"Frame Interpolation": Tell me if I've got this right - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 36Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 198 Old 09-27-2016, 08:19 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
"Frame Interpolation": Tell me if I've got this right

I've owned a Benq W1070 for two years now, and its performance has far exceeded it's cost. Colors are great and it's been dependable. Two minor cons to the W1070 for me are black levels and the loud fan.

But the main con to me is jittery/shuttering pans. This occurs on new and very old movies whenever there is camera panning.

Now doing some research I see the W1070's lack of Frame Interpolation is the reason. Frame interpolation would add or predict an image's motion between frames to lessen the shuttering. However frame interpolation has it's own side-effects like the soap opera effect or adding artifacts.

My list of questions:
So If I'm getting this right Frame Interpolation appears to be a band-aid for the real problem. I then have to ask what is the real problem? Is it that blu-rays are operating at too low frames-per-second? (What are they 24/30fps?) Does 4K UHD take care of this problem? I read in a few places that they are 60 fps? OR something else? I haven't been to a commercial theater for well over 5 years and they don't have that problem I'd assume...correct?
DaleNixon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 198 Old 09-27-2016, 08:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Do you see this judder in the theater?
Verge2 is offline  
post #3 of 198 Old 09-27-2016, 09:34 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
Do you see this judder in the theater?
In mine, yes. In a commercial theater... don't remember, it's been years since I've been in one. Doubtful though... don't think people would put up with that.
DaleNixon is offline  
 
post #4 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 690 Post(s)
Liked: 281
Thanks for addressing the subject (despite my recent suggestion there is still no specialized thread for the issue of Frame Interpolation (FI) / Motion Interpolation / Motion Blur Reduction here at the AVS. )


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
So If I'm getting this right Frame Interpolation appears to be a band-aid for the real problem.

IMHO, "band-aid" is an understatement for what I consider to be one of the most important (r)evolutions in image processing and improvement, which therefore had been the major argument for me to purchase an Optoma HD 83(00) a couple of years ago, thanks to its "Pure Motion Engine" (with equal performance available in the current Optoma HD 50)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
Is it that blu-rays are operating at too low frames-per-second? (What are they 24/30fps?) Does 4K UHD take care of this problem? I read in a few places that they are 60 fps? OR something else? I haven't been to a commercial theater for well over 5 years and they don't have that problem I'd assume...correct?

The problem is of a basic nature. Traditionally, movies are shot with film cameras and a fixed speed of 24 frames per second (fps). During horizontal or vertical camera pans the image gets blurred and any kind of detail is lost in the blur (in contrast to our own eyes that "record" images at higher fps).


FI started back in the late 1990's when Philips Dr. Haan had the brilliant idea for European TVs (and their 50 Hz flicker problem) to not just repeat two identical frames but create a new one between two images, resulting in "Digital Natural Motion".


Ever since this kind of technology has significantly improved and been adopted mostly by flat screen manufacturers (e.g. Sony's "MotionFlow").


Currently all media (e.g. DVD, Blu-ray and UHD Blu-ray) just store the original 24 fps recording, so it's up to the capabilities of the display (flat screen or front projector) to apply Motion Blur Reduction for the program content - or not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
However frame interpolation has it's own side-effects like the soap opera effect or adding artifacts.

"Soap Opera Effect" is a term coined by self-proclaimed purists which IMHO try to tell (I think "dictate" is more appropriate) us how we all should watch program content.


First we had the big "letterbox" debate (the purists won), now we have the big FI debate (purists try to win again, argue again with "director's intent" but never consider what renowned directors like Stanley Kubrick and James Cameron said on the issue of "letterbox" and in the case of Jim Cameron and now on "High Frame Rate").


If "Soap Opera effect" were a bad thing, than what we watch every day in our real lives is a "soap opera" (not too far from the truth, I'd guess...), because the kind of "natural motion" we watch with the SOE is the kind of motion our eyes witness every day. I prefer to call it "Natural Motion Effect" instead.


