Image Map Image Map
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Displaying CGA on CGA

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    I was able to get the 160x100 image displaying correctly by using the low-resolution mode and the scanline per row value of 2. I wasn't quite able to get the 320x200 image 100% using the same parameters.
    My Retro Computing and Vintage Gaming Blog : http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Great Hierophant View Post
    I was able to get the 160x100 image displaying correctly by using the low-resolution mode and the scanline per row value of 2. I wasn't quite able to get the 320x200 image 100% using the same parameters.
    Can you show me the image that you're having trouble with?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reenigne View Post
    Can you show me the image that you're having trouble with?
    These two in the capture.zip file linked above :

    Attachment 54047

    Attachment 54048
    My Retro Computing and Vintage Gaming Blog : http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Great Hierophant View Post
    These two in the capture.zip file linked above :

    Attachment 54047

    Attachment 54048
    These links give me "invalid attachment specified". Are you talking about cgacal.png? (I thought by 320x200 you meant a 320x200x4 graphics mode image but there wasn't one of those in your archive). After resizing cgacal.png to 640x200 and converting (with default parameters except for changing the mode to "low-resolution text", background to 0 and scanlines per row to 8) this is what I get:cgacal.zip (and displaying the resulting .cgad file with cgadview in DOSBox looks correct to me). Do you get something different, or are we talking at cross-purposes?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    Okay, with that guidance, I have been able to render what appear to be 1:1 for the input image for both the 320x200 and 640x200 images I posted. I just have one question remaining. The conversion is accurate, but really slow. Are there any settings that can be used to speed them up?
    My Retro Computing and Vintage Gaming Blog : http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Great Hierophant View Post
    Okay, with that guidance, I have been able to render what appear to be 1:1 for the input image for both the 320x200 and 640x200 images I posted. I just have one question remaining. The conversion is accurate, but really slow. Are there any settings that can be used to speed them up?
    Yes, turn down "quality" (I think it should work with quality set to 0, the fastest setting). I previously thought quality 1 was needed when really it was a 640x200 input image that was needed.

    I know it's still not super speedy but exact conversions weren't my primary design goal. I might add some code to detect and switch to a faster method for the exact case.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    1,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reenigne View Post
    Yes, turn down "quality" (I think it should work with quality set to 0, the fastest setting). I previously thought quality 1 was needed when really it was a 640x200 input image that was needed.

    I know it's still not super speedy but exact conversions weren't my primary design goal. I might add some code to detect and switch to a faster method for the exact case.
    Now that I know better how it works I must congratulate you on such a neat little program. I hope you continue to work on it, but this right now seems to be able to handle 99% of CGA.
    My Retro Computing and Vintage Gaming Blog : http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Great Hierophant View Post
    Now that I know better how it works I must congratulate you on such a neat little program. I hope you continue to work on it, but this right now seems to be able to handle 99% of CGA.
    Thanks! Yes, I have a lot of plans for it (more plans than time at the moment). Eventually I hope that it will be a full-fledged graphics editor as well as converter and renderer, and (as previously mentioned) support time-based features like raster-synchronized palette/mode changes and animation.

  9. #19

    Default

    You should look on eBay for an EGA card.
    They are compatible with the exact same hardware, and they can display a graphics mode display in 16 colors.
    Plus, the resolution is 640x350 instead of 640x200.
    EGA is much better than CGA.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •