🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2b2e6u$ppk@info.curtin.edu.au> Martin Hill <M.B.Hill@info.curtin.edu.au> writes:
>
>
...
>
>Mmm, yes I have been very impressed with AV's video quality. 
>Anything up to half size (376 x 288 in the case of PAL) is
>gloriously sharp and vibrant.  However, as soon as you go larger up
>to full screen, some annoying line pixelation becomes evident when
>viewed at moderately close quarters.  I wondered whether it was due
>to digitization of a single field of the interlaced input or
>something.  However, I guess it's just typical interlaced video
>comparing very poorly with high quality non-interlaced display. 
>(The sample video images were from a PAL videodisc, so it wasn't
>just a poor quality VHS tape I was viewing!)
>
...
>
>-Mart
>

Mart prepare yourself for a shock.

I too noticed the poor quality of the video image above 376*288 on my 660av,
after reading around on the net I discovered that when your AV only has 1meg 
of VRAM, the portion left for video (512K) is not large enough to hold the
full image and so every second line is a duplicate of the line above.

This is understandable, but it annoys me that this 'minor detail' was absent 
on the fact sheet posted to the net on the release of the AV's.

This does mean that the 660av is really unusable for titling or video 
conversion, which doesnt upset me greatly as I didnt buy it for that, but
perhaps others had that in mine and are now rather disappointed.



-- 
Andrew Bevin   andrewb@nezsdc.icl.co.nz   Local Govt Group, Fujitsu New Zealand
"I have a plan so cunning, you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel!"
	- Blackadder