dvd on a 4k player. (1 Viewer)

[paul pisano]

My question is how will a DVD movie look in 4k.

 

[Capt D McMars]

My question is how will a DVD movie look in 4k.

most likely like a DVD on a 4K player is my guess?

 

[paul pisano]

Would one get a better picture?

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Short answer: No

Long answer: You might notice an incredibly slight variation in perceived quality watching a DVD on a 4K disc player hooked up to a 4K TV vs a DVD player hooked up to a 4K TV if the 4K disc player has a better upscaler than the TV itself does. But it’s unlikely to be noticeable for most people most of the time, and not at regular seating distances.

 

[JohnRice]

My question is how will a DVD movie look in 4k.

Another detail is, if your TV is 4K, everything you watch on it is 4K, whether native or upscaled from lower resolution. They are fixed pixel displays, meaning they technically can only display 4K. So, as Josh said, the difference comes in how good the upscaling is. If it isn't upscaled by the player, then the TV does it, and it will be a matter of which component does a better job. At most, the difference will be minimal.

 

[paul pisano]

I have a 1080 p television and not a 4k TV.

 

[JoshZ]

Another detail is, if your TV is 4K, everything you watch on it is 4K, whether native or upscaled from lower resolution. They are fixed pixel displays, meaning they technically can only display 4K. So, as Josh said, the difference comes in how good the upscaling is. If it isn't upscaled by the player, then the TV does it, and it will be a matter of which component does a better job. At most, the difference will be minimal.

This is largely correct. However, I will note that upconverting DVD is trickier than upscaling Blu-ray or other digital sources due to DVD being an interlaced video format and needing to be deinterlaced prior to scaling. Deinterlacing can be complicated and difficult to do well, especially for any content from a video source (as opposed to film) or that has an irregular cadence. Poor deinterlacing results in jaggies and aliasing, as well as loss of resolution.

Back in the days prior to Blu-ray, DVD upconversion was a hot topic, and rating the deinterlacing quality was a chief selling point of any disc player.

 

[jcroy]

This is largely correct. However, I will note that upconverting DVD is trickier than upscaling Blu-ray or other digital sources due to DVD being an interlaced video format and needing to be deinterlaced prior to scaling. Deinterlacing can be complicated and difficult to do well, especially for any content from a video source (as opposed to film) or that has an irregular cadence. Poor deinterlacing results in jaggies and aliasing, as well as loss of resolution.

Back in the days prior to Blu-ray, DVD upconversion was a hot topic, and rating the deinterlacing quality was a chief selling point of any disc player.

Inverse telecine works great at removing a 3:2 pulldown interlacing, back to 24 progressive frames per second, if the original source material was originally prepared with that 3:2 cadence for the transfer. This was common with tv content prepared for syndication and/or dvd during the 2000s decade.

On the other hand, inverse telecine is completely ineffective if the cadence is constantly changing, such as 1990s era tv stuff. A smart active deinterlacing algorithm might be able to handle this changing cadence, such as ones in MadVR.

Otherwise I've found the easiest default deinterlacer is something like yadif x 2 for transfers prepared during the 1990s era. Not ideal, but easiest to deal with.

 

[Tino]

I have a 1080 p television and not a 4k TV.

Well if that’s the case then the answer is definitively NO.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I have a 1080 p television and not a 4k TV.

The same explanation offered by @JohnRice and @Josh Steinberg still applies, but in this case your TV is 1080p only, so all material gets upscaled to that resolution -- either by the disc player, or the TV. A UHD disc player would down convert UHD discs to 1080p for your display, as well. Either a UHD disc player or BD player will perform the same 1080p upscale -- it's just a matter of which (the player or TV) does it better. Odds are that you will not be able to tell the difference, unless one is really bad at upscaling.

 

[Will Krupp]

I will note that upconverting DVD is trickier than upscaling Blu-ray or other digital sources due to DVD being an interlaced video format and needing to be deinterlaced prior to scaling.

Inverse telecine works great at removing a 3:2 pulldown interlacing, back to 24 progressive frames per second, if the original source material was originally prepared with that 3:2 cadence for the transfer.

The vast majority of filmed content released on commercial DVD in the last 20 years is 'soft' telecine. It's contained on the DVD at 24fps with flags to tell the player to add interlacing before it's sent to the TV (since all TVs were 30fps/60i when the DVD specs were written.) For 95% or so of DVD's on the market, there is no need to reverse telecine or deinterlace anything. The only filmed content that is interlaced is older TV or VHS/LD masters with interlaced frames added at the source.

