clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> During normal operation, the electron beam traces a zig-zag pattern
> across the screen (of which only the zig is visible, as the electron gun
> is effectively turned off during the zag)...

Right-- the 'blanking signal', to allow the elctron gun(s) to zip back to their
start positions.

> ...This would be virtually impossible to align with the aperture mask
> so no such attempt is even made.
>
> ...The mask is carefully
> aligned with the phosphor dot matrix and has only one aperture per
> phosphor dot triplet, with the angles of the beams chosen in such a
> manner that each hits its corresponding dot from the triplet as
> precisely as technically feasible.

So the aperture mask has only ONE hole per color triplet.  :-0   THANKS, Clipka;
you've cleared up my LONG-standing misconception--I've always assumed the mask
had a hole for each and every phophor! Funny thing: I've been doing some
research about this-- 'CRTs', 'color television', 'Trinitron tubes', 'aperture
masks' etc. And not ONE of the sources I looked at mentioned this
single-aperture-per-triplet fact. So now, the slight 'angle-ing' of each
electron beam makes perfect sense, as to how it hits its proper phosphors on the
screen through that single hole.

A Eureka moment!

And getting back to the subject of gamma 2.2 non-linear blending of colors: It
occured to me that POV-ray's focal_blur camera might be mistaken by some users
for actual 'blurring'-- when it's really just lots of discreet 'randomized'
camera rays, shot out in a stochastic fashion. I.e., there's no actual
*blurring* of scene colors to cause the gamma 'darkening' effect.

But that raises a question in my mind: If a focal_blur camera has it
blur_samples set at a high value (like 500, for example), do any of those
discrete samples actually overlap? IF so, then I would imagine that there's some
color 'averagaing' going on behind-the-scenes, of the overlapped rays. Does that
relate to the gamma 2.2 color-blending problem? (Hmm, probably not-- because the
'averaging'-- if done-- is done *within* POV-ray, before the resulting pixel
ever reaches the monitor.)

Post a reply to this message