AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ok, well it still doesn't do the vertical resolution right, however in the new detonators (i'm using the 41.09) the overlay has been fixed for playing dvds. The mouse is still messed up...but if you get a dvd started by keyboard, at least it's displaying properly now (rather that displaying in some off-centered godawful zoomed-in mode like before).


So I figured i'd use 1440x960i as a test subject since that is basically the equivilent to 1440x480i because geforce still can interlace properly. However, i have to say that with zoomplayer and "fit to screen" enabled, DVDs are looking better than i've seen in any progressive mode.


So, if you have a geforce and you want to know why the radion people say interlaced is better for dvds...you might wanna try this now that they fixed the overlay.


One question though, do I need to set a registry value that will force cp1.5 to "forceweave", now that i'm using an interlaced resolution? Or, does the decoder detect that you are using an interlaced display and automatically not de-interlace?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,847 Posts
If it does not do verticle right then the 960i is only every other line - correct??? Does this mean a 1440x960i desktop works?


I hate to upgrade from 40.72 - i will need to make all new custom resolutons again and this is such a pain :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,847 Posts
If it does not do verticle right then the 960i is only every other line - correct??? Does this mean a 1440x960i desktop works?


I hate to upgrade from 40.72 - i will need to make all new custom resolutons again and this is such a pain :)


Did you make this screen with Powerstrip?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,201 Posts
Actually, you don't "stay deinterlaced" as you might think. In order to scale from 480i to 960i, you do actually have to deinterlace to 480p as an intermediate step.


So I'm guessing you leave the deinterlace setting where it would normally be. If you do forceweave, you'll just see good old fashioned combing, only scaled from 480p to 960i :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
thanks for answering my question grant. I have to admit i'm sold though on the whole interlaced to watch dvds thing. Now that i have it working (abeit, with half verticle res, messed up mouse), I have decided to keep it. Things look really ...i don't know...3d-like...it's weird. One of two things is happening i believe, either for some reason hdtvs just display detail better in interlaced mode vs progressive, or the fact that you are reintroducing a little flicker back into the picture fools your mind into "overlaying" a fake 3d perception on a 2d image. However it works, it's cool. Movies are soo "poppy" now.


What's cool though is the fact that they fixed ANY of the interlaced issues...this means that they at least fiddled with the interlacing code recently. Maybe a few weeks from now us lowely geforce owners will have fully-functional interlaced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
376 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
oh sjchmura, I couldn't actually add 1440x960i into powerstrip for some reason. It's weird...i'm actually using 1280x960i which is already in there...fits fine on my tv..


i said 1440x960i by accident because that was the resolution i really wanted (better scaling)...and i had forgotten that i setted for 1280x960. If you manage to add it to powerstrip with the 41.09 drivers...let me know how (or what version of powerstrip you use)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Michael Grant
Actually, you don't "stay deinterlaced" as you might think. In order to scale from 480i to 960i, you do actually have to deinterlace to 480p as an intermediate step.
Grant, the two fields consists of 240 odd and even lines. When scaling it to 960i the even lines are resized to 480 even lines, and the odd to 480 lines.

Thus you still remain in interlaced.


You don't have to deinterlace an interlaced source to scale it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,201 Posts
Esben,


That analysis is incorrect, and we've had that discussion on this forum more than once. If you do what you have suggested, then you will get the wrong picture.


If you don't believe me, try this trivial case in your head: a 480i image where all of the odd lines are red and all of the even lines are blue. If you deinterlace to 480p, you'll get 480 alternating red and blue lines, just like you would expect, so any other image that you generate needs to basically look like that. However, if we do what you suggest, you'll get 960 alternating red and blue lines---not correct at all. If we deinterlace to 480p first, then go to 960i, you will still get the 480 alternating red and blue lines like you would expect, only they're all about 2 scan lines tall.


I don't doubt that 960i can look better than 480p, it is still an increase in resolution, I'm just saying that you have to deinterlace first, so don't disable that on your DVD player.


Michael
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
I have 1440x1080i Working as described by llamameat but have not tried the Overlay for Playing DVD's (will try it this weekend). I have this working with the 40.72 Drivers. This is the only resolution that will show full screen for me (even lines, crazy mouse)


I also managed to have a "visible" image from 800x600 and 1024x768 but does are shown in my HDTV as a center square occupying roughly ½ or 1/3 of the screen, overlay here plays offset half screen (will get back to you on the timings for this, but if I remember correctly I’m using progressive timings not interlaced!)


I was trying this since while playing some games at HDTV resolutions if the game plays a movie (avi) it switches to 800x600 or 1024x768 and I could not see anything.


Besides that now at least when a program forces a change to 800x600, now I can see this on the display and I can get out of that resolution by using the keyboard.


I would love to get 800x600i and 1024x768i working since I use my HDTV for playing besides home theater. My solution right now is switching to s-video input since I have a Nvidia card with TV Out, but the image quality is obviously no were near the Component Progressive Scan from the VGA > KeyDigital
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
Michael,


I don't understand the problem, even if I use the trivial case in my head.


I can't see any problem with the 240 red lines being scaled to 480 red lines, which is first beamed onto the phosphor by the CRT screen. The afterwards the 480 blue lines are beamed onto the phosphor.


If done as you mention it will just be spoiled by more aliasing artifacts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,201 Posts
You have properly described what will happen. In the first field, 480 red lines will be displayed. In the second field, 480 blue lines will be displayed. Those will be woven together by our eyes, and the result will be 960 alternating lines! That's not the correct picture. What our eyes should see is exactly 480 alternating lines, and no more.


I will try and construct a graphical illustration if I can.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
But if we shouldn't see more than 480 lines of resolution, then why at all increase resolution?

