Re: 1080p...and why did I?

On Sat, 04 Aug 2007 23:29:03 -0400 Matthew L. Martin <nothere@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| Alan wrote:
|> In article <4d9ab31jbqhmb4nh2cv4bffr8g8m505e8r@xxxxxxx> Robin <me@xxxxxxxx> writes:
|>> On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 20:00:05 -0400, Some Other Guy
|>> <bgates@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|>>> http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_1/feature-article-1080p-3-2007-part-1.html
|>>>
|>> If I read correctly this article claims that when scaling up low
|>> resolution sources, the higher the target resolution the better the
|>> result.
|>> In other words when scaling up 480p source, it will be better if
|>> scaled up to 1080p rather than to 720p.
|>> And in support of this it gives some line drawings.
|>>
|>> I find this claim rather incredible.
|>> I don't pretend to know the math or the algorithm behind the
|>> upscaling. But from common sense, if you scale up 480p source
|>> to 1080p, then you have to conjure up a lot more "missing" data
|>> to fill than you would with 720p target.
|>> No matter how sophisticated the scaling algorithm is, doesn't this
|>> introduce more artifacts for 1080p target?
|>
|>
|> No.
|>
|> If you want to understand why, you probably need to learn the math.
|
| Sigh. Once again, Alan shows his ability to be correct. Too bad poor old
| phil is incapable of such a thing.

It's so funny that MLM has to make his remarks even when I'm not even a
part of the chain of responses back to the parent on this SUB-topic
(although I have responded on some branches).


| It doesn't matter a whit what the destination resolution is, the
| information in the source is the limiting factor. The quality of the
| scaling depends on the quality of the algorithm and the precision of the
| arithmetic. Not the resolution of the target.

Amazing. This is correct (unless, of course, the topic were to change to
doing DOWNconversion).

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / spamtrap-2007-08-05-1100@xxxxxxxx |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 1080p...and why did I?
    ... If I read correctly this article claims that when scaling up low ... resolution sources, the higher the target resolution the better the ... then you have to conjure up a lot more "missing" data to fill than you would with 720p target. ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: 1080p...and why did I?
    ... If I read correctly this article claims that when scaling up low ... resolution sources, the higher the target resolution the better the ... to fill than you would with 720p target. ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: Did you know
    ... Sure it does -- but text does NOT look far better on 300 DPI devices ... Higher resolution displays would let you see fine detail while also ... Such scaling benefits can be fully realized at small increments, ... your 1 pixel lines are now 1.5 pixel lines. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: "Dont Give Up the Ships: A Look at a 200-Ship Navy"
    ... Higher resolution needs higher speed data transmission etc... ... pilots are already accustomed to not having visuals on some targets, and those that are pseudo-visuals they might not really see either - display augmentation gives them the illusion that they see it. ... There are any number of extra points that could be made, but one thing, I believe, is clear - we have barely scratched the surface in determining what is the best way of displaying information to the pilot of a UAV. ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • Re: V500 resolution vs. target size?
    ... but I'm still confused on the issue of resolution vs. "target size". ... you will enlarge your images before or after you scan them. ... You will not be enlarging the images. ... You will enlarge the images as you scan them (increase the Target ...
    (comp.periphs.scanners)