Originally Posted by borf
I think he did this with the "deinterlace test" using the Silicon Optix HQV HD - that is if that test covers 1080i60 non-telicine signals (i.e non 24p based).
I think this was just a basic test to determine if interlace was handled properly. It doesn't evaluate the quality of the resolution under various motion scenarios. Afaict, the article does not bother to specify how much resolution is lost under motion interlace from a reference display (to delineate how much resolution is lost by virtue of the deinterlace process, itself) vs. the various test displays, either. That would have been the most valid test for the article from the standpoint of how these displays would respond to real and potentially most demanding broadcast material (1080i60).
Agee with you point about compression but the display is still important though. Whether 50% resolution loss occurs during deinterlacing depends on the TV (HQV)
and failure to detect 3:2 can result in an equell amount of resolution loss as well as it's ability to resolve bandwidth down to the pixel level.
This is true, but then we are evaluating motion performance in the 24p realm, not 60i realm...which implies a movie of some sort...which implies typical cinema motion blur will be in effect for any motion scene, anyway. Again, the display will not be the bottleneck, as the program will contain its own motion blur just by virtue of its medium and style. Even in the extremely unusual case that there is zero motion blur in the program, we are still talking about a framerate of 24p, which the modern display should have no problem keeping up with if it has any hope of doing 60i reasonably well. The viewer will be at odds with far more insidious image issues with 24p under motion, as well. There is such a spatial jump from frame to frame at 24p, it's not like the viewer will be able to concentrate on the nth degree of detail, when the shear slowness of the framerate is not able to render genuinely smooth motion in the first place.
So, like I was saying, the real relevant part of this test centers around 1080i60 performance, as 1080p24 has its own set of issues that preclude it from really stressing the limits of a particular display, when it comes to motion and resolution (and even 1080i60 isn't an "ideal" source, hence my mention of high fps computer-sourced material).