Did Jay Miner develop the GTIA?

[Foebane]

I know the CTIA was part of the original A8 blueprint, and that Jay designed that, but did he also design the more advanced GTIA? I hope so, but I've not been able to find any conclusive evidence of that.

[Allas]

After TIA 2600 design, Jay splits the chip into 2 chips more advanced : GTIA (George TIA) and ANTIC. Maybe its not 100% from Jay Miner, but sure is from the CYAN team with Jay Miner as a leader.

 

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines. Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

 

Its a pity this history, because that means Atari never expands the power graphics from original plan in 1978. Well as we know Atari its a precious architecture, but costs a lot of money in compare with other machines.

Edited December 7, 2005 by Allas

[doctorclu]

After TIA 2600 design, Jay splits the chip into 2 chips more advanced : GTIA (George TIA) and ANTIC. Maybe its not 100% from Jay Miner, but sure is from the CYAN team with Jay Miner as a leader.

 

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines. Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

 

Its a pity this history, because that means Atari never expands the power graphics from original plan in 1978. Well as we know Atari its a precious architecture, but costs a lot of money in compare with other machines.

977740[/snapback]

 

That's why you tinker with Amigas when you want to see the next step of the Atari 8-bit lineage.

[ijor]

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines.

Interesting, are you sure about that? I have no internal historic knowledge; but technically, it doesn't look like that.

 

Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

Well, I wouldn't say GTIA fill any empty spaces in CTIA. It adds new capabilities, and precisely by the way the new features are implemented, is that it looks that it was designed after, and not before, CTIA.

[Heaven/TQA]

is there any similarity from HAM to mode9?

[Allas]

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines.

Interesting, are you sure about that? I have no internal historic knowledge; but technically, it doesn't look like that.

 

Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

Well, I wouldn't say GTIA fill any empty spaces in CTIA. It adds new capabilities, and precisely by the way the new features are implemented, is that it looks that it was designed after, and not before, CTIA.

983922[/snapback]

 

Sure, GTIA is the first and original project. CTIA came later, Atari wanted the 400 and 800 in 1979 at any cost. Thats because CTIA its only a piece of GTIA project in that moment (1979). Take the CTIA chip like a demo version from GTIA chip.

 

mmm Jay died years ago... who could confirm this ? maybe a member CYAN team?

[Rybags]

I'd say it's fair to assume that the GTIA was the original spec. The OS supported the GTIA modes despite the chip not being present in early machines.

 

HAM is very different.

 

In HAM, you use 6 bit-planes.

 

The first 2 define the action to take:

 

00 = normal. ie: use the next four bit-planes to select a palettized RGB value.

01,10,11=load new R, G, or B value using the next four bit-plane values. The remaining components of RGB are used from the previous pixel.

Edited December 17, 2005 by Rybags

[kevin242]

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines.

Interesting, are you sure about that? I have no internal historic knowledge; but technically, it doesn't look like that.

 

Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

Well, I wouldn't say GTIA fill any empty spaces in CTIA. It adds new capabilities, and precisely by the way the new features are implemented, is that it looks that it was designed after, and not before, CTIA.

983922[/snapback]

 

Sure, GTIA is the first and original project. CTIA came later, Atari wanted the 400 and 800 in 1979 at any cost. Thats because CTIA its only a piece of GTIA project in that moment (1979). Take the CTIA chip like a demo version from GTIA chip.

 

mmm Jay died years ago... who could confirm this ? maybe a member CYAN team?

984042[/snapback]

 

 

Jay Miner died shortly before Commodore went under. He was at a World of

Commodore show just before he died and C= presented him with a brand

new (at that time) A4000. The excact date of death was: June 20, 1994

Edited December 17, 2005 by kevin242

[Allas]

Curious, look I found just in the Atari FAQ.

 

11.2 What is the history of Atari

.

.

.

1981

From Atari Connection magazine:

"At the National Computer Conference in Chicago on May 5, 1981 Atari announced

that the 8K Atari 400 was being discontinued and that the price on the 16K

version was being reduced to $399."

