Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
...
"Ed" wrote:

On Sky news they just showed a Denon amplifer thing that supposedly
upscales DVDs and other sources to Hi Def quality.

What does it really do? Or rather, what does it do to the pictures
coming from a standard dvd player to supposedly make them HD

There's only one or two HD-ready *CRT* TVs, and I've not seen any on
the High Street, so almost all HD-ready TVs being sold at the moment
are flat-panels. The ones that I've seen don't seem to have 720 or 1080
lines, but some other number like 768 or 1024 lines.

When showing a standard definition source, a flat-panel will
format-convert the source to its native definition. But when you take
advantage of the upscaling option of one of these DVD players, the
source is format-converted to 720 or 1080 lines, and then
format-converted again by the flat-panel to its native definition - two
format conversions, each blurring the image slightly. It doesn't make
sense.

The upscaling DVD players have HDMI digital outputs - so that's a real
advantage, if you can use it - but it'd be better to leave the player
set to standard-definition output.

--
Dave Farrance

Just my two pence worth.
I'm far too poor to afford a fancy new panel, but a friend of mine got a 37"
or 39" HDTV plasma last year, and when I went around so he could show off,
it looked frankly, bloody terrible... DVDs looking blocky and dirty.

He went and bought a DVD player with an inbuilt upscaler and it made the
world of difference. DVDs look great again now. As has been mentioned
above, I guess it depends on the panel, and how good the onboard upscaler
is. I guess if you buy a panel and realise SD looks poor, it would be
better to buy a standalone upscaler so you could run Digital TV/DVD/Games
consoles through it too.... or just had a thought.... do some of these DVD
players have scart passthrough, which could also benefit from the upscaler?
I guess not, as they just, as the name implies, pass through, but would be
great if they did!

V1N.

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

loz wrote:

It is clear my DVD does a better job of scaling than the TV.

And I don't use either the TV or the DVD to do the scaling. I use an
external scaler, a Lumagen, and it makes pretty much everything look
fantastic on my HiDef Ready DLP RPTV. Some things, depending on the
original quality, look near enough as makes no difference as good as the
true HiDef demos you see running in Dixons and Currys, coming off custom
PCs. Then again, the cheapest Lumagen will set you back near a £1000,
and more if you get it professionally calibrated to your displays. And
the latest ones are set for about four grand when they're released in
the near future. Which is probably more than your TV and DVD combined,
so not for everyone, probably.

Regards

Mark

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

Matt Overton wrote:
Well, not really true, that's a bit unfair when you consider the scale of
budgets vs Audience ratings. Plus the Americans are a bit mental and spend
money shooting everthing on film whether they need to or not. Even sitcoms
are done on 35mm, never mind 16 or super 16! I don't think the BBC could
justify spending the licence fee doing everthing on film.

Is the cost difference between 16mm and 35mm so great? Compared to the
cost of the entire production?

Mind you, when watching in SD there's little to complain about in the
picture quality of most current BBC drama (in terms of film noise and
grain).

Some older stuff is really shocking. Outdoor film inserts on studio
(VT) comedy are often scratchy, grainy, damaged, and flickery. I know
telecine has improved, but some things look like they were dropped on
the floor, danced on, and _then_ telecinied!

For entire dramas on film, it's quite apparent (usually on ITV, but
often BBC Four) when they've re-transferred film stock recently
compared to using an old composite transfer from a couple of decades
ago. I wonder how often the original film doesn't exist? Or is it just
cost that prevents a new transfer?

I suppose the word "repeats" has a bad name, because when you mention it
over here it stirs memories of Dads Army, Vicar of Dibley and Only Fools and
horses again and again and again and again.......

'nowt wrong with that! I'm amazed how well some episodes of Porridge
and (in a tamer way) Dad's Army stand up - there's lots of similar aged
comedy that doesn't work anymore, which justifies (to me) why some
things are repeated endlessly, while others never are.

There are thousands of progs out there which should be repeated and never
even make it to UK Gold. Where's the good stuff, wasted sitting in a dusty
archive because to bring it out would upset the repeat percentages,
especially against the audience ratings they would be expected to get.

See above.

or provide an example?

Cheers,
David.

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"loz" wrote:

"Dave Farrance" wrote:
But when you take
advantage of the upscaling option of one of these DVD players, the
source is format-converted to 720 or 1080 lines, and then
format-converted again by the flat-panel to its native definition - two
format conversions, each blurring the image slightly.

I would have agreed that this arguement makes sense.
However, having recently bought an upscaling DVD I am surprised how much
better the PQ is when fed a 720p upscaled picture from the DVD compared to a
"normal" 576p one.
This is down to the quality of the scaler built into the DVD compared to the
one in the TV.