Now, creating a new image in the fraction of a second to provide a transition between two frames and calculate the image detail otherwise lost in that transition because of the blur is such an accomplishment that I never get tired to marvel at.
However, fast moving objects in front of a fixed background is still somewhat difficult material that yields a somewhat obscure area around the fast moving object (but I experience that mostly in my "Pure Motion" setting "high").


My recommendation stands that prior to purchasing any front projector the user should try the FI the projector provides - and judge for him- or herself.


If I were to make a choice to either forfeit 3D or FI capability I would reluctantly but definitely forfeit 3D.


Frame Interpolation has enriched my home theater experience to the point where I don't even mind watching a DVD instead of a Blu-ray. In my particular case the natural motion provided by my front projector adds a level of realism and immersion which is almost equal to the increased image detail and resolution provided by a Blu-ray disc.


P.S. Here is an interesting AVS thread on the issue of "High Frame Rate" which inevitably is somewhat related to Motion Interpolation: SMPTE Hollywood Frame-Rate Presentation
DaleNixon likes this.

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde

Last edited by Frank714; 09-28-2016 at 02:35 AM.
Frank714 is offline  
post #5 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:32 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
In mine, yes. In a commercial theater... don't remember, it's been years since I've been in one. Doubtful though... don't think people would put up with that.
Juddering is very obvious in commercial theaters, especially during pans of landscapes and fast action.

Don't let anyone here tell you that frame interpolation isn't good or even necessary. Even 60hz is way too low a native frame rate. And yes, they do put up with it, because it's obvious as H_ll. Go to a theater, you'll see it, guaranteed.

All you need to cure what ails you is SVP. I use it on my w1070 for great justice.

24p is terrible and its deleterious effects on image clarity and smoothness is well known. 24 frames per second only looks OK when things are moving VERRRRY sloooowly. This forces director to limit their panning speeds to excessive amounts in order to mask the problem. But it is there, and many times they cannot. 24p would be smooth(er) with a 360 degree shutter but that was impossible with physical film. However it's so blurry that directors even in the digital age leave the shutter speed at 180 degrees or less. It's a tug of war between motion blur (increases with shutter angle), and judder. But it's a tradeoff, because at 360 degree shutter angle at 24 frames per second there is waaaaay too blurry, even though mathematically it is the appropriate amount of motion blur to eliminate judder. So you're stuck with judder for things to remain clear at all. In short, it sucks. Higher frame rate reduces many of these issues drastically, including frame interpolation.

Even Kubrick back when filming 2001 was frustrated by the limits that 24p was enforcing on his vision of the film. He literally couldn't do many of the panning shots that he wanted. Plenty of directors don't like it for this reason, because it needlessly (in the digital age) restricts their creativity.

When you take a 24p movie and interpolate it to 60hz, you've suddenly increased the shutter angle from 180 to slightly over 360, but you've simultaneously reduced its magnitude by the same factor. Suddenly you have more motion samples (less temporal aliasing : meaning judder. meaning objects jump from one position on the screen to another suddenly) and your eyes are happy.

AVS is full of people who claim they hate higher frame rates but then will happily buy a TV based on how well it renders sports broadcasts which are recorded and transmitted at sixty frames per second. Maybe someone should tell them when they watch a hail mary touchdown at 60 frames per second they are getting a soap opera effect! They will run for the hills.

Last edited by RLBURNSIDE; 09-28-2016 at 05:45 AM.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #6 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 690 Post(s)
Liked: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
Even Kubrick back when filming 2001 was frustrated by the limits that 24p was enforcing on his vision of the film. He literally couldn't do many of the panning speeds that he wanted. Plenty of directors don't like it for this reason, because it needlessly (in the digital age) restricts their creativity.

I didn't know that, yet. I was wondering just yesterday whether it would be okay to watch 2001 with FI (I absolutely feel comfortable watching Silent Running with FI considering Doug Trumbull made that film - and quite in contrast to the UK BD distributor's recommendations not to apply FI...), but the obvious "director's intent" seems to suggest I should definitely go for it.


Was it actually that technical limitation in the making of 2001 that inspired Doug Trumbull to create Showscan?
GordoSan likes this.

