CPCWiki forum
General Category => Amstrad CPC hardware => Topic started by: Gryzor on 18:59, 25 March 16
-
How about that?
[attachimg=1]
-
I didn't know that.
-
I think it's an optical illusion due to shape/perspective. Let's compare our sizes, shall we? :D
-
funny angle of view :D
-
I'd say their elevated at different heights.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvnKXOGYKM8[/youtube]
-
Yeah, ooooohkay, any real input? :D
-
Yeah, ooooohkay, any real input?
There was an example from the 80s Curiosity Show which dealt with Illusions & Angles, but I haven't been able to track down the video. :(
-
As said above, it's a trick. Taking advantage of the way perspective works in images (and so fools the brain...).
Mark
-
As said above, it's a trick. Taking advantage of the way perspective works in images (and so fools the brain...).
Mark
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS12p0Zqlt0[/youtube]
-
I'd sure like to see one of those 464s spinning around an Ames Window. :D
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KrpZMNEDOY[/youtube]
-
Awww, the Curiosity Show. I grew up with that every Saturday morning :)
As for the 464s, I recently had an original 1984 model and a 1988 model with the new logo. Both were the same physical size, so I'm also going with it being a matter of perspective.
-
I don't think we're dealing with perspective here. The angle is very high and the difference in size really noticeable. Even if you mentally continue the edged of the top machines they won't fall on the contour of the bottom one...
-
I recall my tall-button 464 being slightly longer than the short-button 464 my sister had, which had a the later logo on it. It seems these 464s are from different manufacturing times.
-
it'd be really interesting if they actually produced new cases at some point...
-
it'd be really interesting if they actually produced new cases at some point...
The final batch of 464's must have had new moulds as they had dual English and Spanish text moulded into the cases.
-
The final batch of 464's must have had new moulds as they had dual English and Spanish text moulded into the cases.
Do you mean the description of the ports on the backside?
-
:picard: You're not serious! Really? The back of the 464 is higher than the front, so it's closer to the camera and will appear bigger/wider. This is a primary school perspective trick.
Bryce.
-
Do you mean the description of the ports on the backside?
And the volume and power controls on the side.
-
Awww, the Curiosity Show. I grew up with that every Saturday morning :)
Do you remember the episode with the Amstrad in it?
They were playing around with Flight Path 737
-
I remember they had a 464 on, Only Fools and Horses when Rodney was learning how to programme
-
I remember they had a 464 on, Only Fools and Horses when Rodney was learning how to programme
It was a 6128 and Del Boy wiped his work.
-
and here it is
http://www.starringthecomputer.com/snapshots/only_fools_and_horses_cpc6128_2.jpg (http://www.starringthecomputer.com/snapshots/only_fools_and_horses_cpc6128_2.jpg)
-
Let me guess the caption: "It's a bloody computer, init!". :)
Bryce.
-
I remember they had a 464 on, Only Fools and Horses when Rodney was learning how to programme
Unfortunately I don't have any proof to connect "The Curiosity Show" with the Amstrad I recall seeing, so I cannot say what Amstrad it was apart from it having a Colour Monitor, though I guess to setup a game for the programme, a Disc based system could be loaded and ready to go during a commercial break.
The segment it was on was about the Flight Path 737 game. I guess they were impressed with how Simulation was becoming a more realistic in games and it just happened to be demonstrated on an Amstrad. :)
I've never been able to find a video clip of it though. :(
-
and here it is
http://www.starringthecomputer.com/snapshots/only_fools_and_horses_cpc6128_2.jpg (http://www.starringthecomputer.com/snapshots/only_fools_and_horses_cpc6128_2.jpg)
Is it just me or is the monitor in that picture not actually connected to the CPC Rodney is supposedly using?
-
Unfortunately I don't have any proof to connect "The Curiosity Show" with the Amstrad I recall seeing, so I cannot say what Amstrad it was apart from it having a Colour Monitor, though I guess to setup a game for the programme, a Disc based system could be loaded and ready to go during a commercial break.
The segment it was on was about the Flight Path 737 game. I guess they were impressed with how Simulation was becoming a more realistic in games and it just happened to be demonstrated on an Amstrad. :)
I've never been able to find a video clip of it though. :(
I honestly don't recall that episode. Here's hoping it shows up on YouTube at some point.
-
There are definitely different molds and cases. The first one was flat, and the joystick port and volume control were on the back. Later on the back was higher than the front and some ports moved to the side (so they could make the motherboard smaller - it did not need to be the full length of the case anymore).
But I don't know if these cases have the same length or not.
