home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Light ROM 4
/
Light ROM 4 - Disc 1.iso
/
text
/
maillist
/
1995
/
0295.doc
/
000441_owner-lightwave-l _Wed Feb 22 05:53:23 1995.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1995-03-19
|
1KB
Return-Path: <owner-lightwave-l>
Received: by mail3.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id OAA26606; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:58:31 -0800
Received: from ix3.ix.netcom.com by mail3.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id OAA26563; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:58:05 -0800
Received: from by ix3.ix.netcom.com (8.6.9/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
id OAA12971; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:57:23 -0800
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:57:23 -0800
Message-Id: <199502212257.OAA12971@ix3.ix.netcom.com>
From: dougr5@ix.netcom.com (DOUG RICHARDSON)
Subject: Re: Re(2): PAR-titions
To: dbarnard@cix.compulink.co.uk
Cc: lightwave-l@netcom.com
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
You wrote:
>Has anyone using an NTSC PAR found any problems with this ADPro loader?
>
>Using PAL PAR files, only the NTSC screen area is loaded, but also the
>colours are incorrect, and generally darker.
>>---- Dave ----<
>
>
>
I am trying a comparison between ImageFX AdPro and Translate now.
I loaded a frame of digitized video with both programs and did an absolute
subtract on them with ImageFX composite tool.
ImageFX frame - ADpro frame = R=0 G=0 B=0
ImageFX frame - Translated frame = R=0 G=0 B=0
ADPro frame - Translated frame = R=0 G=0 B=0
It looks to me like there is absolutly no difference between loaders.
NTSC PAR version 2.50, PAR Hex2.19, ImageFX2.0, ADPro 2.5