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde
Frank714 is offline  
post #7 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
c.kingsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
AVS is full of people who claim they hate higher frame rates but then will happily buy a TV based on how well it renders sports broadcasts which are recorded and transmitted at sixty frames per second. Maybe someone should tell them when they watch a hail mary touchdown at 60 frames per second they are getting a soap opera effect! They will run for the hills.
Based on the wide variety of responses to frame interpolation, I believe this is a YMMV technology. The problem with frame interpolation is that it is creating something from nothing. In the case of bluray, the source material only has 24 frames per second. An algorithm is then applied to make an educated guess on the missing pixels. This approximation creates artifacts. The difference with a 60Hz broadcast is that it feels natural because the material was there to begin with. When I (and others) view frame interpolated content, it comes off uneasy and feels wrong in the same way that robot faces do. This phenomenon is known as the uncanny valley.
KMFDMvsEnya likes this.
c.kingsley is offline  
post #8 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 06:05 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Go ahead and use SVP for everything.

I watched the original Wizard of OZ and Star Wars films with it recently, it's like giving them both a massive facelift. Interstellar in particular was much better than in the movies, which was terrible for judder. Trust me I was like, man this is obvious, I don't understand why people tolerate it. Probably because of peer pressure / brainwashing to think that smoothness is somehow a bad thing. Your mind loves smoothness, it's the default setting.

The latest version of SVP is quite good and offers good artifact removal. I use the paid version, in fact I was a backer on Indiegogo.

Of course it's not perfect but with high bitrate rips you can get a very, very good result. On Star Wars episode IV, for example, the Death Star Run on a super high bitrate Bluray rip has no artifacts that I could see and it was a WAY better experience. Like seeing it for the first time again. It's a whole new ballgame when you're not starving your mind for pixels and forcing it to engage its suspension of disbelief instead of focusing on the action as if it were in front of you.

I haven't tried it on 2160p content so anyone running at that res might need a better GPU than an NVidia 970. But anyway, there's no way to rip UHD Blurays yet. As soon as there is, you can betcha that I'm going to be watching my (legally purchased) movies from my hard drive. Sadly there is no UHD TV or projector that offers FI.

The only scenario therefore that SVP doesn't cut it, is when you want to just throw in a 3D Bluray and watch it. Ripping can be a royal pain and raw rips take up a lot of space. But SVP makes an even more impressive difference for 3D content. Everything looks "solid" and real. It's really a stunning improvement. And FI built in to the TV or projector I admit is way easier and more convenient than SVP. Not sure how good the quality is. Personally I think the ability to get upgrades to improve the quality over time is a good reason for software-based interpolation instead of hardware.

Bottom line is FI is for 1080p content for now, only. So if judder bothers you, then hold off on UHD Blurays until FI becomes available at 4K or someone cracks AACS 2.0
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #9 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 06:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2053 Post(s)
Liked: 1033
Here's my suggestion if you hate judder... And not everyone will agree with me because it gets more complicated if you are looking for something beyond good FI.

Buy a Sony 45ES and turn Motionflow to 'Low'. You'll see a smidgen of SOE until you get used to it but pans will be smooth. IMO low isn't very aggressive and you won't see many artifacts.

Most people take the 'I turn that $@%# off' approach to FI so it's hard to get any reviews. But Sony's implementation is the best I've personally seen.

With the 45ES you'll also have roughly twice the contrast of your current DLP and the Sony is pretty much dead silent unless you are a few inches away from it.
DaleNixon and GordoSan like this.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #10 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 06:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 690 Post(s)
Liked: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post
The problem with frame interpolation is that it is creating something from nothing.

But, if I may say so, that's essentially the same thing classic "line-doublers" and upscalers did and do to improve image resolution and I never heard of anybody who seriously rejected it.


It never ceases to amaze me how advanced and good Frame Interpolation has become. But good projectors with that feature allow settings from "low" to "high" which gives users a wide array of choices, including switching FI "off".

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde
Frank714 is offline  
post #11 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 07:19 AM
Member
 
lunnar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I was really not sure the first time I've tried Frame interpolation 5 year ago, but the panning judder was becoming an issue for me so I tried.

yea at first the image seem like a live video feed. but you have to understand that you now see lot more frame then before so it is normal.

