9 Feb
2011
9 Feb
'11
8:57 p.m.
On 2011 Feb 8, at 2:15 PM, Richard wrote:
Brent Hilpert <hilpert at cs.ubc.ca>
writes:
See next message.
On 2011 Feb 8, at 7:16 AM, Richard wrote:
Sure, but its not a TV system. There is some limit to the resolution
of a 463{1,2} printer. There is also some limit to the resolution of
a DVST in a Tektronix product. The former is more limited to the
printing mechanism and the latter is more limited to the electron beam
width and addressability circuitry in the storage tube.
The way "pixel" is used canonically these days, there aren't any in a
storage tube system. Nor are there any pixels in a refresh vector
display. There is the idea of the smallest addressable unit on the
screen, but that's not the same as a pixel. Philip Belben <philip at axeside.co.uk>
writes:
I know what you mean here, so not to argue your point about the analog
process in the system under discussion, but I would like to add an
historical footnote: even analog raster-scan systems were
characterised
in terms of "picture elements" going back to the very early days of
TV. For that matter, how big are the pixels?
There aren't any pixels.