors has to be pushing the : > limits of human perception. I read a long time ago in Dr. Dobbs Journal : > about some unspecified research (attributed to the US Navy - I think) that : > claimed that the threshhold for a normal human was 16 million shades. : Anybody : > know anything about this? : >
: I've read the human eye can't differentiate between more than 256 greylevels.
: 32-bit colour is only used because 32-bits is easier to shift than 24bits : (3bytes), and hence should give faster performance.
: Anyway, I always think what's point of so many colours when there aren't : enough pixels on the screen to display them!
: --Sanj
The point is not to display all the colours at once, it is to give your computer that ability to render as closely as possible the true colour of any particular image.
Geiger) wrote: >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: > ... >: My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! > ...
>[begin Public Service Announcement]
>Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to >speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has >the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* >screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are >overpriced.
>If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a >Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I >pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
It's not a question of how many colors can you recognize. Having 8 bits per color available means that picture content with gradual changes (like the sky or the human face) will not have banding effects. Banding effects occur when a discrete perceivable jump occurs in level in what your eye expects to be a gradually changing level.
> In article <4dubv6$...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, > ez058...@boris.ucdavis.edu (Phillip Geiger) wrote: > >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: > > ... > >: My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! > > ...
> >[begin Public Service Announcement]
> >Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to > >speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has > >the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* > >screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are > >overpriced.
> >If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a > >Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I > >pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
> >Enough said. You have been warned.
> So what do you recommend (have)?
> Cheers > --Sanj
Don't know about the poster, but having tried MGA Matrox Millenium, moved to a Diamond Stealth 64 Video VRAM #3420 card, then moved to an ATI Graphics Xpression with 2Mb DRAM. I had minimal support effort from MGA, though they _did_ respond to a printed letter. Had _NO_ response, ever, from email, voice phone, or printed letter from Diamond. ATI isn't as fast or glitzy; but does work well, and it has taken only an email effort (on 4 occasions) to get some help from them. Longest response time on email was next day.
I didn't have functional problems with any of the three cards. But I will _NOT_ tolerate lack of support. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- | Rick Forrister | Hobby: Collecting, Preserving & | | <ri...@glacier.jpl.nasa.gov | Distributing Linux printcaps. | -------------------------------------------------------------------
> The figure is, I believe 200 but 256 is the nearest computer suitable > number.
To add some extra numbers: The human eye is capable of differentiating 3000 to 4000 colours with the same luminance (=greylevel). When this is combined with the roughly 200 luminance levels that can differentiated, an estimated number of 800,000 colours can be seen. The catch is that all these colours are not uniformly spaced across the total colourspace, so that in a linear representation more colours are needed.
N.B. Are the A/D converters and monitors capable of displaying 16 million different shades of colour? Anyone thought of that before?
-- With kind regards, _. _ | Email: schut...@natlab.research.philips.com | |_) | Robert Jan Schutten / | - "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein -
In article <31076FB2.5...@natlab.research.philips.com>, Robert Jan Schutten <schut...@natlab.research.philips.com> wrote:
>N.B. Are the A/D converters and monitors capable of displaying 16 >million different shades of colour? Anyone thought of that before?
Modern monitors are almost exclusively analog, meaning that they can display an arbitrarily large number of intensities of each of red, green and blue. So, yes, monitors can display at least 16 million colours. However, RGB colour space cannot display the full gamut of visible colours.
Most video cards now have 3 8-bit D/a converters, one for each colour. That means 256x256x256=16.8 million unique colours.
Yes, current technology can display 16.8M colours, but can only reproduce a subset of the full visible spectrum.
ciao,
-- Michael J. Scott R.R.I., U of Western Ontario mjsc...@heartlab.rri.uwo.ca 'Need a good valve job?' PC Video Hardware FAQ: http://www.heartlab.rri.uwo.ca/videofaq.html ############### Illegitimus non tatum carborundum. ##############
Mike J. Scott (mjsc...@jones.heart.rri.uwo.ca) wrote:
> Modern monitors are almost exclusively analog, meaning that they can > display an arbitrarily large number of intensities of each of red, > green and blue. So, yes, monitors can display at least 16 million > colours. However, RGB colour space cannot display the full gamut of > visible colours.
