eg - i have my dvd player plugged into my amp using component leads, the amp then upconverts* this picture to its HDMI out so I only have to have one HDMI cable running up to my projector and i plug all my other sources into my amp which spouts them out the HDMI
*it also upscales the picture, which is slightly different inthat it uses processing to turn an standard definition picture into a "pretend" hi-def one
So tell me, a DVD player with HDMI output, is this merely a convenience thing for cabling as it won't be transferring HD pictures because you need an HD-DVD/bluray for that? Or, does it still enhance the picture from standard DVD
Whilst the folk who invented it will tell you its a 'convenience' - many end users will tell you HDMI is a big inconvenience.
HDMI is a video and audio pipeline - its not in itself a guarantee of a decent video image.
It only carries the signal from A to B in a digital format; the theory goes that keeping everything Digital is better than having to convert to Analogue and back again to use the type of video connections we've all been used to for the past twenty or more years.
Just as you can 'see' on-screen differences between DVD players that use S-Video, SCART or Component output sockets there are differences between DVD players that use HDMI Output sockets - they are not all created equal.
No - there are lots of low cost HDMI equipped DVD players that produce fairly humpty video signals.
Assuming the DVD player has a decent Video Processing engine and assuming the DVD player manufacturer paid the same attention to its Analogue and Digital Outputs and assuming your Display device has Analogue and Digital Inputs (again of equal quality) then in theory the Digital (HDMI) signal ought to look sharper than the Analogue signal; that's a lot of assumptions.
Where you have Analogue and Digital Outputs on a source device plus Analogue and Digital Inputs on your Display its always worth trying both connectivity options before you assume one is better (or inferior) to the other.