This was done as a space saver, but it has the added benefit of being viewable at 24fps once blu-ray players hit the market. Turning the 24fps setting to "auto" on DVDs turns the interlace flags off and allows you to watch them at 24fps on a blu-ray player if it was encoded that way, as most are. You still need a TV capable of viewing them at 24fps, but the source doesn't need de-interlacing or reverse telecining (is that even a word or did I just make it up?) In fact, if the disc is 'hard' telecine at 30/60i then the 24fps setting won't matter as it plays back whatever is on the disc.

That being said, my old Sony blu-ray player does a hell of a better job upscaling DVDs than my new Sony 4k player does. I keep the old player just for watching DVDs that I haven't been able to upgrade. I let the player upscale to 1080p and have the Oled do the final lift to 4k.

 

[jcroy]

The vast majority of filmed content released on commercial DVD in the last 20 years is 'soft' telecine. It's contained on the DVD at 24fps with flags to tell the player to add interlacing before it's sent to the TV (since all TVs were 30fps/60i when the DVD specs were written.) For 95% or so of DVD's on the market, there is no need to reverse telecine or deinterlace anything. The only filmed content that is interlaced is older TV or VHS/LD masters with interlaced frames added at the source.

This was done as a space saver, but it has the added benefit of being viewable at 24fps once blu-ray players hit the market. Turning the 24fps setting to "auto" on DVDs turns the interlace flags off and allows you to watch them at 24fps on a blu-ray player if it was encoded that way, as most are. You still need a TV capable of viewing them at 24fps, but the source doesn't need de-interlacing or reverse telecining (is that even a word or did I just make it up?) In fact, if the disc is 'hard' telecine at 30/60i then the 24fps setting won't matter as it plays back whatever is on the disc.

There exists 2000s era dvds where the 3:2 cadence "hard telecine" was left intact on the dvd releases, and NOT encoded as 24 fps progressive frames (with "soft telecine" flags). This is where inverse telecine works losslessly.

One prominent example is many (if not all) of the 15 seasons of the CBS show Criminal Minds over 2005-2020, where the dvds left the 3:2 "hard telecine" intact in the video.

 

[Will Krupp]

There exists 2000s era dvds where the 3:2 cadence "hard telecine" was left intact on the dvd releases, and NOT encoded as 24 fps progressive frames (with "soft telecine" flags). This is where inverse telecine works losslessly.

One prominent example is many (if not all) of the 15 seasons of the CBS show Criminal Minds over 2005-2020, where the dvds left the 3:2 "hard telecine" intact in the video.

Yes, as I said, some DVD material may encoded at 30fps/60i at the source, especially TV transfers that were originally finished in the video realm. They are, fortunately, rare. Are you saying that your blu-ray player reverse telecines those to 24fps?? Every one I've ever had simply plays those back at 30/60 fps regardless of the setting. Which one do you have?

 

[jcroy]

Yes, as I said, some DVD material may encoded at 30fps/60i at the source, especially TV transfers that were originally finished in the video realm. They are, fortunately, rare. Are you saying that your blu-ray player reverse telecines those to 24fps?? Every one I've ever had simply plays those back at 30/60 fps regardless of the setting. Which one do you have?

I rarely use my bluray player for watching dvds.

I connect a computer to the tv via hdmi, and play dvd *.vob rips using a software player like VLC or media player classic with MadVR. It is easy to see how the original dvd is encoded, by playing the video one frame at a time sequentially on VLC with the deinterlacing turned off.

As far as I can figure out, my big screen tv appears to be playing 60 frames per second "refresh rate".

I figured out how to force the tv screen to deliberately play at exactly 24 progressive frames per second "refresh rate", for which the motion was very flickering. So it is obvious that the tv's default "frames-per-second refresh rate" was much higher.

At this point, I don't know how the tv screen is dealing with 24 progressive frames-per-second in order to fill the "60 frames-per-second refresh rate". If I had to guess, the easiest scenario is playing one frame three times and playing the next frame two times .... ad infinitum. (ie. 12 x 3 + 12 x 2 = 60).

The easiest case to understand, is a screen which can play 120 frames-per-second refresh rate. In this case, 24 progressive frames-per-second can be accomodated by playing each individual progressive frame five times (ie. 24 x 5 = 120 ).

 

[Will Krupp]

Okay, the fact that you aren't using a blu-ray player to watch DVD's makes much more sense. I'm just not sure how that fits in with Paul's original question, then (?)

As far as I can figure out, my big screen tv appears to be playing 60 frames per second "refresh rate".

