Jump to content
IGNORED

dads games


Roland

Recommended Posts

9.  There are some major flaws in the image.  I'll leave that to the experts to explore.

 

Well, the first of these that caught my eye was that the interference lines are perfectly horizontal, whereas the rest of the picture is not... :ponder:

 

You've certainly made a splash here Roland, even though you didn't fool most of us! (But if you did manage to get a workable 2600 version of Choplifter running, I'd like to see it!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9.  There are some major flaws in the image.  I'll leave that to the experts to explore.

 

Well, the first of these that caught my eye was that the interference lines are perfectly horizontal, whereas the rest of the picture is not... :ponder:

 

You've certainly made a splash here Roland, even though you didn't fool most of us! (But if you did manage to get a workable 2600 version of Choplifter running, I'd like to see it!)

 

 

 

Assume the image was created by recording gameplay off a TV or monitor screen with a handheld videocamera, and then a still taken from that recording when it was paused. The static would be perfectly aligned, as shown.... so this particular fault can be explained logically - and it also explains why the image itself is slighly askew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This is a hoax.

2. I do not have a bare-board cartridge, or hoard of games from "Dad"

3. I CAN actually spell.

4. Continuing the hoax any further would engender bad feelings - if I haven't already done that.  Hopefully by cutting it short after just a day, people won't be TOO angry.  I think, on reflection, it was a bad idea.  We all have our bad days.

5. The original idea was to have an early start to April Fool, and eventually release some sort of runnable version on April 1.  I think a bit too ambitious.  Things took off a bit too quickly, and it was a bit slow at work for my own good.

6. Although intended as a joke, I can see some people starting to take it too seriously.  

7. I was pleased to see the healthy scepticism shown by quite a few.  Good on' you.

8. The image was created with Paint Shop Pro, and took roughly 30 minutes.

9.  There are some major flaws in the image.  I'll leave that to the experts to explore.

 

Right off the bat I can point out a few.

 

1) Outside of the VCR head interference, the static on the overall image is too much like a typical noise filter in PSP or Photoshop.

2) The interference (both pause and general) runs parallel to the frame of the picture -- but not the frame of the image it is capturing. If the camera was tilted, the interference would be, too.

3) There's no raster bar. If this was captured from the television using a handheld camera, it would no doubt capture a nice fat raster bar due to the inequity between the refresh rate of the camera and that of the television.

4) Why the heck would you use a handheld camera when you have a VCR to record directly from the TV? And if this was the case, why is the image crooked?

 

A little too obvious. :-) But good try, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...