Another Pinball 2000 thought...
solid187
2000 with an equivolent (sized) LCD. The benefits might include
availability, cost, and weight reduction of the pinball 'head'. Any
thoughts?
Lloyd Olson
"solid187" <bda...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1153331279.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Chad Tower
Even after you built the signal adapter so that you are outputting
something the LCD interprets properly, I seriously doubt the LCD would
project enough light onto the playfield to be useful. Particularly
since the placements on the playfield of the video images were
calculated using the curves and refraction rates of the CRT tube, not a
flat screened LCD with a plastic lens.
Radius
I don't think you would need a signal adapter. The P2K computer outputs
a VGA signal in 320x200 resolution IIRC. I've experimented with this
and the P2K computer will run a standard svga monitor. The problem is
that game monitors in the required size are *much* cheaper than
computer monitors.
There are 2 main problems with using a LCD. As other posters have
mentioned, the angle and brightness of the LCD would not work. The
other problem is that all LCD displays have a "native" resolution.
Anything above or below that resolution results in interpolation. In
other words, the image looks like crap.
Great idea, but unfortunately it's a 3 way no-win deal.
Michael
Chad Tower
Radius wrote:
> I don't think you would need a signal adapter. The P2K computer outputs
> a VGA signal in 320x200 resolution IIRC. I've experimented with this
> and the P2K computer will run a standard svga monitor. The problem is
> that game monitors in the required size are *much* cheaper than
> computer monitors.
Ah... I assumed the video was coming in via the usual RGB-Sync
connector you see in most vids. So that must not be a standard res 19"
15khz only arcade monitor?
TheKorn
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
LCDs typically can't pump out enough light power for this to be really
effective IMHO. Now a small scale plasma might be able to do the job, but
not sure if they make them in that size.
--
Have a home video that's trapped on your camera? Want to share it on the
web or on DVD?
Radius
Honestly I'm not sure. I don't know enough about arcade monitors to
say. What I do know is that one time when I was working on some switch
problems I got pissed off over not being able to see the display, and
the backglass was getting in my way. So I dragged an older 17" computer
monitor upstairs, hooked it up and it work. I did have to flip the
monitor upside down though. :)
Michael
Mickey Johnson
those low res modes. MAME builders have been making vga to arcade monitor
cables for years.
Thats another reason that you would never switch them over to flat screen,
new arcade low res monitors are dirt cheap (150 dollars). Also many monitors
can have the entire chassis replaced with a cheapo universal chassis thats
only about 45 dollars.
The prism card puts the pb2000 computer in a low enough res mode that the
arcade monitor can support it. You pull the card and the computer outputs
at a normal vga frequency.
Later,
Mickey
"Chad Tower" <to...@gis.net> wrote in message
news:1153332986....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
GregMaletic
> mentioned, the angle and brightness of the LCD would not work.
I'm not sure this would be a big problem. First of all, there's no real
"angle" issue, because even though the monitor is reflected you're
effectively staring straight into the monitor, i.e., your face is
effectively perpendicular to the display surface and you're receiving
100% of its reflected brightness, just as you would be if you were
looking at the monitor directly. The only potential angle issue would
be for onlookers trying to see what is going on (they're -not- looking
straight at the monitor), but not only are LCDs pretty darn bright now,
they have great off-axis response (I'm not talking about laptop
displays here, I'm talking about the desktop LCD monitors, which are
worlds apart in quality.) Admittedly, I have a nice one--an Apple
Cinema Display--but it seems totally bright to me, and the off-axis
response is near-identical to looking at it straight-on.
> The
> other problem is that all LCD displays have a "native" resolution.
> Anything above or below that resolution results in interpolation. In
> other words, the image looks like crap.
The resolution of P2K is only 640x240. Given that 1) that's pretty darn
low resolution; 2) you're watching the monitor reflected onto a blurry
piece of glass typically covered with some amount of fingerprints and
dust, and 3) there's a ton of flashing lights and stuff moving around
in the background, I don't think the interpolation problem will be an
issue. (In fact, the blurriness might even be a benefit because it
would reduce the perceived pixelization of the image.)
In short, I think using an LCD monitor is feasible, but any potential
benefit would be outweighed by the few headaches you'd face in trying
to shoehorn one in there. And let's face it: the backbox is already the
size it is. If you were going to design a -new- P2K machine from the
ground-up you could definitely look at shrinking it, but given that in
the current design it holds the PC, etc., I don't think it would be
worth the effort to re-engineer the whole backbox.
There will come a day--just a few years away, in fact--when LCD
monitors will be dramatically cheaper than CRTs, and someone will want
to do this. I'm sure they'll make it work just fine; it'll just take a
little more effort than it does to screw in a new CRT.