If your TV has a 60hz refresh rate, then EVERYTHING is ultimately playing at 60hz, regardless of what you're feeding it. TVs, unlike computers, can ONLY play back at their native refresh rate. I don't understand why you're going to all the trouble to feed a different frame rate to your TV that it then has to RE-interlace (anyway) for you to see it. You'd be better off to watch it the way it was encoded, honestly.

I figured out how to force the tv screen to deliberately play at exactly 24 progressive frames per second "refresh rate", for which the motion was very flickering. So it is obvious that the tv's default "frames-per-second refresh rate" was much higher.

Again, that's because you're still watching it at 60hz. you're just making the computer process it to change the frame rate and then making the TV process it again to get you back to 60. By the way, I'm sure you know this already, but the 24fps rate is really 23.98fps and we round up (60hz is actually 29.97fps/59.94hz for comparison) If you're really forcing it to play at "24" even MORE processing needs to be done in order for you to ultimately see it.

If your TV isn't at least 120hz, there's really no point in trying to force anything other than 30/60. It swear to you that it won't change anything for the better.

But again, to answer Paul's original question (I think) It IS possible to get a "good to very good" DVD picture on a 1080p (or even a 4k) TV so long as the disc was encoded progressively (which, again, most ARE) and the player you're using has a good upscaling chip. The fact that my (much) older player does a better job tells me that newer machines (including 4k players like my Sony x700) don't prioritize DVD upscaling as so few people are likely watching them.

 

[jcroy]

Again, that's because you're still watching it at 60hz. you're just making the computer process it to change the frame rate and then making the TV process it again to get you back to 60. By the way, I'm sure you know this already, but the 24fps rate is really 23.98fps and we round up (60hz is actually 29.97fps/59.94hz for comparison) If you're really forcing it to play at "24" even MORE processing needs to be done in order for you to ultimately see it.

The 24 fps refresh rate forced case, appears to be an entirely different tv hardware mode. (I haven't figured out how to force it to a 25 frames per second refresh rate).


This 24fps "forced" refresh rate also happens whenever I reboot the dvr cable box. After the initial dvr boot up sequence is done and the screen is on, the initial video appears to be at a 24 fps refresh rate with the flickering. Hitting the "info" button on the tv's remote control, it explicitly states it is 24 fps refresh rate.

It takes about another 15-20 seconds for the tv screen to automatically change explicitly into a 60 fps refresh rate mode where the flickering is gone. At the moment of changeover from 24 -> 60, the screen glitches for a second. Then hitting the "info" button after this changeover, it explictly states it is 60 fps refresh rate.




In the previous scenario of forcing a 24 fps refresh rate (by hand on a computer) I mentioned in a previous post, there was no automatic changover from 24 to 60 refresh. The only way for such a changeover in this particular scenario, is when I forced the tv hardware to explicitly change to 60 frames per second refresh rate by hand.

 

[Will Krupp]

This 24fps "forced" refresh rate also happens whenever I reboot the dvr cable box. After the initial dvr boot up sequence is done and the screen is on, the initial video appears to be at a 24 fps refresh rate with the flickering. Hitting the "info" button on the tv's remote control, it explicitly states it is 24 fps refresh rate.

Must be something to do with your cable box. Can you look in the settings to see what it's outputting? The 24hz refresh rate you're seeing is what is being fed to the TV from the box, not what the TV is playing. TVs are fixed panel displays, they physically can't refresh at other than their native rate.

 

[jcroy]

Must be something to do with your cable box. Can you look in the settings to see what it's outputting? The 24hz refresh rate you're seeing is what is being fed to the TV from the box, not what the TV is playing. TVs are fixed panel displays, they physically can't refresh at other than their native rate.

The video setting on the dvr is set to 1080p. Though it does not state what the refresh rate is. Reading through the manuals and googling the dvr model and other similar models by the same manufacturer, there is very little information about the refresh rates.

With that being said, the actual video content from network television channel feeds appears to be 1080i. The news channels, sports events, and weekday afternoon soap opera tv shows appear to be more than 24 frames-per-second. (ie. The tv news and sports does not look like a "movie", and looks more like the daily soap opera video quality).

I don't think I have ever encountered any tv feeds which was actually in 1080p. Hitting the "info" button on the tv's remote control, will almost always say the video is 1080i.

 

[Robin9]

most likely like a DVD on a 4K player is my guess?

. . . is the correct answer. I still watch DVDs a lot and they are more than watchable via my 4K player. Most of them are obviously standard definition but I don't find that unacceptable.

 

[Worth]

As with anything else, it depends largely on the transfer and encoding. On my 75” 4K set, some DVDs look terrible and some look very good. Screen size and seating distance will make a much bigger difference than whether either the player or set is 4K.