No, monitors cannot display "at least 16 million colors" simply because they are analog. This is an example of the "analog has infinite resolution" myth which keeps popping up in discussions of digital audio or video. The fundamental limit on the number of colors/grayscale levels which can be resolved in an analog system is the inherent noise present in the system. In the case of the color CRT, additional limits on color accuracy come from variations in phosphor colorimetry, beam landing, luminance uniformity, gamma, etc..
The "16 million color" point actually means 8 bits/color as it is normally implemented; with video amplitudes of 0.7V or 1.0 V (approx.) from black to white on each channel, this means that the LSB value corresponds to roughly 1/256V (0.004V). If the DAC output and on down the chain through to the cathode and on to the screen can deliver this degree of accuracy, without swamping out the LSB in errors and noise, then the CRT can resolve the implied number of colors. For most current CRT monitors, this is probably right at the limit of performance - meaning that increasing the number of bits per color would most likely not result in significant or visible additional dynamic range.
This does not mean that there's no point to having more bits/pixel in the frame buffer, as more bits/pixel here can reduce the accumulation of visible errors when manipulating the stored values. It's not unreasonable that 10, 12 or even higher number of bits/color be used here for this reason (just don't expect to SEE them!).
You are correct in stating that the full visible color gamut cannot be reproduced on a CRT display. It is theoretically impossible for any display based on a fixed primary set (as in the RGB color monitor) to reproduce the full color gamut available to human vision. Full-gamut color spaces are at least three-dimensional, and perversely shaped...:-) (Note that "three dimensional" here does NOT mean the same as "three primaries"; the three primaries used in displays, from a color viewpoint, lie in a 2D plane. There's at least one more dimension to consider, plus the fact that the primaries themselves lie WITHIN the color space, rather than outside it - which is where they'd have to be to cover the complete space.)
Bob Myers | my...@fc.hp.com Senior Engineer, Displays | Note: The opinions presented Workstation Systems Division | here are not those of my employer Hewlett-Packard Co., Ft. Collins, CO | or of any rational person.
Rick Forrister <ri...@glacier.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: >Brain Storm wrote:
>> In article <4dubv6$...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, >> ez058...@boris.ucdavis.edu (Phillip Geiger) wrote: >> >Kenneth D. Dool (kd...@netvoyage.net) wrote: >> > ... >> >: My last card was a Diamond Viper; MANY problems! >> > ...
>> >[begin Public Service Announcement]
>> >Stay away from Diamond. They sell junk, they have no tech support to >> >speak of, their drivers are always defective and released very late (has >> >the W95 driver for the stealth 64 been released yet or are they *still* >> >screwing around with that pathetic "beta" version?), and their cards are >> >overpriced.
>> >If you buy a Diamond product you are asking for trouble. I used to own a >> >Diamond Stealth 64 Video with 4mb VRAM, and actually felt *guilty* when I >> >pawned the piece of junk off for a little over half what I paid for it.
>> >Enough said. You have been warned.
>> So what do you recommend (have)?
>> Cheers >> --Sanj
>Don't know about the poster, but having tried MGA Matrox Millenium, moved >to a Diamond Stealth 64 Video VRAM #3420 card, then moved to an ATI Graphics >Xpression with 2Mb DRAM. I had minimal support effort from MGA, though they >_did_ respond to a printed letter. Had _NO_ response, ever, from email, voice >phone, or printed letter from Diamond. ATI isn't as fast or glitzy; but does >work well, and it has taken only an email effort (on 4 occasions) to get some >help from them. Longest response time on email was next day.
>I didn't have functional problems with any of the three cards. But I will _NOT_ >tolerate lack of support. >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------- >| Rick Forrister | Hobby: Collecting, Preserving & | >| <ri...@glacier.jpl.nasa.gov | Distributing Linux printcaps. | >-------------------------------------------------------------------
John Hall <jh...@synapse.net> wrote: >Thomas Kreibe wrote:
>> Hallo Mark,
>> Du meintest am 10.01.96 um 01:48 zum Thema "Re: ATI way better than Diamond":
>> > >> > Paul, >> > >> > I wish I could agree. When I run my Mach64 w/2mb VRAM at more than >> > >> > 256 colors, letters and numbers disappear in several apps. Tech >> > >> > support has not been much help. It took me several weeks to realized >> > >> > that the text remained stable only in 256 colors. I now only use more >> > >> > colors when I work with photos.
>> > >> This sounds very strange to me. I'm using my Mach64 2MV under Win95 at >> > >> 1024x768@16bpp all the time and I've never found this problem. Are your >> > >> running win95 or not? Just curiouse.
