Goochman Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Someone want to take a crack on producing a better image for the ole 8bit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_8-bit_computer_hardware_palettes#Atari_400.2F800.2FXL.2FXE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Stephen Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Someone want to take a crack on producing a better image for the ole 8bit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_8-bit_computer_hardware_palettes#Atari_400.2F800.2FXL.2FXE Well, they are not allowing for dithering, so not sure how we could have a better image. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Honestly, I don't know what the criteria is for the photos posted there. The Atari image has 9 colors, and the resolution is nothing the 8-bits can do with that many colors. I think they're trying to emulate some approximate image that the computer could display. The C64 image has 16 colors, which is realistic for the machine. But then it's in hi-res too, which would pose some restrictions so that it wouldn't be possible on real hardware either. I suppose the challenge of actually getting real versions of this image for all these machines was a little too much, and whoever was involved with producing the article just settled something that seemed reasonable to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 OK, now that I've had another look, even that doesn't make sense. The C-16 and Plus/4 are using their full palette for the image. So if that's all they're doing, then somehow the Atari image got gipped. You can easily produce a much better image than that with the Atari's palette, skills or no skills, so something isn't right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwilove Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Someone want to take a crack on producing a better image for the ole 8bit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_8-bit_computer_hardware_palettes#Atari_400.2F800.2FXL.2FXE It does look like the Atari version is rushed, and they couldn't bother to use the shades available? And the C-64 Plus/4 looks so good - you may get the impression that that hardware is so good? Harvey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Without very little effort I came up with this: Atari (256 colors) So, who knows what happened here: Atari - Wikipedia (9 colors) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caterpiggle Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Have a file .XEX for that Parrot image 2nd above ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Have a file .XEX for that Parrot image 2nd above ? I think you need to read or reread my posts above... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phaeron Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 The whole idea of representing a computer's color output by maximum color count without regard for the actual resolution and color limitations is a bit bogus to begin with. It's misleading and not useful to show an image that's not even remotely possible to show on the computer it's supposed to represent. Then there's the problem that the article is inconsistent about whether resolution or palette limitations are represented in the image... which can't be easily fixed, because there are almost no references for where the palettes used came from. And "YPbPr composite video"? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Agreed on the bollocks idea. A lot of these sorts of pages are what you could call "informal information" and don't really give true representations of machines capabilities or what a typical user could expect to achieve themselves. 9 colours without tricks is a furphy anyway, we can have 23 colours using mixing though with limitations on what they are and how often they can appear of course. I'm fairly sure I published an APAC version here some time ago (like probably 2008 or earlier). A TIP version would probably be worth a shot as would a PAL colour blended 16 colour version (4 colour one line, 4 luma next line). Not to mention a Rastaconverter version, it might well look the best of the lot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilmenit Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 From RastaConverter, no dithering, no flickering, 63 colors. parrot.xex 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Nice - it's the sort of image that favours cell-based attributes much more than a raster based colour change scheme so having half the pallette being represented is a good outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goochman Posted September 16, 2015 Author Share Posted September 16, 2015 Guys - the author asked the following: Which mode is that? It looks like a software mode. I don't think software modes fit the intent of the page. All of the images would look better using software modes. Having said that I can respond or you can directly on the Facebook page it was listed on: https://www.facebook.com/groups/105586892805903/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Without very little effort I came up with this: Haha... typo there. Obviously I meant "with" very little effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClausB Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 What? Mass media over-represent the C64 and under-represent the Ataris? No! Never! </sarcasm> BTW this thread sounds familiar. Have we gone here before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DrVenkman Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 BTW this thread sounds familiar. Have we gone here before? Well, to be fair, this site is something like 15 years old. There's not much that has never been discussed before. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
high voltage Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 (edited) Gotta love Wikipedia and their mistakes, especially how they got the console generations wrong Edited September 17, 2015 by high voltage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 2 totally different magazine articles aren't they? And one looks US, one English. It was fairly common for plenty of gear to have equivalent prices $ and Pounds, despite the exchange rate being that one Pound was worth probably $US 1.75. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaGtGruff Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I'm not sure I understand what "software mode" means in this case. The 8-bit Atari's graphics were designed to allow changing graphics mode from row to row, as well as the ability to use interrupts from row to row for changing the colors, so it isn't as though using those abilities is somehow "tricking" the Atari into doing cartwheels that it was neveer designed or intended to do. Similarly, the Atari 2600 doesn't even have graphics modes-- you must manually update the graphics components (playfield pixels, player pixels, player positions, colors, etc.) from line to line or else you'll just get a series of colored bars that extend vertically across the screen. So it could be argued that it's impossible to draw the parrot at all on the Atari 2600 if "software modes" aren't permitted. If we were talking about "hacking" the computer's screen display by POKEing locations in ways that "trick" the computer into displaying things in a way its designers had never considered or intended, then I could see the point. But is that really the case with that image? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Software mode in my book means dependancy on the CPU to maintain the display. So that means APAC, TIP and related modes, anything with dynamic palette or priority changes. On that note also throw in the modes that cycle screens like R,G,B and the other flicker types. Just what could be done with Antic 4 modes 5 colours + mixing with non repositioned PMGs for extra colour WRT that parrot pic, unsure. Probably not very much, at the least it would probably come down to heavily modifying the picture to suit what the hardware will allow for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.