Took me like 1 week to stop seeing this so call 'soap opera effect'.

for me FI as been one of the best thing that ever come in my home theater. I've now been using it for 5 years on all content(movie, game, tv) I have an Epson 8700UB projector and set it to medium FI.

My only problem now is when I go to the theater or to a friend house where there is no FI. I am now having a very hard time watching anything without a smooth FI.

but yea the best advice is go see it for yourself. and remember that you brain will eventually forgot the "live video effect" you see at first.
JeffR1 and Frank714 like this.

-Phil
"Tempo is everything, perfection unattainable..."
lunnar is offline  
post #12 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 09:08 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post
Based on the wide variety of responses to frame interpolation, I believe this is a YMMV technology. The problem with frame interpolation is that it is creating something from nothing. In the case of bluray, the source material only has 24 frames per second. An algorithm is then applied to make an educated guess on the missing pixels. This approximation creates artifacts. The difference with a 60Hz broadcast is that it feels natural because the material was there to begin with. When I (and others) view frame interpolated content, it comes off uneasy and feels wrong in the same way that robot faces do. This phenomenon is known as the uncanny valley.
The uncanny valley applies to people, not framerates. Plus, it's not a even scientific theory (not falsifiable).

And people do complain about higher native framerates, which do not "create something" from nothing. Remember The Hobbit? People were complaining about that like crazy. Except, well, aside from the fact that the 48fps wasn't interpolated one bit.

As I said in my previous post, SVP's frame interpolation is quite good, with artifacts masking enabled. Is it as good as a high native framerate? No, definitely not. But is it much smoother and overall a better watching experience for those who cannot stand motion judder? Absolutely. It's a compromise. Let's not make perfect the enemy of good. Interpolated video is better than extreme low framerate.

Yes it is processed but there is a ton of digital processing going on for every single pixel on the screen, so that's not a valid argument, and in fact video codecs encode the deltas between successive frames. And it looks quite good.

Every single DVD / Bluray / UHD Bluray / stream / youtube / etc you own or have ever watched "creates something from nothing".

For it to not do so, it would have to have each frame be a keyframe, and this would be equivalent to showing a succession of TIFF files. All video data except for keyframes is interpolated based on motion vectors. Those motion vectors can be exploited to re-sample the original motion vectors to different timestamps, ergo interpolation is not really so different than how basic every day video decoding works. In fact it's what I'm working on now, exploiting info stored in the compressed video stream and generating new position samples by extrapolating positions based on bicubic filtering (instead of linear). This more closely mimicks acceleration which may be a big reason why linear interpolators have some weird motion artifacts. Work in this area is ongoing...

I work on video codecs for high framerate VR every day, and even linear sample interpolation is often used to great effect. You probably don't even notice the difference between real 90fps and fake 90fps (from 60fps source material). The more source framerate (samples) you have the less motion artifacts there are.

This is a big reason why, for example, doubling the framerate from 60 to 120fps in HEVC only increases the file size by 25% instead of 100%. Because the motion vectors get smaller and you don't need 2x the number of keyframes (since the absolute magnitude of changes between neighbouring frames is diminished).

How can that be, if something isn't "created from nothing?" Think about it.
Anodynic likes this.

Last edited by RLBURNSIDE; 09-28-2016 at 09:13 AM.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #13 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 09:19 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunnar View Post
I was really not sure the first time I've tried Frame interpolation 5 year ago, but the panning judder was becoming an issue for me so I tried.

yea at first the image seem like a live video feed. but you have to understand that you now see lot more frame then before so it is normal.

Took me like 1 week to stop seeing this so call 'soap opera effect'.

for me FI as been one of the best thing that ever come in my home theater. I've now been using it for 5 years on all content(movie, game, tv) I have an Epson 8700UB projector and set it to medium FI.

My only problem now is when I go to the theater or to a friend house where there is no FI. I am now having a very hard time watching anything without a smooth FI.

but yea the best advice is go see it for yourself. and remember that you brain will eventually forgot the "live video effect" you see at first.
I agree completely.

