Vickie_M
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2001
- Messages
- 3,208
I'm Chris, Vickie's husband, posting through her account...
The captures were each originally at their native resolutions:
1080 by 1920 for the HD image
480 by 720 for the DVD image
Each was then trimmed of black border. I then scaled the images to fix the aspect ratio - video images have non-square pixels. I hope this doesn't seem "dishonest", but if the images looked stretched it would bother a lot of viewers and make them think there was something "wrong". The resulting image sizes are 1080 by 796 for the HD capture, and 720 by 306 for the DVD capture. The scaling I used was Paint Shop Pro's "bicubic" resampling.
So, now we have the two files, each in something approximating native resolution (as close as seen on a computer screen). But just having two images of two different sizes doesn't really bring home the reality of the difference in detail. So Vickie picked particular small details from various HD images and cut them out. She then located the same detail on the DVD versions of the images. The DVD detail was resized to the HD detail size using Paint Shop Pro's "pixel resize" resampling.
Why? In order to show the actual pixel detail. If I had used "better quality" resampling it would have obscured the pixel detail. The idea was to show the effect of blowing up DVD resolution images to large screen sizes. This is exactly how one would compare a DVD and a HD movie. You wouldn't watch the DVD on a 13" screen, and the HD on a 55" one and consider it a fair comparison.
Anyway, I assure everyone that these details look like this when you look at each version on the same sized screen.
The captures were each originally at their native resolutions:
1080 by 1920 for the HD image
480 by 720 for the DVD image
Each was then trimmed of black border. I then scaled the images to fix the aspect ratio - video images have non-square pixels. I hope this doesn't seem "dishonest", but if the images looked stretched it would bother a lot of viewers and make them think there was something "wrong". The resulting image sizes are 1080 by 796 for the HD capture, and 720 by 306 for the DVD capture. The scaling I used was Paint Shop Pro's "bicubic" resampling.
So, now we have the two files, each in something approximating native resolution (as close as seen on a computer screen). But just having two images of two different sizes doesn't really bring home the reality of the difference in detail. So Vickie picked particular small details from various HD images and cut them out. She then located the same detail on the DVD versions of the images. The DVD detail was resized to the HD detail size using Paint Shop Pro's "pixel resize" resampling.
Why? In order to show the actual pixel detail. If I had used "better quality" resampling it would have obscured the pixel detail. The idea was to show the effect of blowing up DVD resolution images to large screen sizes. This is exactly how one would compare a DVD and a HD movie. You wouldn't watch the DVD on a 13" screen, and the HD on a 55" one and consider it a fair comparison.
Anyway, I assure everyone that these details look like this when you look at each version on the same sized screen.