>> > >My Mach 64, 2 MB VRAM works all right at all resolutions up to 800*600 >> > >truecolor and 1280*1024 highcolor with DOS, WIN3.11, WIN95 and OS2.
>> > >Thomas
>> > I have notice missing letters from time to time also. I have not tried 256 >> > color mode to see if this helps yet.
>> Please test the following: If you loose letters go to your ati screen >> config programm and change the size of the letters (you can choose small, >> large and DTP in the ati screen programm). Do the letters come back ?
>> With kindest regards
>> Thomas
>Ya, this sounds like a setup problem as opposed to a hardware problem. >If you're running Win95 go to the display properties screen and choose >whether to use large or small fonts from there. If that doesn't correct >the problem, somewhere in the myriad of setup option screens, there is >one that will help you. Have you tried reinstalling the ATI driver in >the device manager? You probably have. All I know is that I've owned 4 >ATI cards and have never had a serious problem with any of them. Am >currently using the new Winturbo card with 2 megs of VRAM. All is fine.
Some PCs have problems with the earlier ATI drivers. An upgrade to the latest drivers should solve your problems; however, if You have a 4MB card there is one more thing to check if the drivers don't work. I have seen crossed pins on the 2MB expansion card cause the same problems. Take the expansion card off the video card and inspect the expansion module carefully for crossed pins. If there are crossed pins then also check the connectors on the video card for damage. You may need to return the card.
In article <4e8oj5$...@cs0.dasd.honeywell.com> Brian DeBruine <bdebr...@p05.dasd.honeywell.com> writes:
>From: Brian DeBruine <bdebr...@p05.dasd.honeywell.com> >Subject: Re: How many colors do you see? ... Was: ATI way better than Diamond >Date: 25 Jan 1996 20:18:45 GMT >It's not a question of how many colors can you recognize. Having 8 bits >per color available means that picture content with gradual changes (like >the sky or the human face) will not have banding effects. Banding >effects occur when a discrete perceivable jump occurs in level in what >your eye expects to be a gradually changing level.
----------------------------------- 24-bit colour means that you won't (eventually) have to worry about different Windows requiring different palettes. Only when the software supports it.
In article <4ebcte$...@fcnews.fc.hp.com> my...@fc.hp.com (Bob Myers) writes: >From: my...@fc.hp.com (Bob Myers) >Subject: Re: How many colors do you see? >Date: 26 Jan 1996 20:17:50 GMT
[cut]
>You are correct in stating that the full visible color gamut cannot be >reproduced on a CRT display. It is theoretically impossible for any >display based on a fixed primary set (as in the RGB color monitor) to >reproduce the full color gamut available to human vision. Full-gamut >color spaces are at least three-dimensional, and perversely shaped...:-) >(Note that "three dimensional" here does NOT mean the same as "three >primaries"; the three primaries used in displays, from a color viewpoint, >lie in a 2D plane. There's at least one more dimension to consider, plus >the fact that the primaries themselves lie WITHIN the color space, rather >than outside it - which is where they'd have to be to cover the complete >space.)
--------------------------------------- Hi Bob,
Not being an expert in color theory, could you fill me in on what that third dimension is?
Also, I have always understood that theoretically it needed only two base frequencies (primaries) to create the full intervening spectrum (i.e. a one dimensional space) and that the use of three primaries was a practical consideration relating to the physical (including biological) systems involved. Am I wrong? Or are you talking color theory and I'm talking physics.
In article <4e13n8...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca> nap...@theory.chem.ubc.ca (Duncan Napier) writes: >From: nap...@theory.chem.ubc.ca (Duncan Napier) >Subject: How many colors do you see? ... Was: ATI way better than Diamond >Date: 22 Jan 1996 22:39:36 GMT >In article <1996Jan22.201158.16...@paramount.nikhefk.nikhef.nl> >nata...@paramount.nikhefk.nikhef.nl (Natalia Kruszynska-Straszewicz) writes: >>Charles Thiele (cthi...@uniserve.com) wrote: >>: bkval...@fletch.fix.net (Brian Kvalstad) wrote: >>: >: in compliance with your card. I'm running a NEC MultiSync 4FGe at 1024 x >768, >>: >: 24 bit, 67 million colors and graphics are displayed beautifully.
