Re: The Park of the Wall

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Dyer-Bennet, May 19, 2011.

  1. On Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:52:44 PM UTC-5, Frank S wrote:

    > I have a wide-screen monitor and a newer Win7 computer. I'm under the
    > impression that it's possible - even easy - to connect up to three monitors
    > to the outputs on the back of the box.
    >
    > http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5185/5735039137_5223a93c34_o.jpg


    To my immediate right (at work) is a desk with four monitors
    on it; three "normal" in landscape mode, and one 24" widescreen
    in portrait mode (#2 from the left, driven off one system.

    Few computers come by default with graphics cards that can
    drive more than two monitors. The systems at work have
    dual graphics cards in them, driving (up to) two monitors
    each.

    > Thinking about a second monitor oriented for portrait viewing since it seems
    > that causing the tools to appear on one screen and the workspace on the
    > other would solve a number of screen-space problems; wouldn't do much for
    > the skills and talents aspect, but it would make assigning responsibility
    > for successes and failures a bit easier?


    As far back as 1996, graphics professionals were mostly running
    dual-monitor systems; often a big good monitor plus an old
    leftover 17" for the palettes and all. It's a good plan.

    But yeah, it doesn't magically fix any of the hard problems.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 19, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Dyer-Bennet

    Martin Brown Guest

    On 19/05/2011 15:02, bugbear wrote:
    > David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    >
    >> As far back as 1996, graphics professionals were mostly running
    >> dual-monitor systems; often a big good monitor plus an old
    >> leftover 17" for the palettes and all. It's a good plan.

    >
    > Heh. Right back to the early 1970's it was normal graphics (for a wide
    > sense of "graphics")
    > practice to have a terminal (keyboard + 24x80 character display) for
    > complex commands,
    > and a "display" for the actual image. Mouse, trackball or lightpen
    > were used for image interaction, as far as it existed.


    ITYM early 80's.

    Starlink was one of the first UK facilities to have full colour 512x512
    graphics workstations powered by chunky Sigma ARGS graphics units
    embedded into a VAX 11/780. There were some other expensive colour
    terminals around before that but they were really only useful for being
    pseudo plotter output. They were excruciatingly slow at displaying
    images. There were quite a few competing monochrome image systems around
    the same time with close coupling into the main box.

    There were also a few systems with dedicated hardware assisted vector
    graphics units around based on PDP minis.

    ISTR they were all using trackerballs until the mid 80's.

    Scanning a digital image was pretty tedious then and making a high
    quality negative from a digital file was excruciating.

    What was astonishing was that not long after 1980 thanks mainly to the
    mass produced 6545/6845/6847 graphics chips bitmapped colour suddenly
    became possible and even easy on home PCs.

    Regards,
    Martin Brown
     
    Martin Brown, May 19, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Dyer-Bennet

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <qlaBp.3498$>,
    |||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk says...
    >
    > On 19/05/2011 15:02, bugbear wrote:
    > > David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
    > >
    > >> As far back as 1996, graphics professionals were mostly running
    > >> dual-monitor systems; often a big good monitor plus an old
    > >> leftover 17" for the palettes and all. It's a good plan.

    > >
    > > Heh. Right back to the early 1970's it was normal graphics (for a wide
    > > sense of "graphics")
    > > practice to have a terminal (keyboard + 24x80 character display) for
    > > complex commands,
    > > and a "display" for the actual image. Mouse, trackball or lightpen
    > > were used for image interaction, as far as it existed.

    >
    > ITYM early 80's.
    >
    > Starlink was one of the first UK facilities to have full colour 512x512
    > graphics workstations powered by chunky Sigma ARGS graphics units
    > embedded into a VAX 11/780. There were some other expensive colour
    > terminals around before that but they were really only useful for being
    > pseudo plotter output. They were excruciatingly slow at displaying
    > images. There were quite a few competing monochrome image systems around
    > the same time with close coupling into the main box.
    >
    > There were also a few systems with dedicated hardware assisted vector
    > graphics units around based on PDP minis.
    >
    > ISTR they were all using trackerballs until the mid 80's.
    >
    > Scanning a digital image was pretty tedious then and making a high
    > quality negative from a digital file was excruciating.
    >
    > What was astonishing was that not long after 1980 thanks mainly to the
    > mass produced 6545/6845/6847 graphics chips bitmapped colour suddenly
    > became possible and even easy on home PCs.


    You're a bit late in your chronology. Many large manufacturers had
    developed CAD systems by 1970 for in-house use. In 1975 the first
    commercial sale of a CAD system took place, Lockheed's CADAM, licensed
    to Avions Marcel Dassault. Dassault later acquired marketing rights and
    continued to develop that system.

    You ran those early systems, just as you ran AUTOCAD, by typing commands
    on a keyboard and watching the result on the image dispay.

    It all seems horribly clunky today, but it worked well enough to create
    quite a lot of aircraft and cars and other useful devices.
     
    J. Clarke, May 19, 2011
    #3
  4. David Dyer-Bennet

    tony cooper Guest

    On Thu, 19 May 2011 06:30:44 -0700 (PDT), David Dyer-Bennet
    <> wrote:

    >On Wednesday, May 18, 2011 8:52:44 PM UTC-5, Frank S wrote:
    >
    >> I have a wide-screen monitor and a newer Win7 computer. I'm under the
    >> impression that it's possible - even easy - to connect up to three monitors
    >> to the outputs on the back of the box.
    >>
    >> http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5185/5735039137_5223a93c34_o.jpg

    >
    >To my immediate right (at work) is a desk with four monitors
    >on it; three "normal" in landscape mode, and one 24" widescreen
    >in portrait mode (#2 from the left, driven off one system.
    >
    >Few computers come by default with graphics cards that can
    >drive more than two monitors. The systems at work have
    >dual graphics cards in them, driving (up to) two monitors
    >each.
    >
    >> Thinking about a second monitor oriented for portrait viewing since it seems
    >> that causing the tools to appear on one screen and the workspace on the
    >> other would solve a number of screen-space problems; wouldn't do much for
    >> the skills and talents aspect, but it would make assigning responsibility
    >> for successes and failures a bit easier?

    >
    >As far back as 1996, graphics professionals were mostly running
    >dual-monitor systems; often a big good monitor plus an old
    >leftover 17" for the palettes and all. It's a good plan.
    >
    >But yeah, it doesn't magically fix any of the hard problems.


    The problem is also space. I can afford a second monitor, but I don't
    have the surface space to conveniently locate a second monitor.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, May 19, 2011
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Cymbal Man Freq.
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,038
    Uncle John
    Jun 4, 2005
  2. Flatus Ohlfahrt

    From tomorrow's Wall Street Journal

    Flatus Ohlfahrt, Dec 30, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    555
  3. mmyvusenet

    Park of the Wall

    mmyvusenet, Aug 7, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    315
    mmyvusenet
    Aug 10, 2010
  4. mmyvusenet

    The Park of the Wall

    mmyvusenet, May 6, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    813
    John Turco
    May 27, 2011
  5. David Dyer-Bennet

    Re: The Park of the Wall

    David Dyer-Bennet, May 9, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    249
    tony cooper
    May 19, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page