 

The USPTO grants U.S. Patent 4,296,476 to Atari on October 20, 1981 for the

400/800 computer system.  Read the full text of the patent here:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?M2561456

 

November: 400/800's begin shipping with the new GTIA chip in place of CTIA,

increasing the palette of simultaneously displayable colors to 256 and adding

3 new graphics modes.  CTIA is totally phased out by the end of the year.

 

Jerry Jessop adds:

  "The very first proto systems did have the GTIA, but it had some

  problems and was not released in the consumer version until 1981.  The

  GTIA was completed before the CTIA."

 

 

 

Jerry Jessop is a former Atari engineer.

Those are the facts.

Edited December 17, 2005 by Allas

[Curt Vendel]

HUH?!?!

 

I own the actual pencil hand drawn E Sized schematics for both the CTIA and GTIA, they were both done side by side in 1978.

 

 

Curt

 

After TIA 2600 design, Jay splits the chip into 2 chips more advanced : GTIA (George TIA) and ANTIC. Maybe its not 100% from Jay Miner, but sure is from the CYAN team with Jay Miner as a leader.

 

People think GTIA is after CTIA, but CTIA was created after GTIA in 1979 because GTIA wasnt ready for the 400 and 800 machines. Of course CTIA is a incomplete version of GTIA project, thats explain the empty spaces that just GTIA complete.

 

Its a pity this history, because that means Atari never expands the power graphics from original plan in 1978. Well as we know Atari its a precious architecture, but costs a lot of money in compare with other machines.

977740[/snapback]

[mos6507]

The Amiga's copper lists are an extension of the Atari 8-bit's display lists which are themselves a coprocessor-driven version of the all-software Atari 2600 kernels.

 

The idea was that you could automate a screen drawing process as much as you want, or you could go in there and customize it in a controlled manner, or even go in and do things when the beam is in the middle of scanning out.

 

The thing I've read about HAM was that it was initially based on a different colorspace model on the graphics (HSV?). All previous architectures were more HSV-based (as it mapped to NTSC better, you know, luminance and chrominance, aka S-Video). When they went to RGB, HAM delta, or changes, had to occur at the RGB level. When applied to photographic sources, this is what yields the HAM fringing artefacts. This fringing would have been less evident when applying changes to hue or luminance instead of RGB. But it was still pretty impressive.

 

Since the Amiga chipset ran at 7.xx mhz, it was able to do more real-time video tricks than the A8 or 2600.

 

What was also impressive on the Amiga was the DCTV add-on device that exploited composite video artefacts and used some overscan area to yield truly photographic quality images.

 

When Lightwave was first unbundled from the Toaster, people started using the inexpensive DCTVs with single-frame VCRs to record their lightwave animations. It was a cool time period. But progress marches on.

[supercat]

When Lightwave was first unbundled from the Toaster, people started using the inexpensive DCTVs with single-frame VCRs to record their lightwave animations.  It was a cool time period.  But progress marches on.

992561[/snapback]

 

Weren't single-frame VCRs horrendously slow and expensive? My recollection was that the VCR would have to start a recording session with a few seconds of blank video, then rewind, wait for the trigger, then start "playing" the video to get the head and tape in sync with the incoming signal, then record one frame, then back up a couple seconds and repeat. I suppose if frames take minutes to render, an extra 10 seconds of tape shuffling might not hurt too much, but if would make working with previews (that might otherwise take 1-2 seconds to render) somewhat difficult.

[kevin242]

...

What was also impressive on the Amiga was the DCTV add-on device that exploited composite video artefacts and used some overscan area to yield truly photographic quality images.

 

When Lightwave was first unbundled from the Toaster, people started using the inexpensive DCTVs with single-frame VCRs to record their lightwave animations.  It was a cool time period.  But progress marches on.

992561[/snapback]

 

 

Bit of trivia, Commodore bought the DCTV (and another upgrade to original amiga's

called HAM-E) it is said these two tech were instrumental in developing the AGA

chip set.

