Progressive scan comments... (1 Viewer)

[Jason_Solack]

Hello everyone,
Just wondering if anyone would like to comment on the differeces in picture quality when going from 480i to 480p. I have never actually seen 480p but I have heard the difference from 480i is very noticable. Also if anyone has a line doubler that has taked progressive scan rate higher I am interested in finding out if there is a real big difference between 480p and 720p. Thanks for any input!!
Jason
My DVD collection
------------------
Jason Solack

 

[Nicholas A. Gallegos]

Ummmmmm.....
When you have a progressive-scan DVD player connected to a digital monitor, the player's line doubler will override the TV's built-in line doubler. So, you'll still be getting 480p.
Even if the TV's doubler wasn't disabled, you wouldn't want the TV's inferior line doubler to be interfering. The line doublers built into HD-ready TVs aren't truly progressive; they interpolate resolution instead. In other words, the line doubler actually tries to create resolution that wasn't even present in the source to begin with. This is why line doublers look like crap on analog picture sources like cable TV.
------------------

 

[Jason_Solack]

Thanks for the response!
I understand how the progressive scan players work, I was just wondering about first hand accounts with picture quality improvements from 480i to 480p.
I am considering buying a progressive player and digital TV and I really want to know if it is a big improvemnt in picture quality.
Thanks!
------------------
Jason Solack
My DVD Collection

 

[Captain Spaulding]

I can only speak from my experience with the Sony 36XBR450. This TV has Sony's "Digital Reality Creation" and built-in 3:2 pulldown. I've tried both Sony and JVC progressive DVD players with this set. In both cases the 480p video was noticeably inferior to the regular 480 interlaced picture. While most folks say that the majority of built-in line doublers in TV's are inferior to the 480p output of most DVD players, it is not the case with this Sony model.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Some people see a huge difference between 480i and 480p. Others wonder what the big deal is (there have been many posts here expressing that sentiment).
The differences becomes more noticeable as the size of the screen increases. IMO, progressive scan provides numerous subtle improvements in detail, clarity and lack of noise that, on a cumulative basis, make for a superior image. But it's not like you can point to some part of the image and say, "Ah-hah! That's the 480p, and it blows away the 480i!"
I've always found the difference most pronounced on discs that aren't enhanced for 16:9, since the reduction in visible line structure helps compensate for the lack of additional resolution that anamorphic enhancement provides.
M.

 

[Michael Reuben]

In both cases the 480p video was noticeably inferior to the regular 480 interlaced picture.

To be accurate, the "regular" picture isn't "480 interlaced". It's 480 progressive -- but the progressive is being generated by the doubling circuitry in your Sony TV. So what you're really comparing are two different versions of 480p.
M.

 

[BrianBHD]

Actually, I thought the XBR450 doubled 480i to 960i, not 480p. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Jim A. Banville]

Sony's DRC converts 480i to 960i or 480p.
I have compared 3 different progressive players against the line doubler in my Sony 53" RPTV and I saw VERY MINOR improvements with the progressive players.

 

[Darryl_B]

From Nicholas: The line doublers built into HD-ready TVs aren't truly progressive; they interpolate resolution instead. In other words, the line doubler actually tries to create resolution that wasn't even present in the source to begin with. This is why line doublers look like crap on analog picture sources like cable TV.

Nicholas, I don't think this is true, for the most part. Most internal line doublers in TV's have motion-adaptive deinterlacing. What most lack is 3-2 pulldown detection and appropriate deinterlacing for film-sourced material, which is included in most progressive-scan players.
The difference noticed between 480i input and 480p input (properly calibrated TV inputs and using the same DVD player) will most likely not be a "night-and-day" difference if one is currently using a TV with a built-in line-doubler. You should, however, notice less artifacting when watching DVD movies (film-sourced material) due to the 3-2 Pulldown Detection. If the dvd player incorporates an adaptive deinterlacer (such as Faroudja chip or Si503), then one may also see some improvement with video-sourced material as well.
Likewise, I've only read about awesome performance of Sony's DRC in the Wegas. Because of the inclusion of the new Cinemotion 3-2 Pulldown Detection in the newer models, I wouldn't be surprised if many didn't find a noticeable difference between using a 480i player vs. a 480p player with the xbr450. I personally couldn't tell the difference using an interlaced player with the new xbr 53" widescreen.

