Re: Color CRTs, dot pitch, resolution and the like...

If this is to test to try to make a svga vector
monitor, I can donate one Clay if you want to pay
shipping. I believe it is a Samsung tube at .26 dot
pitch. The model is Tovis MTG-1972XN, brand new. I
know it won't accept cga as-is, vga or higher, but
have pushed one up to 1600 in mame...although its a
little soft up there.

http://www.poweronix.com/Files/MTG-1960XT-1971XT-Service-Manual.pdf

Is the xxx71 model which should be close to my 72
model which they don't have specs for anymore. If I
send it though the deal is this has to be followed
through on in a reasonable timeframe and well
documented for everyone...including myself.. ;)

Will be away for a couple days.

--- Scott Caldwell <scottcaldwell@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

> Clay, that sounds correct. It's possible they
> pushed the pixels to the
> next resolution of 1024 pixels
> horizontally, since that's the next increment, but I
> question whether
> they could reach the vertical of
> 768. Additionally, if they are being literal in
> their description of
> the monitor, it maxes out at
> 800x600, since by definition VGA = 640x480 and SVGA
> = 800x600.
> XGA=1024x768.
> Admittedly, a lot of manufacturers fudged on the
> 1024x768 over the years
> and called it SVGA
> too.
>
> I know the standard dot pitch for 1024x768 monitors
> is 0.28 or better
> and has been for many,
> many years (computer monitors).
>
> Scott C.
>
> Clay Cowgill wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Time to play: check my math (and theory)...
> >
> > I was pondering the VGA/SVGA Vision Pro monitors
> that Happ sells (they're on
> > sale now, BTW-- $200 a whack if anyone wanted one
> to experiment with).
> >
> > The "dot pitch" is advertised as 0.78mm.
> According to Google, that makes
> > for about 0.030708 inches.
> >
> > If we assume a full 19" of the CRT is visible area
> (not likely) and the
> > aspect ratio is 4:3, that would make for a display
> area about 15.25" x 11.5"
> >
> > So if the 'dot pitch' was arranged as a
> rectangular grid of 0.030" blocks...
> > 15.25 / 0.030 = ~508 pixels. Since the dot pitch
> is a diagonal measurement
> > and since the triads are arranged in a sorta
> tessellated pattern, I'd
> > guestimate that the 'effective' resolution would
> be about double-- so around
> > ~1000 pixels horizontal?
> >
> > (That kinda passes the sniff test since the tube
> is spec'd for 800x600 pixel
> > resolution and with a smaller actual visible area
> than this example you'd
> > probably be guaranteed to hit a couple triads with
> even the smallest pixel @
> > 800x600 with standard sync/clock rates.)
> >
> > This sound about right to anyone else? (I was
> just thinking that even if
> > using one of these 'high res' "SVGA" tubes, the
> active area of the CRT could
> > be resolved with 10 bits of DAC in a vector output
> stage if you don't need
> > overscan. You'd not see any loss of 'resolution'
> since the dot pitch of the
> > monitor is the limiting factor...)
> >
> > -Clay
> >
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ** Unsubscribe, subscribe, or view the archives at
> http://www.vectorlist.org
> > ** Please direct other questions, comments, or
> problems to chris@westnet.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ** Unsubscribe, subscribe, or view the archives at
> http://www.vectorlist.org
> ** Please direct other questions, comments, or
> problems to chris@westnet.com
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Unsubscribe, subscribe, or view the archives at http://www.vectorlist.org
** Please direct other questions, comments, or problems to chris@westnet.com
Received on Thu Apr 19 09:23:19 2007