Posted by M.I.5� on 01/08/07 12:44

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:5umsp2pk6asreh740v0el95lr06024eotj@4ax.com...
> M.I.5� wrote:
>
>>> There are most certainly common display devices in the HD display
>>> realm that are fully capable of surpassing the best abilities of the
>>> standard DVD. Full 4:2:2 from DVD is still lower res than many of
>>> today's displays.
>>
>>I know of no 1440x1152 pixel display available in the domestic market.
>>The
>>resolution that is required to best display the 720x576 pixel information
>>off the DVD (which as what 4:2:2 gives - though the colour is 360x576).
>
> ??? Are you claiming that a 1440x1152 display is required to fully
> display the information from a DVD? If so, why?
>

Because it is fact. If you record a signal containing 720 dots across the
width of the DVD, a 720 pixel wide diplay will not resolve it, displaying
only a continuous line. It requires a 1440 pixel wide display to resolve
the information as dots. Although this may not seem to square with most
peoples intuitive take on the issue, it is a matter of proven fact that a
digital picture will appear sharper when viewed on a display that has twice
the number of pixels in each plane. Anyone who knows anything about digital
representation will know that the highest resolution in the digital domain
is half the number of digital samples (the Nyquist frequency) in this case
represented by the display samples.

In the professional domain, double resolution displays are common (except in
cowboy cheap jack companies).

[Back to original message]