I only became used to it after a week or so, too. But once you go smooth, you can't go back. It ruined movie watching at the box office to a large extent. With my trusty old w1070 I get a better movie experience than most cinemas. Plus most cinemas have pretty poor black levels so they can't even compete on that.

Being able to pause the movie, make another drink or snack, and go to the bathroom without missing anything, is actually my primary reason. Plus the cost.

I've often wondered how good FI is in TVs and projectors compared to SVP.

3D movies in particular at the cinema I find terrible. But watching it at home ripped to SBS or O/U and then increasing it from 24p to 60p is a huge difference in the realism of 3D. Headaches go away, the effect is just awesome. I'm building a passive 3D dual projector setup so I can watch full res Blurays with the left and right eye presented at the same time and at 60fps, plus at double the lumens, that will be a good upgrade for me.
JeffR1 likes this.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #14 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 12:29 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
All you need to cure what ails you is SVP. I use it on my w1070 for great justice.
Thanks for the link. I will definitely try this. Does the movie have to be ripped onto the hard drive? Normally I play movies from the original disc with MPC-HC.
DaleNixon is offline  
post #15 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 12:33 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMartin56 View Post
Here's my suggestion if you hate judder... And not everyone will agree with me because it gets more complicated if you are looking for something beyond good FI.

Buy a Sony 45ES and turn Motionflow to 'Low'. You'll see a smidgen of SOE until you get used to it but pans will be smooth. IMO low isn't very aggressive and you won't see many artifacts.
Thanks for the recommendation. That was going to be one of my next questions: "What price point does "good" FI come into play?" Although I'm hoping to get a few more years out of my W1070 before upgrading.
DaleNixon is offline  
post #16 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 12:38 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank714 View Post
If I were to make a choice to either forfeit 3D or FI capability I would reluctantly but definitely forfeit 3D.
Yeah...I agree. If there were a choice between a projector's FI fixing the problem or having 3D, I'd go without 3D as well.
DaleNixon is offline  
post #17 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2053 Post(s)
Liked: 1033
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
Thanks for the recommendation. That was going to be one of my next questions: "What price point does "good" FI come into play?" Although I'm hoping to get a few more years out of my W1070 before upgrading.
You can get what I consider 'bad' FI for a lot less.

I can't stand DLP due to RBE. So I bought a cheap Epson 2040 to play around with (Back porch use etc). Now its contrast ratio is not all that great but otherwise you have to give them credit for piling in a bunch of features like FI and their version of Reality Creation (an electronic sharpness enhancement). But their FI is way too aggressive IMO even at the lowest setting and I can see a ton of artifacts with it on. The Sony handles it much better.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #18 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 690 Post(s)
Liked: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
That was going to be one of my next questions: "What price point does "good" FI come into play?"
I'd say around 1,200 $ (i.e. Optoma HD 50). I'm still using the Optoma HD 83(00) from 2011 and upon arrival of the HD 50 for my customer/s I compared the FI performance of the HD 50 to my HD 83. It's identical and IMHO rather excellent.

Given the absence of a dedicated forum devoted to FI here at the AVS (IMHO it's really hard to believe but true), I'd like to see what kind of FI the projectors of JVC and Sony have to offer in comparison. I'm getting the JVC entry level X5000 (Euro designation) hopefully soon to compare performance, but of course, the JVC doesn't belong into the price category of projectors we are talking about here.

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde
Frank714 is offline  
post #19 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:19 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
In mine, yes. In a commercial theater... don't remember, it's been years since I've been in one. Doubtful though... don't think people would put up with that.

Are you feeding your projector 24p then? Or 60 from a streaming box?
Verge2 is offline  
post #20 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2053 Post(s)
Liked: 1033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank714 View Post
I'd say around 1,200 $ (i.e. Optoma HD 50). I'm still using the Optoma HD 83(00) from 2011 and upon arrival of the HD 50 for my customer/s I compared the FI performance of the HD 50 to my HD 83. It's identical and IMHO rather excellent.

