Slightly unusual scaler requirements - can this be done cheaply?

[NicolasB]

Right.... The background to this is that I'm sort of half considering the possibility of buying one of the new Sony SXRD rear pro TVs. One of the factors involved in whether I buy it or not will be whether I can achieve the external scaling effects I want - or, more precisely, how expensive it will be to achieve them. It may be the case that an HTPC setup will do most of what I want fairly cheaply, or it may be that a stand-alone scaler is needed. Either way, this has to be cheap. If it's going to cost £1000 or more, it's simply not going to happen.

A little more background....

I'm not proposing to buy an HD-DVD or BluRay player for a little while yet, as I'm waiting for the 2nd or 3rd generation players to come along. (They may have ironed out the bugs by then!). If I do buy the SXRD screen I'll definitely be getting Sky HD soon afterwards, though, and I will eventually get some sort of hi-def disc player.

I would guess that nearly all of the actual hi-def material I'll be viewing for the foreseeable future will be 1080i (rather than 720p) and from an originally-progressive (e.g. film) source. I don't ever watch sport; cinema movies will definitely be progressive; I'm not clear if hi-def TV shows are generally filmed progressively or as native 1080i - if they're actually native 1080i then my requirements list below may have to change a little.

At least to begin with, all hi-def material will be 50Hz, so 2:2 pulldown is particularly important.

The SXRD displays' internal scaling is apparently fairly good, but their deinterlacing is supposedly a little bit patchy.

My ideal device would therefore have the following features:

1) It should be able to deinterlace 1080i by an "always weave" method - i.e. it should be locked into film mode rather than constantly trying to guess whether it's processing film or video.

2) For SD material it should be possibly to lock it into 2:2 pulldown mode for 50Hz sources and into 3:2 pulldown mode for 60Hz sources.

3) If I choose not to lock it into film mode for SD, then it should be possible to lock it into video mode, and deinterlacing of SD video sources when thus locked needs to be good quality - per-pixel motion-adaptive or better.

4) It needs to output 1080p.

5) It needs to be HDCP compliant.

6) It needs to have both HDMI and component inputs. (I suppose it would be quite nice to have the option to upgrade to SDI later, but that's not at all important).

7) This is the trickiest one: I want to have the option to view SD material at as near native resolution as is possible without messing up the aspect ratio. In other words, I don't want it to be scaled up to full screen: I want it to be displayed letterboxed. The SXRD screens don't allow this directly, so the external device will need to scale the signal enough to get the correct aspect ratio (but no more), then output a 1080p signal that consists of the slightly-scaled SD signal in the middle and the rest of the screen filled in black. It needs to be able to do this at both 50 and 60Hz.

Likely output resolutions would be:

PAL 4:3 - 768x576.
PAL anamorphic - 1024x576
NTSC 4:3 - 720x540
NTSC anamorphic - 853x480

Incidentally, please do not waste your time trying to persuade me that I don't actually want this. I know you want your SD scaled up to fill the whole of your screen and you find it utterly incomprehensible that anyone else could ever not want that. I don't care. I have seen SD on a large screen upscaled about as well as it can be upscaled, and I, personally, don't like it. Trying to persuade me otherwise makes about as much sense as me trying to persuade you that a type of food you hate so much it makes you feel sick just thinking about it actually tastes really good: it may, indeed, taste good to me, but it doesn't to you, and never will; that's life. So just let it go.

Okay, then; suggestions?

[Piers]

I think I have understood what your wishes are. Sadly, £1,000 max budget won't satisfy it - unless others know better.

[VirusKiller]

How about a used Crystalio VPS-2300 which are now under £1000? Let me make quite clear that I have a silver late model 2300 in superb condition that I am thinking of selling. I believe my comments below are accurate, but others on this forum will be able to confirm or refute.

Originally Posted by NicolasB

1) It should be able to deinterlace 1080i by an "always weave" method - i.e. it should be locked into film mode rather than constantly trying to guess whether it's processing film or video.

Basic weave is all the Crystalio does with 1080i.