-
(http://zone.bomberoza.net/Autres%20ordinateurs/Amstrad/cpc464-cpc472-mars2006.jpg)
-
And the volume and power controls on the side.
As far as I know you could make this part of the moulds exchangeable, to avoid massive costs for localisation of the cases.
-
The molded text on the case would have been an insert, no need for extra tooling for different markets.
@Token (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=210): With enough CPCs you could make the nearest one look twice the length of the furthest.
Bryce.
-
So my CPC desk as a kid was measured on my friends fat key CPC and when I got my Xmas 90 model it was smaller than the width we thought, which was good as the joystick (which didn't fit) and volume were on the side.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
-
I would like to think I do know about perspectives and all that, thank you :D
However, this should take care of the perspective issue, wouldn't it?
[attachimg=1]
I'm not saying it's so, just that it's weird.
-
The bit that "tells me" that it can only be a perspective trick is the fact that the bottom one is the newer logo and there is no way, that they made the case BIGGER over time!
Bryce.
-
That's certainly logical. I wish he had put them one on top of the other... all my machines are boxed away :(
-
I would like to think I do know about perspectives and all that, thank you :D
However, this should take care of the perspective issue, wouldn't it?
There maybe another explanation, but because I did 6 years of Graphics at School, perspective is the foremost explanation I consider, but a single image taken from above isn't giving enough information because there is no side or front view.
I'm not saying it's so, just that it's weird.
The alternative is photo manipulation by simply resizing, but why would anyone do that?!? ??? And as Bryce said a newer 464 just wouldn't be in a larger box.
-
The bit that "tells me" that it can only be a perspective trick is the fact that the bottom one is the newer logo and there is no way, that they made the case BIGGER over time!
Bryce.
Having 464 from tall key to cost down, I can tell you that of them have the same length ;)
-
Having 464 from tall key to cost down, I can tell you that of them have the same length ;)
I was just waiting for someone who owns them all to bring some sense and reality into this thread :)
Bryce.
-
The bit that "tells me" that it can only be a perspective trick is the fact that the bottom one is the newer logo and there is no way, that they made the case BIGGER over time!
Bryce.
They didn't make it shorter either! In the cost-down there is a lot of empty space..
Almost enough to make an echo.... echo... echo... :picard:
-
Having a new tool made would have cost more than the plastic they'd save.
Bryce.
-
Indeed, I have a v1 tall keys one and definitely a cost down version (and a couple in-between) and I didn't remember them being different in size - just the cavernous empty space inside. But then again I never compared them...
-
just the cavernous empty space inside.
You mean "potential mod / expansion space" :)
Bryce.
-
Oh yes, that, we're talking about the same thing.
-
Having 464 from tall key to cost down, I can tell you that ____ of them have the same length
I was just waiting for someone who owns them all to bring some sense and reality into this thread
Bryce.
But was the word meant to be "All" or "None"?
-
If they were different lengths I'm sure we would have got a comprehensive list of models and dimensions.
Bryce.
-
If they were different lengths I'm sure we would have got a comprehensive list of models and dimensions.
You make us sound like a bunch of geeks.
-
You make us sound like a bunch of geeks.
What, on a retro Amstrad computer forum? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
But was the word meant to be "All" or "None"?
I let you guess[nb]My keyboard has some suden Alzheimer crisis[/nb] ;D
-
I would like to think I do know about perspectives and all that, thank you :D
However, this should take care of the perspective issue, wouldn't it?
[attachimg=1]
I'm not saying it's so, just that it's weird.
That would take care of it if you assume that all CPCs are perfectly parallel to the ground. (ie a Parallelepiped on a planar ground).
But if, as i believe, the units are tilted toward the camera (or on some kind of a small stair), then you can explain the fact that the perspective line are not the same for each CPC.
-
Seen this today and thought of this thread
The train track optical illusion that's bewildering the internet - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-35989211)
-
Seen this today and thought of this thread
The train track optical illusion that's bewildering the internet - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-35989211)
This just confirms that the average internet user is actually dumber than I previously thought. Do they not teach these things in schools anymore??
Bryce.
-
I sort of remember being taught things like this but that was long ago and isn't something that's come up too often for me to remember.
That said if I had posted the video I'd have said it was a very nice optical illusion knowing someone would've given the correct explanation eventually then I would have pretended I knew the science behind it the whole time.
-
Alas, people don't realize that it is the brain that gives them 3D vision. So all kinds of perspective type "tricks" will fool people who don't know, or who have forgotten this.
You sometimes get similar weirdness when people use an inappropriate camera lens and wonder why the straight lines they see with their eye end up as curves in the picture....
And don't start me on aspect ratio.... or lighting issues...
Mark