Given the absence of a dedicated forum devoted to FI here at the AVS (IMHO it's really hard to believe but true), I'd like to see what kind of FI the projectors of JVC and Sony have to offer in comparison. I'm getting the JVC entry level X5000 (Euro designation) hopefully soon to compare performance, but of course, the JVC doesn't belong into the price category of projectors we are talking about here.
It's funny you should mention JVC. I'd LOVE to try one. But I can't get a straight answer regarding how well it handles FI so I'm not going to risk it. All the reviews just skip over the subject. I can't really blame them because it can be subjective but come on... Do your job.

I have a Samsung plasma. Nice TV and everyone says plasma handles motion well. But I think it looks like a juddery mess with 1080p/24 and I hate watching movies on it. It has FI but it's implemented poorly IMO.

I want good FI AND good contrast so I feel like I have to settle for 5000:1 ish and Motionflow with the Sony. I'm sorry but native motion resolution on a LCD/SXRD based display is not going to cut it. And while the SVP sounds appealing I have over two hundred blurays and my setup is complicated enough as it is.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #21 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:45 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
DaleNixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
Are you feeding your projector 24p then? Or 60 from a streaming box?
Blu-ray discs playing in a 1-year old 3D Sony BD player via HDMI. So should be 24p, right?
DaleNixon is offline  
post #22 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rekbones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somers, CT
Posts: 1,791
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 479 Post(s)
Liked: 248
My Mitsubishi HC7900dw has a very good FI and I use it all the time set on its highest setting. The main draw back is the idiot directors that think shaky cam is a good thing and FI just can't handle it. I very rarely go to the theater but I did see Star Trek Beyond in an IMax and the motion judder was unbearable, can't wait to see this at home with FI.

"Smart enough to know better, to old to care" ------ Dedicated Home Theater, Mitsubishi HC7900DW Projector, 110" 16:9 Jamestown screen with variable power masking for CIW 2.50:1 to 16:9, Marantz 7009 with 7.1.4 Atmos with Ohm mains,3 DIY Subs (2 15" (1 ported, 1 sealed and a 12" 4th order bandpass), 1 DIY butt kicker, Custom Built HTPC, 10TB DroboFS NAS
rekbones is offline  
post #23 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 01:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2053 Post(s)
Liked: 1033
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
Blu-ray discs playing in a 1-year old 3D Sony BD player via HDMI. So should be 24p, right?
Most blu-ray players can do the pull down internally and could be sending 1080p/60 to the projector. Easiest way to tell is to have the display report what signal it is receiving. The button on the remote for this varies.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #24 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 02:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2053 Post(s)
Liked: 1033
This article has a decent overview of 1080p 24 vs 60.

http://hometheaterreview.com/1080p24/

Generally if you have a display capable of other than a 60hz refresh rate sending it 24 fps is preferred. But that won't completely eliminate judder and some people find the pull down evident when sending a 60hz signal 'comforting' since they were used to it for so long.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #25 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
c.kingsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,937
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
The uncanny valley applies to people, not framerates. Plus, it's not a even scientific theory (not falsifiable).
....
Yes it is processed but there is a ton of digital processing going on for every single pixel on the screen, so that's not a valid argument, and in fact video codecs encode the deltas between successive frames. And it looks quite good.

Every single DVD / Bluray / UHD Bluray / stream / youtube / etc you own or have ever watched "creates something from nothing".
My statement was what most people refer to as an analogy. The uncanny valley describes a situation where something feels "not quite right" as it pertains to people and how they move. It was not intended for peer review in a scientific paper.

You are absolutely right that motion interpolation is used in the encoder but there is also a difference. The encoder had the original non-interpolated source to work with. When the encoder creates a vector it was aware precisely the magnitude and direction of movement from frame to frame. Frame interpolation attempts to fill in those vectors for the missing frames (and I'm sure it is much more complicated that just that). Either way, you've made my point for me. Frame interpolation is an algorithmic process which makes an educated guess about where objects on screen would be given the delta between the objects frame to frame. Some humans can detect this as abnormal. As I stated originally: YMMV.
KMFDMvsEnya likes this.
c.kingsley is offline  
post #26 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
Blu-ray discs playing in a 1-year old 3D Sony BD player via HDMI. So should be 24p, right?