2) For SD material it should be possibly to lock it into 2:2 pulldown mode for 50Hz sources and into 3:2 pulldown mode for 60Hz sources.

Yes. It will auto-detect 2:2 or 3:2 material. You can also force it into the harder-to-detect 2:2 mode if necessary. Note that it cannot genlock 24 or 48Hz out of 60i 3:2 material, but I don't think you specified that as a requirement.

3) If I choose not to lock it into film mode for SD, then it should be possible to lock it into video mode, and deinterlacing of SD video sources when thus locked needs to be good quality - per-pixel motion-adaptive or better.

You can force video mode deinterlacing (DCDi is the default SD video mode algorithm).

4) It needs to output 1080p.

It can.

5) It needs to be HDCP compliant.

The later models with HDCP board are.

6) It needs to have both HDMI and component inputs. (I suppose it would be quite nice to have the option to upgrade to SDI later, but that's not at all important).

It has two configurable component/RGB inputs.
It has a single DVI-D for HD sources (so could use HDMI adaptor). It will not accept 480i or 576i over DVI, but if I've read your post correctly your SD inputs will be component?
The digital output is a single DVI-D (so could use HDMI adaptor).
It has 3x SD-SDI inputs.

7) This is the trickiest one: I want to have the option to view SD material at as near native resolution as is possible without messing up the aspect ratio. In other words, I don't want it to be scaled up to full screen: I want it to be displayed letterboxed. The SXRD screens don't allow this directly, so the external device will need to scale the signal enough to get the correct aspect ratio (but no more), then output a 1080p signal that consists of the slightly-scaled SD signal in the middle and the rest of the screen filled in black. It needs to be able to do this at both 50 and 60Hz.

Likely output resolutions would be:

PAL 4:3 - 768x576.
PAL anamorphic - 1024x576
NTSC 4:3 - 720x540
NTSC anamorphic - 853x480

If I understand you correctly, I think this might be possible. The Crystalio can cope with custom geometries and aspect ratios. Given an output signal of, say, 1080p, you can zoom the source to any number of lines.

I'll be honest in that I've found the UI a pain (it's very slow) and it takes some getting used to. Once it's set up though, it's capable of excellent results with SD sources. I'd don't have a 1080i source yet.

[hornydragon]

Originally Posted by NicolasB

Right.... The background to this is that I'm sort of half considering the possibility of buying one of the new Sony SXRD rear pro TVs.

Nicholas you have been doing this for at least 3 years.....

[redpavlos]

Originally Posted by NicolasB

Likely output resolutions would be:

PAL 4:3 - 768x576.
PAL anamorphic - 1024x576
NTSC 4:3 - 720x540
NTSC anamorphic - 853x480

Interesting approach. The native source resolutions of active lines for broadcast full format PAL (digital component) are somewhat different.

PAL 4:3 - approx 702x576
PAL anamorphic - approx 702x576

Yes, they're the same, and in both cases source pixels are not square. Horizontal or vertical scaling is inevitable.

NTSC horizontal pixel counts are same as for PAL. Vertically, I believe its around 480 in both cases. Similarly, source pixels aren't square.

I believe there may be some displays that do what you what.

I'm also one for preserving the correct aspect ratio, but with a good panel and/or scaler it can look very good indeed filling the screen so far as necessary, with borders in appropriate places. But probably necessary to spend more than you want on a good scaler to achieve what you want, or maybe use an HTPC.

[NicolasB]

Originally Posted by hornydragon

Nicholas you have been doing this for at least 3 years.....

Well, yeah... that's because, for the past three years, there hasn't been a single decent, affordable hi-def display on the market. The new Sony devices are the first even vaguely sensibly-priced devices that have 1920x1080 resolution and can accept a native-resolution digital feed. (Excluding front-projection systems, that is - I have, with some regret, ruled them out for a number of reasons that needn't concern us here). I'm hoping that the technology has finally reached the point where I actually feel able to buy something - but I might still end up waiting for SED.