 

[Jason_Solack]

That is really interesting that you guys say that there is not a big difference. I have always heard that there is a big jump in quality when going from 480i to a true 480p (not upconverted to 1080i). I have noticed that lines like windows in building or patterns on shirts seem to shimmer with 480i, does this go away when viewing in 480p.
Thanks for all of your input!
------------------
Jason Solack
My DVD Collection

 

[Garry I]

To the above question, i have Miracles by HKL and it shimmers especially noticed on the shoulders of jackets.
That is on my 32inch philips 100hz tv. The player is interlaced. So am i watching it at 480i or 480p?

 

[Michael Reuben]

I have noticed that lines like windows in building or patterns on shirts seem to shimmer with 480i, does this go away when viewing in 480p.

Not always, but it is dramatically reduced. A lot depends on the source material.
M.

 

[Eugene Hsieh]

Well, it's better, but it's not like "OMG I COULD KISS MY DVD PLAYER IT IS SO DAMN MUCH BETTER!". It's hard to see a huge difference on my TV, especially with well done anamorphic titles, partially because it's "only" a 34" (Toshiba) direct view, and it already has an internal line doubler.
However, I see a reduction in some types of artifacting but testing is ongoing at the moment. My player has 3:2 pulldown support.
On the other hand, moving from my old interlaced one was noticeable to my new progressive scan player even in interlaced mode. Mind you I bought a "low end" player 3 years ago and I am comparing it to my current Panasonic RP91, which by all accounts is a highish end mid cost player. But that said, my old interlaced one is still more than acceptable.
The biggest jump for me was a new TV after my low end 27". No comparison, but no big deal since it it cost only 1/5th of my current TV.
Watching any DVD on my 27" can be painful at times. However, with my 34" TV I can use any of my three DVD players (interlaced or not) and be sufficiently happy with the image quality in most cases. But yes, now the artifacts that I had to deal with before are starting to irritate me more, because they are less obvious with my new Panny.
------------------
Eugene Hsieh, VisorCentral FAQ Editor
1000 km on a tank of gas??? Check out the Prius and drive the future now!
[Edited last by Eugene Hsieh on August 01, 2001 at 02:37 PM]

 

[Darryl_B]

quote: From Jason: I have noticed that lines like windows in building or patterns on shirts seem to shimmer with 480i, does this go away when viewing in 480p.[/quote]
Like Mike said, not always. It depends on the source material. Some material is more difficult to handle than others. Likewise, it also depends on the player. Some players will deal with things like this better or worse than others. Not all progressive-scan players with 3-2 Pulldown Detection are created equal. Overall, though, I think it's safe to say any player with 3-2 Pulldown Detection will do better than a TV's internal line doubler without any film mode deinterlacing at all (for film-sourced material).
[Edited last by Darryl_B on August 01, 2001 at 03:38 PM]

 

[Michael Reuben]

quote: Some material is more difficult to handle than others. [/quote] To expand on Darryl's point: Some "shimmer" is right there in the original film-to-video transfer, which means there's no way to eliminate it. Off the top of my head, the DVDs of The Crying Game, Outland and Snake Eyes are good examples. It's probably no accident that all three are recycled LD transfers (and the first two probably came from composite masters).
M.
[Edited last by Michael Reuben on August 01, 2001 at 04:34 PM]

 

[Carlo_M]

My PT-47 tv does doubling and 3:2, so does my RP91 player. I've found both to be very comparable, but on the rare occasions that there are shimmeries or motion artifacts on the TV's doubler/3:2, they are mostly straightened out by the RP91's electronics. Don't know why that is, but from now on I will be using the RP91 for progressive output.
------------------
My dealer of choice (especially if you live in So-Cal, I highly recommend them): www.yawaonline.com

 

[Tom Sullivan]

A good DVD to see the difference is Star Trek Insurrection. Look at the roof tops on all the
buildings panning by in the
beginning of the movie. You'll see tons of jaggies in 480i on an HDTV. Put your progressive
scan dvd player to 480p and
the jaggies disappear. You'll see smooth edges. Once you see the difference there's no
going back.

 

[Carlo_M]

Tom,
How ironic you mention that title. I was just watching it on my PT-47 this morning. Because the PT-47 does some deinterlacing and 3:2, the roofs don't shimmy so much. There was oh-so-miniscule amount, but sure enough, switching to the RP91 progressive cleared it up. But if your TV set does good deinterlacing/3:2 you may not need to upgrade your DVD player immediately.
------------------
My dealer of choice (especially if you live in So-Cal, I highly recommend them): www.yawaonline.com