Originally Posted by SpiffX
Awesome explanation Max. Greatly appreciate it.
I am one of the unfortunate few that see both the 24fps judder and the Soap Opera Effect. However, for some reason I haven't noticed it either at the movies or on my SXRD. Maybe that's because I haven't been paying as much attention as I was at BB trying to make sure I didn't see anything I didn't like on the VT50...
, if you don't like movies or BD, what do you watch? Only TV broadcast?
I tend to wait for movies to come out on BD and then watch them in my HT with frame interpolation to smooth out the motion. Fortunately for me, these days, movies tend to be released on BD within about 6 months of their theatrical release.
Originally Posted by SpiffX
, forgot to ask on my previous post/quote: What do you consider is "the best implementation of frame interpolation [currently] available"?
Of the various implementations of frame interpolation I've seen, the best thus far has been Sony's implementation on the HX929 and VW95, but they're still not flawless/perfect. I'll have to go and check out the Panny's for myself to see how they fare.
Originally Posted by SpiffX
Apologies for not responding to your earlier post Rahzel. I can't remember if I had it in 96Hz. However, what Max explained pretty much describes what I saw. It was not 3:2 pull down where "every so often, there's a jerk/jump in the pan, as if the camera has a twitch at regular intervals.". It was exactly like the 24fps judder Max described where "the same pan in the movie stutters all the way across the screen."
I am thinking that plasma frame interpolation causes less of a SOE than LED LCD frame interpolation.
I am just wondering what technology my SXRD uses. Given that it is just a projected LCD, it should have the same SOE as an LED LCD, but it doesn't...
I'm not too sure what display you have, but there are varying levels of frame interpolation. Consider it in this manner:
Film is shot in 24fps. If a display can refresh the images at say, a true 240Hz (fairly common for LCD's these days), then to play back the 24fps, the display can simply show each frame 10 times. This would retain the original/native 24 fps.
If you choose to enable frame interpolation though, you might be able to choose between say, Light, Medium, and Strong.
With the Light setting, instead of the original
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
the display now compares frames 1, 2 and 3 and creates new intermediate frames 1a between frames 1 and 2, frame 2a between 2 and 3 etc. and now it shows
1 1 1 1 1 1a 1a 1a 1a 1a 2 2 2 2 2 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 3 3 3 3 3 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a...
At this setting, the display is only adding 1 additional created frame between the original frames.
With the Medium setting, it might now create:
1 1 1a 1a 1b 1b 1c 1c 1d 1d 2 2 2a 2a 2b 2b 2c 2c 2d 2d 3 3...
where it is now creating 4 frames for every original frame
With the Strong setting, it might now create:
1 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 1g 1h 1i 2 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 2f 2g 2h 2i 3 3a 3b...
where the display is now creating 9 interpolated frames for every original frame.
Even 240Hz sets don't actually create 9 interpolated frames for every original frame but you get the general idea. The more interpolated frames, the greater the soap opera effect, as it emulates a much higher frame rate.
One of the reasons slightly older Sony LCD TVs were considered to have better creative frame interpolation than Samsung LCDs was due to the fact that at the lower settings, the interpolation was only enough to reduce 24fps stutter for most folks, but not high enough that they thought it looked too... soap opera like? The Samsung LCDs on the other hand, even at their lowest interpolation settings created enough frames to make it objectionable to folks who don't like the soap opera effect. That didn't really matter to me though, as I wanted the strongest interpolation available (i.e. the greatest number of created/interpolated frames for the highest apparent frame rate).
If I could find a display that could creatively interpolate to resemble 120Hz or higher without artifacts, I would get it. The problem is processing power. At this current time, no one does 'per-pixel' creative frame interpolation because it would use way too much processing power to do that in real time for 24 times 1920x1080 images per second. Because of this limiting factor, they use 'tricks' to decide what part of the image is important and concentrate the processing on keeping THAT in focus.
This is why you can occasionally see interpolation artifacts for instance, when a person or object like a vehicle moves across a complex textured field (bushes, chainlink fences, or anything with a busy pattern). You might have noticed a blurred 'halo' outline around the moving object as it passes the complex texture. With 'per-pixel' interpolation, they would map each pixel as opposed to mapping regions of pixels and we wouldn't have those artifacts.
Since it's a matter of increased processing power and/or better algorithms, it's only a matter of time.
When the Panny VT20 first came out, I asked Panasonic reps to include creative frame interpolation in future models. They originally said that creative frame interpolation isn't needed on plasma TV's because they inherently have better motion handling than LCDs and that frame interpolation was a crutch for LCD technology to try to improve motion handling. I then explained about 24 fps stutter and how some folks like me don't like it and after seeing frame interpolation on LCD sets, we want plasma picture quality with frame interpolation (and Samsung was implementing it). Glad the folks at Panny listened.