Originally Posted by VirusKiller

How about a used Crystalio VPS-2300 which are now under £1000? Let me make quite clear that I have a silver late model 2300 in superb condition that I am thinking of selling. I believe my comments below are accurate, but others on this forum will be able to confirm or refute.

Thank you for the entirely impartial advice. I shall mull it over at my leisure. Do you know for sure if the Crystallio is actually able to output a letterboxed picture in the way I'm describing? Doing custom resolutions isn't necessarily enough - you need to able to vary the picture resolution and signal resolution independently of one another.

Originally Posted by redpavlos

Interesting approach. The native source resolutions of active lines for broadcast full format PAL (digital component) are somewhat different.

PAL 4:3 - approx 702x576
PAL anamorphic - approx 702x576

Yes, they're the same, and in both cases source pixels are not square. Horizontal or vertical scaling is inevitable.

NTSC horizontal pixel counts are same as for PAL. Vertically, I believe its around 480 in both cases. Similarly, source pixels aren't square.

PAL is 720x576, and NTSC is 720x480. As you say, the pixels are not square. The resolutions I'm suggesting will (on a display which has square pixels) give all four possible image formats (PAL/NTSC, 4:3/widescreen) the correct aspect ratio while scaling as little as possible to do it (i.e. scaling in only one direction).

Originally Posted by redpavlov

I'm also one for preserving the correct aspect ratio, but with a good panel and/or scaler it can look very good indeed filling the screen so far as necessary, with borders in appropriate places. But probably necessary to spend more than you want on a good scaler to achieve what you want, or maybe use an HTPC.

While one obviously needs to get the aspect ratio correct (or it just looks stupid) filling the entire scren is precisely what I want to avoid at all costs. Like I said, it's no good trying to persuade me that I want to fill the whole screen really, because I don't. I know you and virtually every other person in the world does want to, but I'm weird. You just have to accept that.

[redpavlos]

Originally Posted by NicolasB

PAL is 720x576, and NTSC is 720x480. As you say, the pixels are not square. The resolutions I'm suggesting will (on a display which has square pixels) give all four possible image formats (PAL/NTSC, 4:3/widescreen) the correct aspect ratio while scaling as little as possible to do it (i.e. scaling in only one direction).

Of the 720 clock intervals in each line for PAL and NTSC in the broadcast world, only about 702 are 'active'. Those near the edges contain no picture information. In practice, the amount of horizontal blanking varies somewhat between sources.

While one obviously needs to get the aspect ratio correct (or it just looks stupid) filling the entire scren is precisely what I want to avoid at all costs. Like I said, it's no good trying to persuade me that I want to fill the whole screen really, because I don't. I know you and virtually every other person in the world does want to, but I'm weird. You just have to accept that.

You'd be surprised how many people don't care about getting the aspect ratio right, and do just want to fill all of the screen. I'm not one of them. And I don't think what you are trying to do is weird, it's a valid personal preference

[tryingtimes]

tough one this.
An HTPC will do all the AR stuff, but not the HDTV processing.

I'm not sure that Crystalio I will do the AR stuff in the way that you need, and even though it does do bob and weave on HD, it doesn't do 3:2 pulldown. It can passthrough though just in case the TV does a better job.

It's definitely a struggle to do this for under £1000 unless you let the TV handle the HD stuff and just focus on the SD AR control.

[VirusKiller]

Originally Posted by tryingtimes

I'm not sure that Crystalio I will do the AR stuff in the way that you need, and even though it does do bob and weave on HD, it doesn't do 3:2 pulldown. It can passthrough though just in case the TV does a better job.

I had a quick play with my Crystalio last night. Signal resolution to my AE900 was a constant 1280x720p50. I then zoomed to "source height" (a pre-defined zoom option) and, voila, Harry Potter in a letter box...

Now I wasn't able to count the lines, but it certainly looked to me that there were 576ish active lines, in the middle of my 720 line display, completely surrounded by black. The 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratio buttons on the remote give you easy switching of the aspect ratio of the letter-boxed image - the number of active lines is constant and only the width of the letter-boxed image changes.

I'm assuming this is exactly what you want?

