AVS Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,113 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I gave my mother-in-law my old 36 inch Sanyo CRT. No progressive scan, only composite and S-video. Well, I watched some SD DVDs via composite and they all looked amazing. Cartoons, movies, everything. Gorgeous black levels, no artifacts. Naturally it wasn't as sharp as HD but I'm thinking: so what?


SD DVDs and even many HD DVDs look like crap on my HD sets because the high resolution makes noise and artifacts look far too visible and distracting.


I think I prefer the "clean" picture with deep blacks on this set as opposed to the opposite with a sharper image on my HD sets.


Any thoughts or opinions on this?


Also - what is the benefit to progressive scan that can be seen vs what this set does without it?


This set without progressive scan shows moving pictures that still look perfectly smooth, free from motion artifacts or any problems I can see. Sooooo...what does progressive scan help for in this case?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
There are a lot of variables in that question, like the quality of your current DVD player or the picture quality of your other HD sets used for comparison. An old stadard definition CRT masks a lot of problem areas in video with its wide black dot pitch/line pitch. Your eyes see that obstruction, but the mind "fills in the blanks" by assuming color reproduction similar to the adjacent colored dots/lines. You probably know that, but I try to defend HD sets by reminding people that we perceive standard definition picture quality as better more because of what it omits than due to actual superiority. Yes, CRT black levels are superior to cheap LCD black levels of course. Lord knows I don't want to debate that point.


There aren't that many moments in movies that benefit hugely from progressive scan by itself. When done clumsily, progressive scan can actually make a 480i recorded film ugly and pixelated. The "big deal" with this feature is that most quality proscan DVD players also do some sort of rescaling and/or other forms of image cleanup. Such as "fixing" what the player perceives as video imperfections, smoothing pixellated curved and horizontal lines, etc. The picture output quality will only be as good as the video processing quality of your media player and the TV. When it all works, standard def movies proscanned and upscaled look great on an HDTV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
If you think composite looks good, wait til you see S-Video on an Analog CRT. You should really see a difference in sharpness on a 36". I among others have gone over this in other threads until we have pissed off just about everyone that has an LCD TV. The bottom line is, DVD is 480 and Analog CRT's are 480. There is no upscaling of the picture, and this is why it will always look better than on any other tv. The is one conversion, Digital-to-Analog, and the better the DVD Player, the better the conversion.


The problem with HDTV, is the ****ers just can't decide on what resolution or technology to stick with. They knew full well that HD-DVD was coming and it would be 1080p. They knew everything was heading toward 1080p. They had HDTV's that could handle both 480 and 1080.


Instead, they crank out ****ing 768 resolution, XGA, Plasma, DLP, LCD, LCOS, POS, you name it, they came out with it. They pretty much ****ed everybody that bought an HDTV that is less than 1080.



Also, Progressive Scan softens the edges of the picture, but adds more depth. If you sit at the same distance as an Analog, and compare the two side-by-side, you will see the Analog as sharper. But, if you step back about 4 feet, you will see the depth that the HD Set offers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 /forum/post/13013664


Instead, they crank out ****ing 768 resolution, XGA, Plasma, DLP, LCD, LCOS, POS, you name it, they came out with it. They pretty much ****ed everybody that bought an HDTV that is less than 1080.

People who buy 1080p sets are getting ****ed too, because SD material will look even worse upscaled to 1080 lines than it does upscaled to 768 lines. More interpolation = lower PQ.


If they had simply set up the HD standard with SD compatibility as a priority, then the horizontal and vertical resolutions would've been fixed as double one of the NTSC standards. With double the number of pixels in each direction, no interpolation of SD sources is necessary - i.e., there would simply be a 4:1 mapping of pixels - and no interpolation = best PQ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,757 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 /forum/post/13013664


If you think composite looks good, wait til you see S-Video on an Analog CRT. You should really see a difference in sharpness on a 36". I among others have gone over this in other threads until we have pissed off just about everyone that has an LCD TV. The bottom line is, DVD is 480 and Analog CRT's are 480. There is no upscaling of the picture, and this is why it will always look better than on any other tv. The is one conversion, Digital-to-Analog, and the better the DVD Player, the better the conversion.


The problem with HDTV, is the ****ers just can't decide on what resolution or technology to stick with. They knew full well that HD-DVD was coming and it would be 1080p. They knew everything was heading toward 1080p. They had HDTV's that could handle both 480 and 1080.


Instead, they crank out ****ing 768 resolution, XGA, Plasma, DLP, LCD, LCOS, POS, you name it, they came out with it. They pretty much ****ed everybody that bought an HDTV that is less than 1080.

There ya go. Never miss an opportunity to start a childish format war.


Quote:
Also, Progressive Scan softens the edges of the picture, but adds more depth. If you sit at the same distance as an Analog, and compare the two side-by-side, you will see the Analog as sharper. But, if you step back about 4 feet, you will see the depth that the HD Set offers.

??? Progressive scan "softens" a picture? Analog is sharper? Are you trying to confuse everyone? What exactly are you comparing: HD/SD, analog/digital, or progressive/interlaced?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amiable-Akuma /forum/post/13013339


SD DVDs and even many HD DVDs look like crap on my HD sets because the high resolution makes noise and artifacts look far too visible and distracting.

What kind of HDTV do you have, I wonder?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by WJonathan /forum/post/13015095


There ya go. Never miss an opportunity to start a childish format war.





??? Progressive scan "softens" a picture? Analog is sharper? Are you trying to confuse everyone? What exactly are you comparing: HD/SD, analog/digital, or progressive/interlaced?


I pulled this from Wikipedia so that I wouldn't have to explain it all again:

In the case of most media such as DVD movies and video games, the video is blurred during the authoring process itself to mask flicker artifacts when used on interlace displays. As a consequence, recovering the sharpness of the original video is impossible when the video is viewed progressively.


Hence, you get a softer image when viewing a DVD through a Progressive Scan Player. 1080p HD-DVD or HD Signals are different because the disc itself is encoded Progressively. DVD is 480 interlaced and as such will always have the maximum sharpness on an interlaced screen. But don't get me wrong, I am not saying 480p sucks, as it's definitely better than upscaling to 720, 768, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike999 /forum/post/13014583


People who buy 1080p sets are getting ****ed too, because SD material will look even worse upscaled to 1080 lines than it does upscaled to 768 lines. More interpolation = lower PQ.


If they had simply set up the HD standard with SD compatibility as a priority, then the horizontal and vertical resolutions would've been fixed as double one of the NTSC standards. With double the number of pixels in each direction, no interpolation of SD sources is necessary - i.e., there would simply be a 4:1 mapping of pixels - and no interpolation = best PQ.


I don't think they are getting screwed. In a few more years, 1080p will be the standard and as such HD-DVD/Blu-Ray on a 1080p TV will be the equivelant to DVD on a 480i CRT because there will be no upscaling.


Standard Def TV as it is today is going to look like **** regardless on anything but an interlaced set, so it's really not even worth arguing anymore. We know it sucks. But, that will most likely all be gone in about 2 more years.


I am about to post on the LCD takeover thread of how we needed a 480i/1080p CRT, rather than a 480p/1080i CRT. Infact, maybe I will just make a new thread devoted to that
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top