Message-ID: <3D3C1E06.99DD300C@virgin.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 16:00:22 +0100
From: "Stewart Bryant" <stewart.bryant@virgin.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: Re: LF Roundtable
References: <LOBBIDNOENMNHIBGDCKBKEHFDAAA.g3wkl@btinternet.com>	 <3D3BDF8E.17F2CEE1@usa.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20020722134910.00adc928@gemini.herts.ac.uk> <3D3C0DBA.13397D9@usa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>


Alberto di Bene wrote:

> James Moritz wrote:
>
> > Re - computer required for Spectran, I found my old P133/16Mb had problems
> > trying to run Spectran, but various machines around 300MHz seemed to be
> > perfectly OK. The display on the slower computer had a peculiar "blinking"
> > effect, and attempting to save the waterfall to files produced some rather
> > odd-looking results.
>
> While the PC speed may affect the smoothness of the waterfall, I am rather
> dubious that it can impact the quality of the captured images.
> I would tend to point the finger on the video card used, or on the resolution
> settings. Spectran works best at 24 bits-per-pixel (16,777,216 colours or 'True Color'
> in Windows parlance) or at 16 bpp (that's 262,144 colours, or 'High Color').
> Working at 8 bpp is 'tolerated', but the results are less than spectacular...
>

Just to add some clarification, I have no interest in the quality of the local display,
just the quality of the captured image. My plan is to sit this in the corner listening
to MB7LF on a dedicated receiver and dumping the output to a web site every
few minutes. Anyone have any thought about how frequently this needs to be?

How does the system work, is the captured image derived by screen capture
or from internal data?

Stewart

>
> 73  Alberto  I2PHD