>>: >WOW! 67 million colors? That's a pretty cool card. ;)
>>: Yeah...26-bit color....(he he he)
>>: With the Mach 64 VRAM version under Win95 you can actually do 32-bit >>: color (4.3 billion). >What's the deal with 4.3 billion colors? I can't tell the difference between > 16 bit (64 000 colors) and 24 bit (16.7 millon colors) color. Maybe I'm > color-perception-challenged, but 4.3 billion colors has to be pushing the > limits of human perception. I read a long time ago in Dr. Dobbs Journal > about some unspecified research (attributed to the US Navy - I think) that > claimed that the threshhold for a normal human was 16 million shades. Anybody > know anything about this? > Fighting for the rights of the color-perception-challenged minority, > Duncan Napier, > "What color is that, again?", > University of British Columbia. >_________________________________________________________________________ >The University of British Columbia supports color-perception-deficiency > employment equity.
I don't think it's REALLY doing 32-bit color. All that means is that it's doing 24-bit color but with 32-bit memory alignment. That is, each pixel requires 4 bytes (32 bits) of video memory even though it is only using 3 of those bytes. Wastes memory, but probably performs faster during 32 bit reads/writes since everything is 32-bit aligned.
Malcolm Coulter (m...@zeus.hsrc.ac.za) wrote: > Hi Bob, > Not being an expert in color theory, could you fill me in on what that > third dimension is?
It depends on the color space you're talking about - some systems use "dimensions" which don't translate well into any particular physical concept. However, the most intuitive 3D color spaces are such things as "HSV" space, which uses "hue" (roughly, the wavelength of the color in question, although it also applies to colors which aren't exactly on the visible spectrum), "saturation" (how spectrally "pure" that color is) and "value" (or in some spaces, "luminance"). On the good ol' CIE color chart that you see posted everywhere (where colors are given in x,y coordinates), the missing dimension is basically luminance. The point is that it's very difficult to represent color spaces in the first place, and impossible to completely respresent one in a 2D plane.
> Also, I have always understood that theoretically it needed only two base > frequencies (primaries) to create the full intervening spectrum (i.e. a one > dimensional space) and that the use of three primaries was a practical > consideration relating to the physical (including biological) systems > involved. Am I wrong? Or are you talking color theory and I'm talking physics.
Given two sources at opposite ends of the spectrum, I suppose you could find a means to generate any intermediate frequency - which would mean that you could generate any single, pure, fully-saturated color, or at least something which would APPEAR to be that color. What you could NOT do is produce the appearance of white, or an arbitrary non-fully-saturated color; that takes at least three "primaries". Part of the reason for this is that we have three types of color receptors in our eyes. (Oddly enough, there ARE animals - some insects, I believe, for just one example) which have MORE than three receptor types for color vision; God knows what things look like to them! :-))
If you plot the three primaries of any such display system on something like the CIE chart, you can draw a triangle which connects them; this is the "color gamut" for that display, or the set of all colors which can be produced using those three primaries. Given the shape of the color space, it is impossible for this triangle to cover the entire space unless the primaries themselves lie OUTSIDE the space - meaning that they are not something that can be physically realized. So any color display using a three-primary system is not capable of displaying all possible colors.
Bob Myers | my...@fc.hp.com Senior Engineer, Displays | Note: The opinions presented Workstation Systems Division | here are not those of my employer Hewlett-Packard Co., Ft. Collins, CO | or of any rational person.
>>> Du meintest am 10.01.96 um 01:48 zum Thema "Re: ATI way better than Diamond":
>>> > >> > Paul, >>> > >> > I wish I could agree. When I run my Mach64 w/2mb VRAM at more than >>> > >> > 256 colors, letters and numbers disappear in several apps. Tech >>> > >> > support has not been much help. It took me several weeks to realized >>> > >> > that the text remained stable only in 256 colors. I now only use more >>> > >> > colors when I work with photos.
Several of us at work have had this problem, however, we are all using 256 colors. ATI tech support suggested adding the line EngineText=off to the [Macx] section of the SYSTEM.INI file.
This has stopped the problem for us.
--------------------------------------------------------- Ron Anderson e-mail: r...@ti.com Texas Instruments MSG ID: RWA2 phone/voice mail:(214) 952-5420 --------------------------------------------------------- How 'bout them Huskers! *** GO BIG RED *** Back-2-Back National Champions 1994-1995 ---------------------------------------------------------
