|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | Mark_A_W wrote: |
Ok, I'm lost, why would I do that?
I have a HD2600XT, it runs all HD video just fine. Why would I overclock it? I don't game. |
It will make your video faster!  Sorry, I couldn't resist. |
Well really who knows, cause it was my mistake i didnt read the whole thread before i made the effort to assist a fellow Australian that wasnt interested in the help. Some in this country are too good for others. It may have been late help, but the intent was there, that isnt good enough for some people though.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jesse S
Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 209
Location: Etobicoke
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suggest you guys post a picture of what the scan lines look like right up at the screen. If it looks the same then it's not my setup.
The timings I used are what were posted early in this thread.
1920,40,96,240,1076,54,14,97,136632,542 (interlace checked)
for 1080p 72hz
1920,80,96,130,1080,55,17,97,199980,534 (interlace not checked)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kschmit2
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 1141
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jesse, even with those timings, your video card may still have to be forced into interlaced mode internally. Unfortunately that does change does not always happen automatically, as Mark's "quasi-540p" phenomenon shows.
That seems to be a driver limitation though, but does apply to both ATI and NVidia cards.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | Jesse S wrote: | This is why I didn't like 1080i 96hz. But I'm using 1080p 72hz now and it looks awesome.
 |
I never question anyones preferences, but this picture is right at the screen. Show me a pic from your seating distance. For me, I prefer the sharpness of 1080i over the softness of 1080p. I know Scott and I talked about this once and he mentioned that most everyone grew up with CRTs and scanlines. We should be used to them by now.
Before people start coming back and saying that 1080p isn't soft, it is a matter of degrees. Read that Sarnoff paper that Elaine posted last year. |
That is exactly what I get at 1080i96. Yes it is visible from a normal viewing distance. So I went back to my slightly soft 1080p72hz.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jesse S wrote: | For film source, there is no debate. The source is progressive and only a progressive setup will render it like film.
Even if you setup some odd-ball res like 1920x1440i to cram the lines back together, there will still be artifacts when there is motion. Movies have an annoying habit of moving. Also, I don't think an interlaced setup can maintain full resolution when motion exceeds a certain inch/second value. There is a point where the 2nd field is still drawing but the pixels have moved. Using a higher refresh is irrelevant. If the source is 24fps and you use 96hz, it just repeats the frame 4 times. There are interpolation schemes like Tri-mension but those destroy the film motion blur. LCD's with 120hz mode interpolate and they ruin film motion too.
The only reason they ever allowed 1080i was to accomodate the junky CRT RPTV's available at that time. Thank the tech gods that HD-DVD and Bluray were real 1080p from the outset. |
I won't get into the debate over film source, as some here seem to prefer interlace. Unto each their own.
I think you need to go back and review the ATSC standards. 1080i wasn't allowed for the junky (your words) CRT RPTVs. It had to do with broadcasting bandwidth. It may take awhile before there is 1080p delivered to the home (with any sort of quality). If I remember correctly CBS and NBC went 1080i for the better picture and Fox and ABC went 720p for the better motion for sports. Also, some people liked those junky CRTs. My sister has a Mitsubishi RPTV and it puts out a really nice pic. It isn't FP quality, but it did only cost $6k instead of $20k.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark_A_W
Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 3068
Location: Sunny Melbourne Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jesse S wrote: | For film source, there is no debate. The source is progressive and only a progressive setup will render it like film.
Even if you setup some odd-ball res like 1920x1440i to cram the lines back together, there will still be artifacts when there is motion. Movies have an annoying habit of moving. Also, I don't think an interlaced setup can maintain full resolution when motion exceeds a certain inch/second value. There is a point where the 2nd field is still drawing but the pixels have moved. Using a higher refresh is irrelevant. If the source is 24fps and you use 96hz, it just repeats the frame 4 times. There are interpolation schemes like Tri-mension but those destroy the film motion blur. LCD's with 120hz mode interpolate and they ruin film motion too.
The only reason they ever allowed 1080i was to accomodate the junky CRT RPTV's available at that time. Thank the tech gods that HD-DVD and Bluray were real 1080p from the outset. |
This also seems to assume that a progressive res is "painted" in an infinitely short time.
I don't see any issues with motion at 96i. It looks the same as 72p.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