[desiv]

Bit of trivia, Commodore bought the DCTV (and another upgrade to original amiga's called HAM-E) it is said these two tech were instrumental in developing the AGA chip set.

992660[/snapback]

 

I actually owned a HAM-E for my Amiga 500.

(I won it from BlackBelt in a Compuserve forum. Seemed like a deal since it was an over $300 item, until I got my Compuserver bill for that month.. Oh well. :-)

 

Drawback to the HAM-E as I remember (I was an early adopter) was that it was only for viewing pics. I don't think there was an option for a HAM-E desktop.

 

And it was a big unit, with lots of dials to tune to get it right.

 

But, the resulting pictures when viewed were stunning. It was a great crowd pleaser.

 

Also, Black Belt software maintainted on their message boards that their software was the first commercial software to support JPEG and it allowed morphing VERY early on.

 

Haven't thought of that for a long time...

 

desiv

[kevin242]

Bit of trivia, Commodore bought the DCTV (and another upgrade to original amiga's called HAM-E) it is said these two tech were instrumental in developing the AGA chip set.

992660[/snapback]

 

I actually owned a HAM-E for my Amiga 500.

(I won it from BlackBelt in a Compuserve forum. Seemed like a deal since it was an over $300 item, until I got my Compuserver bill for that month.. Oh well. :-)

 

Drawback to the HAM-E as I remember (I was an early adopter) was that it was only for viewing pics. I don't think there was an option for a HAM-E desktop.

 

And it was a big unit, with lots of dials to tune to get it right.

 

But, the resulting pictures when viewed were stunning. It was a great crowd pleaser.

 

Also, Black Belt software maintainted on their message boards that their software was the first commercial software to support JPEG and it allowed morphing VERY early on.

 

Haven't thought of that for a long time...

 

desiv

992914[/snapback]

 

 

are we talking about the same thing? HAME chip that you installed inside

the Amiga or DCTV?

[desiv]

are we talking about the same thing?  HAME chip that you installed inside

the Amiga or DCTV?

992997[/snapback]

 

Nope.

 

HAM-E (That I owned) wasn't a chip. It was a really big external box you plugged inbetween the video port and the monitor.

 

It had lots of chips!

 

Now, I could be wrong, but I owned the 500 and then a 1200 and as far as I know, there was never a HAM-E chip. There was only ever the HAM-E external device.

 

DCTV itself was eternal as well, although much smaller than the HAM-E. I didn't own one, but have seen them.

 

I found a good desc of the HAM-E below:

(p.s. I did find a website that mentions that the HAM-E was the inspiration for AGAs HAM8 mode...)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Black Belt Systems has introduced a new hardware peripheral for the

Amiga, called the HAM-E graphics system. HAM-E is a graphics processor

board which provides the Amiga with two new graphics modes, which are:

 

- REG Mode: This mode provides a 320*200 resolution (or 320*400 with

interlacing) with 256 displayable colors out of a 24-bit color palette

(or 16,776,216 colors). REG Mode has up to 236 usable color registers,

for animation application such as color cycling.

 

- HAM-E Mode: This mode is an Extended HAM (Hold-And-Modify) Mode,

which can display 262,144 colors at the same time with a 24-bit color

palette, at a 320*200 resolution. Here is an excerpt from Black Belt

Systems' Press release, further explaining how this is done:

 

--------------------

 

*** HAM-E Mode:

The second mode is the Extended HAM (Hold-And-Modify) mode. This mode

provides 236 24-bit color registers in four banks of 59, and full 18 bit

HAM capability. You can have 262,144 colors on screen at one time (in

exactly the same way "standard" HAM allows you to have 4,096) and instead

of having 16 color registers available to enhance "fast-edge" color

changes, you have 236, which are accurate to 24 bits (16 million colors).