I guess so. Two replies say that the upscaler gives a better result so
practice trumps theory - but I am surprised. You still have to use the
TV's upscaling as well.

On my HD LCD it doesn't scale the 720p image to fit the 768 pixels, but
leaves a 24 pixel black border on each side.

Hang on. 768 is the number of lines. Do you mean that it leaves a gap
at the top and bottom? If not, then the TV is upscaling.

--
Dave Farrance

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
...
"loz" wrote:

"Dave Farrance" wrote:
But when you take
advantage of the upscaling option of one of these DVD players, the
source is format-converted to 720 or 1080 lines, and then
format-converted again by the flat-panel to its native definition - two
format conversions, each blurring the image slightly.

I would have agreed that this arguement makes sense.
However, having recently bought an upscaling DVD I am surprised how much
better the PQ is when fed a 720p upscaled picture from the DVD compared to
a
"normal" 576p one.
This is down to the quality of the scaler built into the DVD compared to
the
one in the TV.

I guess so. Two replies say that the upscaler gives a better result so
practice trumps theory - but I am surprised. You still have to use the
TV's upscaling as well.

On my HD LCD it doesn't scale the 720p image to fit the 768 pixels, but
leaves a 24 pixel black border on each side.

Hang on. 768 is the number of lines. Do you mean that it leaves a gap
at the top and bottom? If not, then the TV is upscaling.

Yes. It leaves a gap.

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

I see. So that's how it's done.

The 720p digital stream resolution is defined as 1280x720.

But HD-Ready displays with a similar resolution are actually either
15:9 1280x768 displays or 16:9 1366x768 displays.

So in order to display 720p, the 15:9 displays put black bars at the
top and bottom, and the 16:9 displays put a black frame all the way
around wasting 12% of the display.

So I do wonder why the heck they didn't make the displays 1280x720?

--
Dave Farrance

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
...
I see. So that's how it's done.

The 720p digital stream resolution is defined as 1280x720.

But HD-Ready displays with a similar resolution are actually either
15:9 1280x768 displays or 16:9 1366x768 displays.

So in order to display 720p, the 15:9 displays put black bars at the
top and bottom, and the 16:9 displays put a black frame all the way
around wasting 12% of the display.

So I do wonder why the heck they didn't make the displays 1280x720?

Because they use the same panels with PCs where 768 is a common resolution.
Saves making 2 resolutions of panels.

Loz

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"loz" wrote:

"Dave Farrance" wrote

The 720p digital stream resolution is defined as 1280x720.
But HD-Ready displays with a similar resolution are actually either
15:9 1280x768 displays or 16:9 1366x768 displays.
So in order to display 720p, the 15:9 displays put black bars at the
top and bottom, and the 16:9 displays put a black frame all the way
around wasting 12% of the display.
So I do wonder why the heck they didn't make the displays 1280x720?

Because they use the same panels with PCs where 768 is a common resolution.
Saves making 2 resolutions of panels.

Maybe that's it. But it doesn't seem a very satisfactory explanation.
Widescreen PC displays appeared after TV widescreen IIRC. I would have
thought that they'd give priority to the TV resolution because that's
where the majority of the sales would be.

768 lines was common in the form of 4:3 1024x768 PC displays, but
they'd have had to add extra modes to the graphics hardware to handle
the greater width of the widescreen displays anyway, so why not switch
to 720 lines? The Windows and other desktop environments adjust
themselves to whatever the display driver requires so there's no
problem there.

--
Dave Farrance

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
...


Because they use the same panels with PCs where 768 is a common
resolution.
Saves making 2 resolutions of panels.

Maybe that's it. But it doesn't seem a very satisfactory explanation.
Widescreen PC displays appeared after TV widescreen IIRC. I would have
thought that they'd give priority to the TV resolution because that's
where the majority of the sales would be.



when they started making lcd screens, the market was pcs - almost no tvs.
now the factories exist - built at a cost of billions, they are in no rush
to build more.



--
Gareth.
A french man who wanted a castle threw his cat into a pond.
http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/dsbmusic/

Upscaling to Hi Def
 

"the dog from that film you saw" wrote:

"Dave Farrance" wrote

Maybe that's it. But it doesn't seem a very satisfactory explanation.
Widescreen PC displays appeared after TV widescreen IIRC. I would have
thought that they'd give priority to the TV resolution because that's
where the majority of the sales would be.

when they started making lcd screens, the market was pcs - almost no tvs.
now the factories exist - built at a cost of billions, they are in no rush
to build more.

That was true of 4:3 LCDs, but not of 16:9 LCDs, I think. Also, plasma
displays are 768 lines rather than 720 lines, and those are for TV
only. I wonder if there's another explanation for providing 768 lines?

--
Dave Farrance