The main goal of increasing resolution is increasing detail and lessening aliasing artifacts.


That's exactly what is happening when doing the interlaced->2 seperate fields scaled.


What we should see is alternating red and blue lines. When done as I propose it's done, that is still what we see.


If we change the color of red and blue to black and white, and propose that the intention of the black/white lines is to create an illusion of grey, then showing the 480i lines as 480p then it would be spoiled by showing it as 2 lines of black and then 2 lines of white. That would really show the difference between the original image and the upsampled (worse), whereas the interlaced upsampled would look even better than the original.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
Think of it this way...


Full image is a diagonal line that takes up 3 scan lines (4 shown for reasons you will see in a moment).


Also, - means blank, * means pixel

Odd. *********-------------------

Even ---------**********---------

Odd. -------------------*********

Even ----------------------------


Deinterlace, scale, and reinterlace and you get

Odd. *********-------------------

Even *********-------------------

Odd. ---------**********---------

Even ---------**********---------

Odd. -------------------*********

Even -------------------*********

Odd. ----------------------------

Even ----------------------------


What you describe is this...

Odd. *********-------------------

Odd. *********-------------------

Even ---------**********---------

Even ---------**********---------

Odd. -------------------*********

Odd. -------------------*********

Even ----------------------------

Even ----------------------------


Which is woven back together for this....

Odd. *********-------------------

Even ---------**********---------

Odd. *********-------------------

Even ---------**********---------

Odd. -------------------*********

Even ----------------------------

Odd. -------------------*********

Even ----------------------------


Obviously that is not correct.


That doesn't even factor in anti-aliasing...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,201 Posts
Quote:
But if we shouldn't see more than 480 lines of resolution, then why at all increase resolution?
You do so because sampling is always an imperfect way to represent a continuous image. A 720 x 480 DVD image is not meant to be viewed as 720 x 480 large square blocks. Instead, those 720 x 480 pixels are meant to define single, infinitely small points in the image space, and what goes in between them is supposed to be a smooth transition between the points as determined by Nyquist sampling theory.


Of course, we can never do this perfectly, because of practical limits like the finte resolution of our displays. But any extra resolution that we're given can be used to come as close as possible to the right "smoothing" between DVD pixels. And once we get above a certain resolution, our eyes can do the rest of the smoothing and all is well.


This idea is precisely the same as in the audio space, when people talk about "oversampling" D/A converters. As you may know, the optimal way to play a CD involves applying an analog brick-wall filter at 22.05kHz. That's impossible to do, and in fact there are real problems with trying to come close (Gibbs phenomena, for example). So what is often done instead is to increase the sampling rate to, say, 88.2kHz or 176.4kHz. This allows you to do some of that filtering digitally, and then apply more gentle analog filter to take care of the rest.


Think of scaling to 960i, 1024p, etc. As the digital upsampling, and our eye as the gentle analog filter.
Quote:
The main goal of increasing resolution is increasing detail and lessening aliasing artifacts.
No. It is impossible to increase detail. You can't restore the detail that was taken away when the movie was sampled at 720x480 resolution. What you can do is properly represent the detail that remains, by removing aliasing artifacts (so your second point is correct).
Quote:
What we should see is alternating red and blue lines. When done as I propose it's done, that is still what we see.
What we should see is 480 alternating red and blue lines. Your technique gives us 960. Why in the world would you think that's correct? If I give you an image of an American flag with 13 red and white stripes, would you consider it OK to "process it" so that it has 26 stripes?
Quote:
If we change the color of red and blue to black and white, and propose that the intention of the black/white lines is to create an illusion of grey, then showing the 480i lines as 480p then it would be spoiled by showing it as 2 lines of black and then 2 lines of white.
No. The purpose of alternating black and white lines would be to display alternating black and white lines, not simulate some shade of gray. If you want to display gray, you can do so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,847 Posts
I cannto get Powerstrip to add ANY custom resolutions with 41.xx series drivers. 920x500, 960x540 - NONE of them work. the only one that comes built in is 1280x720p and 848x480p.


As soon as I swith back to 40.72 all is well again.


Anyone get powerstrip to work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
i think it would be helpful if we could establish who is using what version of powerstrip with which operating system, which drivers, and what video card.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,847 Posts
WinXP SP1

Geforce4 4400 41.xx drivers (both tried 0.4 and 0.9)

Powerstrip 3.30 build 358 (12/10/02)


Does not work


40.72 drivers work
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
sjchmura:


what resolutions work in powerstrip? can you post your timings from the pstrip.ini file that work? i'm using:


geforce 3

winxp pro

powerstrip 3.30 build 362


i don't know what drivers i was using until yesterday, but they were OLD. when i updated to 4.72, i lost everything that worked in powerstrip with the old drivers and nothing new would take. so i'm stuck with 15,000 of hardware that i can't watch dvds on until i can get working timings for that setup with the 4.72 drivers somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Quote:
I cannot get Powerstrip to add ANY custom resolutions with 41.xx series drivers. 920x500, 960x540 - NONE of them work. the only one that comes built in is 1280x720p and 848x480p.
I have the same problem, using XP Home (latest), Geforce2 GTS 32Mb, Powerstrip v4.10.3.29. Switching drivers back to v40.72.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
I was able to get 1280x960i working with detonator 41.09 and powerstrip 3.30 build 362, but nothing else. 960i desktop is missing every other line. PowerDVD only showed the top half of the DVD. SereneScreen aquarium at 1280x960i looks ok and the entire screen is visible.


I uninstalled the older version of powerstrip then installed detonator 41.09. Then i installed the new powerestrip. I was then able to add the 1280x960i(HDTV derived), but could not add anything else. Any further info would be great.


Oh yeah...I am using a Geforce 2 MX 400.


Nayan
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top