 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> For what it's worth, does "TFT" actually mean something? Or is it just a
> marketing term that means "hey, this screen is great!!!1!1 please buy
> me!!1"?
*T*hin *F*ilm *T*ransistor
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> For what it's worth, does "TFT" actually mean something? Or is it just a
> marketing term that means "hey, this screen is great!!!1!1 please buy
> me!!1"?
As Michael said, it is the type of transistor that is laid down onto the
glass in every sub-pixel. TFT is also called active matrix (ie each
sub-pixel is "active" because it has some control circuitry).
FWIW the opposite is passive matrix, which is basically a grid of wires,
with a layer of LC (and no electronics) between the X and Y grid lines.
Because LC needs above a certain voltage to work (let's say 5V), you can
apply +4V to each row in turn, and then a voltage between -1 and -5 V to
each column to set the brightness of just that row. If you do the frame
quick enough you can make a steady image, but then you get problems with
stray charge "spilling over" from one line to the next because there is no
time for voltages to settle.
There are numerous other problems with this method which makes it only
suitable for black and white displays or very low resolution colour displays
(eg low-end mobile phones). Any monitor or TV is going to be TFT.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> Yeah IIRC a picture of two squares representing monitors. Fine if
> understand that.
My god! You might need to read the instructions for the $1000 device you
just bought to use all it's functions!!
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:18:18 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> Yeah IIRC a picture of two squares representing monitors. Fine if
>> understand that.
>
> My god! You might need to read the instructions for the $1000 device you
> just bought to use all it's functions!!
Yeah crazy ain't it.
Except some people do read the instructions, but six months later need to
do something they've forgotten the function for and then have to locate
the manual, which by this time had migrated to the back of some drawer or
been accidently thrown out with some rubbish.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> whether the technology that goes into them is actually expensive itself,
>
> Not in the US at least. Look up "tv capture card". I got a full-blown
> system, 300G drive, 1G ram, dual core 3GHz machine with dual tuner card
> and hardware mpeg, fairly high-end video card (Radeon whatever) 7.1
> surround sound yadda yadda for just under $1000.
We must have vastly different notions on what constitutes expensive.
--
"I owe, I owe, so it's off to work I go!" - Bumper Sticker
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> The only thing you need is a graphics card which supports video out,
> and then you connect it to a TV (or VCR) which supports video in. I have
> owned such a graphics card myself at one point.
And proper video card drivers. Take it from a Linux user who's suffered
on this issue.
--
"I owe, I owe, so it's off to work I go!" - Bumper Sticker
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:40:37 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> I have to disagree with Warp - I don't believe this is not an NTSC vs.
>> PAL issue
>
> I didn't mean to say it's an NTSC vs PAL issue, but that the NTSC/PAL
> standards suck for high-definition images.
Oh, I see - I misread - and I agree, I get the same kind of blurriness
Andy mentioned on my NTSC TV here.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:09:08 +0000, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> But usually it's clearly marked. And, usually, you can do it from the
> video driver settings too...
"Usually" being the key...(pun not intended)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Invisible wrote:
>>> whether the technology that goes into them is actually expensive itself,
>> Not in the US at least. Look up "tv capture card". I got a full-blown
>> system, 300G drive, 1G ram, dual core 3GHz machine with dual tuner card
>> and hardware mpeg, fairly high-end video card (Radeon whatever) 7.1
>> surround sound yadda yadda for just under $1000.
>
> We must have vastly different notions on what constitutes expensive.
Likely. I've been a professional computer programmer for 30 years. I
don't mind spending money to get a decent system that fits my needs.
On the other hand, the TV it's plugged into is probably 15 years old at
this point. I buy quality stuff when I can.
Relatively speaking, you pile up all the hardware together, it's pretty
inexpensive for the machine it is. If you bought all the parts
individually and left out the tuner card, it would be more than $1000.
It's a pretty high-end tuner card, too. (I'm assuming you're saying
$1000 would be expensive regardless of the machine it buys. The machine
has a bunch of stuff in it I didn't list.)
A bottom-of-the-line machine from Wal-mart in the same time period was
some $300 or $400 without any OS/software on it, no DVD drive, etc.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Most capture cards come with some form of primitive Windows software for
> doing this.
Mine does. But then I noticed it also installed a plain old Video for
Windows driver, so I can capture just using VirtualDub; the same program
I use to convert bunches of PNGs (fresh out of POV-Ray) into video
files. It's a lot better than using the crappy included software.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