Should be yes, i've ever used a 1070 though.

I grew up watching movies, 24p is all i've ever known. I have a particular disdain for television, i think it's idiot. Watching a movie at 60fps just looks weird to me. For television people it's probably the opposite.
Verge2 is offline  
post #27 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 05:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,106
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post
My statement was what most people refer to as an analogy. The uncanny valley describes a situation where something feels "not quite right" as it pertains to people and how they move. It was not intended for peer review in a scientific paper.

You are absolutely right that motion interpolation is used in the encoder but there is also a difference. The encoder had the original non-interpolated source to work with. When the encoder creates a vector it was aware precisely the magnitude and direction of movement from frame to frame. Frame interpolation attempts to fill in those vectors for the missing frames (and I'm sure it is much more complicated that just that). Either way, you've made my point for me. Frame interpolation is an algorithmic process which makes an educated guess about where objects on screen would be given the delta between the objects frame to frame. Some humans can detect this as abnormal. As I stated originally: YMMV.

I've never seen an implementation without massive artifacts.


And that includes processing so heavy, it was done offline and took days.
Verge2 is offline  
post #28 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 07:00 PM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleNixon View Post
Thanks for the link. I will definitely try this. Does the movie have to be ripped onto the hard drive? Normally I play movies from the original disc with MPC-HC.
There's a way to hook it into PowerDVD to interpolate Blurays automatically. I just use it on rips.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #29 of 198 Old 09-28-2016, 07:07 PM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
Should be yes, i've ever used a 1070 though.

I grew up watching movies, 24p is all i've ever known. I have a particular disdain for television, i think it's idiot. Watching a movie at 60fps just looks weird to me. For television people it's probably the opposite.
At least this argument, which is an appeal to tradition (an invalid argument, to be sure, according to logic theorems), is consistent.

But you know that most people on AVS have no problem watching 60hz sports then complaining about 48p native Hobbit being too smooth. Ergo you know that's total BS. And FI is quite good and the artifacts are only visible in certain situations.

The next frontier is SDR-to-HDR automatic conversion so that your existing SDR collection can get a much-needed facelift. Same principle. Technicolor has conversion chips that are so good, they're going into mass produced live TV events to make the entire broadcast ecosystem HDR.

HFR is tricky but no trickier than predicting where a splotch of colour is going to be in a sixtieth of a second after a 24th of a second + knowing its velocity. The "hardest" part is eliminating the motion blur from the source frames. Ideally if you have 24p with a 1 degree shutter angle (next to zero motion blur), then you could interpolate without any haloing artifacts whatsoever.

I write this for the benefit of people who enjoy 60p or 120p, obviously, but I applaud you for at least having a consistent argument (however incorrect and illogical it might be).
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #30 of 198 Old 09-29-2016, 01:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 690 Post(s)
Liked: 281
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMartin56 View Post
It's funny you should mention JVC. I'd LOVE to try one. But I can't get a straight answer regarding how well it handles FI so I'm not going to risk it. All the reviews just skip over the subject. I can't really blame them because it can be subjective but come on... Do your job.

It will be my pleasure. Right now I'm looking for program content with a high probability everybody has (like The Matrix or Lord of the Rings) to pick certain scenes and later provide a graphic description how the FI handles it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
I've never seen an implementation without massive artifacts.

Could you describe "massive"? With fast moving objects in front of a rather static background I observe "halos" or artefacts around the moving objects but mostly these are far and few between for my personal liking.


On the other hand I positively and instantly notice the FI improvement when characters just move their hands or heads like they do in real life (no artefacts whatsoever in such scenes).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
I grew up watching movies, 24p is all I've ever known.

Thank you. That's exactly the point I addressed in another thread: LG demonstrates HFR - High Frame Rate - on OLED


IMHO, you have gotten accustomed to the artefacts that come along with watching films in 24p. Therefore it looks normal and "theatrical" to you, and you find a different look understandably irritating.

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde
Frank714 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off