[pjr918bmw]

I have read thread after thread about upscaling DVD players and native resolutions of panels, deinterlacing, progressive, hdmi v component etc etc etc etc.

Can somebody who REALLY knows explain why the following happens ( no disrespect to anybody)

Samsung 950 DVD, Toshiba 37WL56, HDMI via Denon AVCa11XV ( though same result without amp in path)

Picture when DVD set to standard NTSC or PAL is average ( PAL bit better), at every level of scaling above this the picture noticeably improves. I'm standing 5 feet away - too close to view but you can obviously see any "errors"

The "best" resolution is without doubt 1080!

WHY? IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME!

The native resolution of the panel is 720 - so how can this be? The Toshiba manual says the best input is 1080I, but surely whatever it gets at 1080i it scales to 720 and if it's getting it from the DVD it's been scaled once already!
There's no more info, in the scaled 1080i signal than in the standard one?

So why is the picture way better than non scaled?

TV is via Sony Freeview and component feed to TV (converter) - PQ is about the same as DVD player on standard feed ( ie non scaled)

Yes, I know it shouldn't bother me but it just doesn't seem logical!

[pjr918bmw]

I presume I've bored everybody to death or its been asked before.....

Can't believe it's because no one knows!

[Jammyb]

let us know when this thread is open to uneducated idle speculation and guesswork

[WGLOVER]

Originally Posted by pjr918bmw

I presume I've bored everybody to death or its been asked before.....

Can't believe it's because no one knows!

I think many of us are puzzled as to which settings are best but can't get a clear answer.
I can't get my head around the de-interlacing bit.
I understand interlacing, but can't figure out what happens to the second frame. I understand it is converted to progressive scan, but if you have 1080 lines interlaced on a 720p TV, where do all those extra lines go. Are they chopped off, no, are they squashed, squished or what?

I have perused the internet and found all sorts of stuff, but am still none the clearer.

[PJTX100]

Originally Posted by Jammyb

let us know when this thread is open to uneducated idle speculation and guesswork

It sounds like the display is doing a better job of deinterlacing than the player to me. But that's just idle speculation.

[Greg Mandel]

Right, so you're taking a standard DVD, upscaling it in the player, sending it to the screen which is then scaling it back down to the screen's native resolution.

You're basically doing supersampling here, I'd I would say that the image processing done in the upscaling/downscaling is giving you a more pleasing (not necessarily a more accurate) picture. It may be the case that the TV starting with a much larger upscaled image from the player is able to process it down to a perfect size to match the resolution of your screen.

It may be the case that without upscaling from the player, the screen is doing a much more limited form of image processing to slightly upscale to it's native resolution.

Without knowing exactly what processing is done at both the player and screen ends in these various scenarios, you're not going to get a definative answer, so you'll have to make do with some guesswork.

On the whole, you generally get a better result by downscaling from a larger image to a smaller one, but as you've already upscaled from a lower resolution source, you're already interpolating data that isn't there, so it's
all down to the image processing that's going on.

[pjr918bmw]

Cheers Greg, Super sampling - now theres one I hadn't heard!

Just a small point the picture is actually better - I understand what you mean about appears better - but it is better. There is less pixellation, speckles whatever, its not just smoother - looks more "detailed.

Agree, i think, with the rest of your comments!

Right if nobody else wants to play - now open to more pi** taking and general Friday merriment!

[alnwrd]

try this

http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/artic...AN/765/v/1/sp/

[bsuttie]

Well since it's Friday I'll stick my head above the parapet.
Firstly I have the same DVD player as you, but with the Toshiba 42wlt66 and find I get best results with 1080i HDMI between the two, and the TV on "Exact Scan".

Ignoring de-interlacing and concentrating on scaling only I am happy that this works best for me as only one scaling is going on (in the DVD Player).

If your panel was 720 pixels high, and if it had an "Exact Scan" mode, then possibly 720p would be a better option for you and give the benefits of one scaling only.

However I don't think this is the case and so you are stuck with two scalings - unless you only scale in the TV.

So my general conclusion like others is that the scaler in the DVD player is better than that in the TV.

What I find really interesting is that material which is originated HD, even if it is totally post produced and transmitted in SD looks so much better when upscaled back to HD than anything originated in SD.

regards

Brian

[PTjak]

The permutations and combinations of joining different DVD players with different displays via different lengths and types of different cables will inevitabily lead to display variation at different resolutions. There's even the human equation...what looks great to my eyes could look like crap to others.

The multiple/different brands of scaling chips combined with various types of deinterlacers along the DVD player & display-type signal path is certainly not going to give uniform results. Notwithstanding some tech guru who can illustrate my point, I guess my conclusion is that there isn't a model result...you just tweak to find what looks best to you, tweak again to confirm, then set it, forget it and enjoy the results.

I have a 3910 and Panny AE900 connected by a 12m Kimber Kable HDMI...the best display to me on my Stewart Firehawk is 480p eventhough the display is 720p native. Some of my friends disagree with me when I jump to 1080i, they like that better....

Wasn't it in the Matrix when the kid at the Oracle's flat said "do not try and bend the spoon, that's impossible, instead, try to realize the truth, there is no spoon"