You use this just like you use HAM mode, but you get:

 

(1) More than a quarter-million more simultaneous colors than standard HAM

mode (or any "normal" Amiga mode) can provide;

 

(2) You have much better sharp edge color changes because you have 59

immediately available color registers you can use to load the R, G and B

guns with no delay or HAM artifacts to a precision of 24 bits (16 million

colors);

 

(3) You have the ability to change anywhere in the picture to a new set

of 59 color registers - the cost is one pixel that does not change at all

from the previous pixel. Obvious "good" places to do that are at the

beginning of a scan line, or in an area of an image that is not currently

changing (say, the contour of a cheek). Remember, it only takes one pixel

and there is no processor overhead involved, no interrupts, no blitter.

It's all directly dependant on the pixel data in the image.

 

--------------------

 

Like the REG Mode, the HAM-E mode is fully compatible with Genlocks

and the IFF picture format, as well as supporting full register-based

color cycling. Like the Amiga's standard graphics modes, the HAM-E system

displays its images inside a standard Amiga window, and acts exactly as if

it was designed into the Amiga as standard. As such, the HAM-E's modes

can be interlaced, and its images can be accessible via the CPU or blitter

chip. However, there is NO CPU or Blitter overhead in maintaining images

produced by the HAM-E. Resulting in increased system performance....

 

Impulse (Turbo Silver CAD program), NewTek (Digipaint), Electronic

Arts (DeluxePaint, Deluxe Photo Lab), MicroIllusions (Photon Paint II),

and ASDG (Professional ScanLab, ScanLab 100) have expressed interest in

supporting the HAM-E system when it is introduced. Meaning that most of

the graphics and desktop video applications out for the Amiga will

probably support HAM-E when it is introduced....

 

The HAM-E is plugged into the Amiga via the RGB Port. It has its

own RGB port, for connecting a monitor or genlock. It also works with

all Amigas, and produces 24-bit RGB output. HAM-E is expected to be

shipping before the end of the year. Cost: Around $300.00.

Edited January 3, 2006 by desiv

[kevin242]

re: Ham-E

 

 

My memory of that era (late 80's and early 90's) is really messed up. I

rem the Ham E/DCTV and that they were the inspiration for AGA and that

I really wanted eithe rof them but could not afford them, but for some

reason I thought HAM-E was an internal upgrade... I must be thinking of

something else. Part of the reason the AGA was too little too late tech

is that all commodore did was cobble together some upgrades to make

it... a far cry from the revolutionary advance the Amiga was when it

was first released.

[Gunstar]

Was any graphic device like these ever released for any of Atari's 16-bit line in any form (i.e., external device, kit-upgrade or VME/other card? How about the TT/Falcon?

[mos6507]

Weren't single-frame VCRs horrendously slow and expensive?  My recollection was that the VCR would have to start a recording session with a few seconds of blank video, then rewind, wait for the trigger, then start "playing" the video to get the head and tape in sync with the incoming signal, then record one frame, then back up a couple seconds and repeat.  I suppose if frames take minutes to render, an extra 10 seconds of tape shuffling might not hurt too much, but if would make working with previews (that might otherwise take 1-2 seconds to render) somewhat difficult.

992564[/snapback]

 

That could be. I never used them. You'd sure use an RS232->RS422 cable and some control software so it required no manual intervention.

 

Bleeding edge was definitely bleeding back then.

 

DCTV could be used for animations also, but only played fullspeed if you had a lot of RAM and there wasn't a lot of delta from frame to frame.

 

What little animation I did do at home on my A1200 was rendered to IFF animations destined for DCTV. Even with a 68030 at 50mhz I had trouble getting animations to play at a constant 30fps.

 

For Babylon 5 they somehow streamed animations to 8mm Exabyte tapes.

[pkblack]

veryy cool Allas, thanks for posting the information!! Its always cool to have some real Atari experts posting stuff like this!!!

[Bryan]

I own the actual pencil hand drawn E Sized schematics for both the CTIA and GTIA

 

Eeeeeeentresting....

 

 

-Bry