The Crystalio can be set to automatically output 50Hz for PAL sources and 60Hz for NTSC sources ("dynavout").

Regarding 1080i deinterlacing, I thought that 3:2 pulldown was exactly what Nic was trying to avoid. My info (from Liam@progressive) is that it is basic weave, not bob.

[togad]

Originally Posted by VirusKiller

The Crystalio can be set to automatically output 50Hz for PAL sources and 60Hz for NTSC sources ("dynavout").

Damn and blast. I was just about to launch my new "active good bacteria" yoghurt drink with that very same name.

/me fires the Marketing Director.

[VirusKiller]

[NicolasB]

Originally Posted by VirusKiller

I had a quick play with my Crystalio last night. Signal resolution to my AE900 was a constant 1280x720p50. I then zoomed to "source height" (a pre-defined zoom option) and, voila, Harry Potter in a letter box...

Now I wasn't able to count the lines, but it certainly looked to me that there were 576ish active lines, in the middle of my 720 line display, completely surrounded by black. The 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratio buttons on the remote give you easy switching of the aspect ratio of the letter-boxed image - the number of active lines is constant and only the width of the letter-boxed image changes.

I'm assuming this is exactly what you want?

That sounds right, yes.

Originally Posted by VirusKiller

The Crystalio can be set to automatically output 50Hz for PAL sources and 60Hz for NTSC sources ("dynavout").

Regarding 1080i deinterlacing, I thought that 3:2 pulldown was exactly what Nic was trying to avoid. My info (from Liam@progressive) is that it is basic weave, not bob.

The terminology may possibly be getting the better of me, here. What I'm after is a device that, when fed something that started off as film and was then telecined to 1080i, will as closely as possible reconstruct the original 1920x1080 film frames.

For 50Hz sources this is simply "always weave" deinterlacing, so, as long as the device can be locked into doing this (rather than constantly guessing on the fly whether it's supposed to be weaving or doing per-pixel motion-adaptive) that's sufficient.

Unfortunately I don't think the SXRD rear pro TVs are able to accept a 24 or 48Hz input signal, so a 60Hz 1080i stream will probably still have to be output as 60Hz 1080p.

I'm actually not sure what's the best deinterlacing method under those circumstances, perhaps someone can tell me.... If you simply always weave then you will have some frames on the screen made by weaving together two fields from two different original film frames, which will give you some combing; whereas if you reconstruct the original film frames you'll end up showing half the frames twice and half of them three times, which will be worse from the point of view of non-juddery motion.

[NicolasB]

Btw, a related question (that possibly I ought to ask on another forum - if advised to do so, I shall): assuming one wanted to try and do at least the SD stuff on a PC, what would be needed? If we start with a Conroe processor, 2GB of memory, and an HDMI-compliant video card (assuming one can find one), is any other hardware needed besides a video capture card? What capture card is the currently-favoured model? (They used to recommend Sweetspot cards the last time I was paying any attention to the HTPC market, but that was a while ago!) Is it possible or desirable to try and decode Sky or Freeview inside the PC rather than capturing output from an STB? Is it preferable to use the PC as a DVD player as well as a scaler? And what software is needed?

Am I also correct in thinking that there is still no practical way of capturing an HD video stream on a PC, even if the source is not HDCP-encrypted?

[VirusKiller]

To be clear, the Crystalio doesn't have a 1080i "film mode" per se. It has basic weave deinterlacing and that's it. It ain't ever going to have proper 2:2 or 3:2 pulldown. Only you will know if that is going to be an issue or not. There will be less visible combing if you perform plain weave with HD 60Hz telecined material than SD material, but how much less I don't know.

I think the problem is that once you throw HD into the mix, things start getting very expensive, particularly if excellent SD video processing is a given. The "cheapest" SD/HD option with excellent SD video performance would seem to be £2000 for the VP50 and even that might not meet your "letterbox" needs. Lumagen VisionPros are cheaper (and available used), but for me are let down by lack of diagonal smoothing for SD video.

[tryingtimes]

Originally Posted by NicolasB