|
|
Posted by Bill's News on 04/21/06 19:14
Jeff Rife wrote:
> Allan (Spamsuckhard@finallykantica22admitstobebrianlamb.org) wrote
> in
> alt.video.dvd:
>>> We shall see.......................
>>> I am a usual "early adaptor", but not this time.
>>
>> Me, all over it.... Like the "upconverting" of existing DVD's with
>> the new player....
>
> How is it any different from current upconverting DVD players?
> Since
> I've got quite a few of those lying around, and you can buy one for
> $150, the extra $350 for the HD-DVD player is an awful lot to pay if
> all you care about is upconverting existing DVDs.
I'm having a semantic attack regarding "upconvert."
I have installed here a 1920x1080(p) monitor, a cable HD-VR
(Motorola), and a Buffalo LT DVD player - both connected via component
input. The monitor uses all 1080 pixels from either source.
The Buffalo manual specifically states that it is enjoined from
"upconverting" DVDs by the DVD Consortium's and MPAA's legislative
powers. However, all 1080 vertical pixels are employed in displaying
a properly scaled picture from a DVD.
What is different about the player's behavior, when playing DVDs vs.
playing videos stored on a PC drive, is the ZOOM function. When
playing a DVD, the BLT zoom has 4 increments of unstated percentages.
When playing a PC file, zoom has 3 settings - "actual size," "fit to
screen," and "full screen." Wherein, "actual size" is presented in
the unscaled size (720x480, say), "fit to screen" is scaled sensibly
to the first edge which abuts a screen edge, and "full screen" scales
to the farther edge (while retaining aspect).
For all but 16:9 source materials, it's actually more visually
pleasing to play videos from the PC drives - as the scaling options
makes more sense than the monitor's single scaling option best
referred to as S-T-R-E-T-C-H and the Motorola's total lack of scaling
options.
As the BLT player does NOT play authored DVDs from the PC's hard or
optical drive, it's necessary to rip the DVD and remove any ancillary
audio to achieve this. According to the BLT manual the player is not
enjoined from upconverting these images. Yet, I see no difference
between the same DVD played from the PC or the original disc? Both of
which are excellent images, BTW.
Now, when I compare 640x480 analogue feeds over the cable, with
640x480 digital feeds, and HDTV of ????x???? feeds, there is a
significant difference in image quality. Are we suggesting that an
"upconverter" placed between the cable box and the monitor would
improve picture quality of the lower definition sources?
It seems to me that "upconverting" should mean something more than
merely scaling the image to the best fit on the screen, but damned if
I can tell what that is?
Can you tell me, Jeff, or anyone for that matter, what upconverting
does for you?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|