«

Kent Smith wrote:
> "Craig Sutton" <> wrote in message
> news:egd0d5$thj$...
> >
> > "Mutley" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> >> "Steven Ellis" <> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jack Hammond wrote:
> >>>> Seems to be its not a fully compatible standard and still up in the
> >>>> air.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2006...alphabet_soup/
> >>>
> >>>There is an interesting article here
> >>>http://openmedia.co.nz/openmedia/content/view/51/62/ which compares
> >>>existing NZ Analogue TV and the pending FreeView digital TV network.
> >>>Shows just how much better an SDTV Widescreen signal looks compared to
> >>>existing 4:3 analogue TV on a large modern 720p or 1080i screen.
> >>>
> >>>Steve
> >>
> > Hey Steve you might want to redo those images in a non lossy format. Jpg
> > adds its own compression artifacts.
> >
> And your "1080i" is "1080p"

Some 1080 sets will show 1080i as 1080p as the don't really do
interlaced. Always an interesting one of how to show a screen capture
of a 1080i signal. Any recommendations?

Steve

In message <. com>, Steven
Ellis wrote:

> Some 1080 sets will show 1080i as 1080p as the don't really do
> interlaced. Always an interesting one of how to show a screen capture
> of a 1080i signal. Any recommendations?

Something moving, so the discrepancy between alternate scan-lines becomes
obvious.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <. com>, Steven
> Ellis wrote:
>
> > Some 1080 sets will show 1080i as 1080p as the don't really do
> > interlaced. Always an interesting one of how to show a screen capture
> > of a 1080i signal. Any recommendations?
>
> Something moving, so the discrepancy between alternate scan-lines becomes
> obvious.

Tried that at one point which leads into the following comment
"Why is the picture so bad"
and then you have to explain the whole interlaced/deinterlaced picture
thing which most consumers don't understand.

Ho Hum..

Steve

Steven Ellis wrote:
> Jack Hammond wrote:
>> Seems to be its not a fully compatible standard and still up in the air.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2006...alphabet_soup/
>
> There is an interesting article here
> http://openmedia.co.nz/openmedia/content/view/51/62/ which compares
> existing NZ Analogue TV and the pending FreeView digital TV network.
> Shows just how much better an SDTV Widescreen signal looks compared to
> existing 4:3 analogue TV on a large modern 720p or 1080i screen.

There is something majorly wrong with that guys analog reception and the
addition of jpegging it over the noisy images makes it look worse again.

Steven Ellis wrote:
>

> Some 1080 sets will show 1080i as 1080p as the don't really do
> interlaced. Always an interesting one of how to show a screen capture
> of a 1080i signal. Any recommendations?

Anything that isnt a CRT will display 1080i as progressive, which is why
converting 720p up to 1080i is a huge step backwards since it has to be
deinterlaced at the other end of the cable to display on the flat panel.

steve <> wrote:

>Jack Hammond <jm@yah***.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Seems to be its not a fully compatible standard and still up in the air.
>>
>> http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2006...alphabet_soup/
>
>If you want a crystal clear picture on a TV the size of a dinner table, then
>you need HDTV.
>
>Otherwise....sit closer to the 14" TV and enjoy the quality.
>
>I do.
Maybe we need one of these.. http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/14092

Vaporware or real..??

"Mutley" <> wrote in message
news:...
> steve <> wrote:
>
>>Jack Hammond <jm@yah***.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Seems to be its not a fully compatible standard and still up in the air.
>>>
>>> http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2006...alphabet_soup/
>>
>>If you want a crystal clear picture on a TV the size of a dinner table,
>>then
>>you need HDTV.
>>
>>Otherwise....sit closer to the 14" TV and enjoy the quality.
>>
>>I do.
> Maybe we need one of these.. http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/14092
>
> Vaporware or real..??

Don't know if this is the same thing:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/16/m...projection-tv/

Pity no mitsi resellers in NZ anymore (that I know of) since Melco dropped
them.


-KENT

Richard wrote:
> Steven Ellis wrote:
> > Jack Hammond wrote:
> >> Seems to be its not a fully compatible standard and still up in the air.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2006...alphabet_soup/
> >
> > There is an interesting article here
> > http://openmedia.co.nz/openmedia/content/view/51/62/ which compares
> > existing NZ Analogue TV and the pending FreeView digital TV network.
> > Shows just how much better an SDTV Widescreen signal looks compared to
> > existing 4:3 analogue TV on a large modern 720p or 1080i screen.
>
> There is something majorly wrong with that guys analog reception and the
> addition of jpegging it over the noisy images makes it look worse again.

Actually I have excellent analogue reception. Better than a lot of
people I know. There is a touch of ghosting I know, but otherwise quite
watchable by NZ standards.

The captures were done using a Hauppauge PVR-150 MPEG-2 capture card at
an average bit rate of 5.6 Mb. Comparing the JPEG images on the net
with the original non-compressed screen captures shows very little
difference.

Steve

Steven Ellis wrote:

> Actually I have excellent analogue reception. Better than a lot of
> people I know. There is a touch of ghosting I know, but otherwise quite
> watchable by NZ standards.
>
> The captures were done using a Hauppauge PVR-150 MPEG-2 capture card at
> an average bit rate of 5.6 Mb. Comparing the JPEG images on the net
> with the original non-compressed screen captures shows very little
> difference.

What deinterlacing was performed on the image? I find I get similar
effects if I use some of the crap modes in dscaler when watching tv.

Also, I think reception out of auckland is worse then auckland because
they have to sent it down country. I know when I was in chch the picture
was horrible despite having good LOS to the site and a decent looking
antenna.

Richard wrote:
> Steven Ellis wrote:
>
> > Actually I have excellent analogue reception. Better than a lot of
> > people I know. There is a touch of ghosting I know, but otherwise quite
> > watchable by NZ standards.
> >
> > The captures were done using a Hauppauge PVR-150 MPEG-2 capture card at
> > an average bit rate of 5.6 Mb. Comparing the JPEG images on the net
> > with the original non-compressed screen captures shows very little
> > difference.
>
> What deinterlacing was performed on the image? I find I get similar
> effects if I use some of the crap modes in dscaler when watching tv.

Deinterlacing was using kerndeint from Donald Graft which produces
about the best quality. The de-interlacing issues aren't really as
apparent on motion as they are on stills.

Plus I really could do with a deghost filter before the de-interlace.

> Also, I think reception out of auckland is worse then auckland because
> they have to sent it down country. I know when I was in chch the picture
> was horrible despite having good LOS to the site and a decent looking
> antenna.

The reception for the average Kiwi Auckland or elsewhere is dreadful.
Hence why so many choose to get SkyTV just for a better TV picture.
Generally when i've been in larger towns reception has been comparable
to an average Auckland picture. I personally feel my reception is
slightly above average.

Steve