@sigmason
Wow nice post.
If we ignore Super72, Euro72, and multiscan the Amiga always drives an output compatible with a regular TV. That means the Lisa output is always compatible with these four modes : 720x240p, 720x480i, 720x288p & 720x576i.
And if we ignore interfield motion (I know we shouldnt) then the Lisa output is always compatible with 720x480i or 720x576i.
The actual number of changing pixels may be lower, but the DAC doesn't know that. It is just sampling pixels at 28MHz.
I would imagine we are just going to feed the RGB outputs + sync + clock + config to the HDMI transmitter.
As you say these modes are below the 25 MP/S and so (from reading the HDMI spec) it appears we may need to have the Pixel Repetition (PR0:PR3) fields set (which will just be a counter) but I wouldn't be surprised if the transmitter does this automatically when configured for TV video sources.
sigmason wrote:
Let's consider this: if the Amiga at NTSC HiRes interlaced (which is a fine mode and the Toaster and other genlocks should work at it) is spitting out 640x400x60Hz or 480i.
Erm sorta.
sigmason wrote:
The digital data you are tapping at Lisa is pixel data for less pixels then the HDMI interface will require in a given frame or field because the HDMI display modes are all more data then you actually have (causing you to do pixel repetition on HDMI).
Yes the Lisa pixel data is less than 25MP/s and (from what I read in the spec) yes you will need to tell the HDMI interface to do pixel repetition. But all TV video sources must do this, it has nothing to do with the Amiga resolution.
sigmason wrote:
Even if the frequency of the digital data stream amounts to NTSC video at 50 or 60Hz what about the resolution?
What about it?
sigmason wrote:
You are transmitting in digital per pixel. Usually most of the HDMI displays I've seen scale 480i to get it fullscreen because not only are they not 480i resolution
Yup. I've seen them range from 1920×1080 for full HD through 1366 x 768, 1280x720, 1024x1024 etc. etc. and they all have built in video scalers designed to upscale TV resolution to HD.
sigmason wrote:
but even if they are actually 640x480 they are missing 80 lines of information
What is missing 80 lines?
sigmason wrote:
So even 480i is actually stretching the timing in HDMI standard because it doesn't match one of the standard transmission resolutions so they resort to pixel repetition.
Ok. But pixel repetition is just supersampling right?
sigmason wrote:
The Amiga obviously can do more modes then that (even if he drops the modes you mention.)
But does it matter as long as you are sampling at the right rate? I don't think it does. They are all pixel compatible with a 28MHz pixel clock.
sigmason wrote:
I see a problem. If the RGB data coming out of Lisa is 320x200 interlaced for instance and you want to double it think about the timing difference going into something designed to take in 480i and getting something a division of 480i. If they sample more then one pixel in digital RGB for that input timing how do they compensate for the timing difference?
I do not understand what you mean by 'timing difference'? Surely the HDMI transmitter is a slave to the pixel clock coming from the Amiga?
sigmason wrote:
I don't see inputs specified for chips from Silicon Image or Analogix that are lower then 480i.
It doesn't matter. All Amiga modes (except Super72, Euro72, and multiscan) will be compatible with 480i (or 576i). The only problem might be interfield motion, but I dunno how progressive displays fix this.
sigmason wrote:
I don't see RAM in there.
It doesn't need any. It just reads the same data twice.
sigmason wrote:
how would it compensate for this difference if you use them to produce HDMI from the Amiga and the Amiga is not in NTSC HiRes Interlaced or 480i?
The same way a TV does at the moment, oversampling. The Amiga keeps the RGB output stable a set period of time per pixel. When resolution is 320 pixels wide this time is roughly 2x as long as when resolution is 640 pixels wide because the line time is fixed.
sigmason wrote:
If you think I'm wrong enlighten me.
It is obvious from your last post that you are technically literate. We just have different ideas about different bits, probably each equally wrong ;-)