GT4 IGN Review up!

[rabidrabbit]

I really don't have much first hand experience with these 1080i 480p modes, but what if that guy who took those pics turned the sharpness up on the pic right? Would it not look "blurry" any more, but sharp and still less jaggy than the pic on the left?
If the sharpness on the pic left were lowered to lower the jaginess to the level of pic in right (though in reality it would not achieve the same level, but anyway..) wouldn't the image become very blurry.

isn't it common knowledge that most (all?) tv sets increase the perceived sharpness of the image by using all kinds of image degrading trickery. It'll look "sharper" to the common eye, but it also has lost much of the finer detail. For the same reason an unsharpened picture looks blurrier to the common eye because there are no edge enhancing contrast trickeries used.

 

[London Geezer]

Whatever "trickery" is used, the TV will NEVER increase or decrease the number of jaggies. It might make the jaggies more or less blurred, but you wouldn't go from 10 to 19 lines for free. You'd go from 10 normal lines to 10 blurry lines.

 

[PC-Engine]

Thanks for posting that info which corroberates my original assertion perfectly.

540p is slighty higher resolution than 480p. When you double both you get 1080 and 960 respectively.

You still have the difference in sharpness vs blurred look between the two modes. Some people prefer one over the other so whether one looks better than the other is purely based on preference. Do you like a Progressive picture with sharp details, large jaggies, and 4:3 aspect ratio or do you like a Interlaced picture with blurred details, small jaggies, and 16:9 aspect ratio?

What are you talking about?
That 1080 pic looks like the jaggies (which are still there) are much smaller than the ones on the 480p pictures.
The lines are sharper. The pictures are not blurrier. Stop trying to make excuses.

Read my posts on page 4 lb...

Here I'll cut out the parts you missed.

That's right it would look very similar to that 1080i pic except it would be progressive and not wide screen.

Now did I say it would look exactly the same? No.

And yes the 1080i pic DOES look blurrier/softer no ifs or buts.

 

[HappyBread]

All this bickering over a stupid 1080i mode. I think I'll stick with my good old fashioned 50hz/60hz tele, afterall it does look better.

 

[-tkf-]

All this bickering over a stupid 1080i mode. I think I'll stick with my good old fashioned 50hz/60hz tele, afterall it does look better.

I'm planning on getting a US version next to my Pal version, have to check it out

 

[-tkf-]

Whatever "trickery" is used, the TV will NEVER increase or decrease the number of jaggies. It might make the jaggies more or less blurred, but you wouldn't go from 10 to 19 lines for free. You'd go from 10 normal lines to 10 blurry lines.

Actually i think there is a good explanation for the "blur", the native display on the screen where that photo is taken is 1365×768, that would explain the missing line and the blur since it's slightly downsampled. And if anything it's even more clear that it is really twice the res, if only one way

The interlace vs Progressive discussion is another issue.

 

[Fafalada]

Why is there a 3 page debate over this?
GT4s 1080i mode has roughly double vertical detail of 480P - there's no upscaling going on, it works like every other field rendered mode.

Each 1/60th of a second, one field of around 480-540 lines is rendered, and they are offset by half a pixel from one another, generating 960-1080lines of unique data over every 2 frames.

And yeah - this can effectivelly be a free mode for any 60hz game with Progressive scan support.

 

[London Geezer]

Why is there a 3 page debate over this?
GT4s 1080i mode has roughly double vertical detail of 480P - there's no upscaling going on, it works like every other field rendered mode.

Each 1/60th of a second, one field of around 480-540 lines is rendered, and they are offset by half a pixel from one another, generating 960-1080lines of unique data over every 2 frames.

And yeah - this can effectivelly be a free mode for any 60hz game with Progressive scan support.

You only need to ask that to one person.

 

[-tkf-]

Why is there a 3 page debate over this?

3 reasons.

1) You weren't here
2) PC-ENGINE
3) PC-ENGINE

 

[phat]

XBR...riiiiiight. Kinda like WEGA...

XBR is not your run-of-the-mill WEGA. And, don't you know, a high-end CRT still provides the best image quality? I don't imagine you would.

 

[PC-Engine]

XBR...riiiiiight. Kinda like WEGA...

XBR is not your run-of-the-mill WEGA. And, don't you know, a high-end CRT still provides the best image quality? I don't imagine you would.

That used to be the case, but not anymore...

Technology moves fast, too fast for you apparently.

 

[-tkf-]

Technology moves fast, too fast for you apparently.

Interesting, please post a link or whatever needed to prove this?

Sounds very very interesting....

And nice little personal insult there..!

 

[Ty]

Generally speaking (and this is a pretty broad statement I'm about to make), CRTs still DO have the best PQ. And the best* CRT you can get now (other than a specialized brand like a Loewe) is the Sony Widescreen KD-34XBR960 (once you tone down the red push).

Mind you, compared to other technologies such as LCD or plasma (I won't touch projection or even DLP), you are giving up perfect geometry. But nothing can touch the black levels of a CRT though some plasmas come close now. Of course, other critically important variables include; price, desired screen size, environmental lighting conditions, etc. so these will impact what could be considered "best" as well.

SED (or even FEDs) look promising but Toshiba has already pushed back the already limited production by a year AND openly admitted that the sets will initially come in at "Ferrari prices" (exactly the phrase the Toshiba exec used).


*Generally considered to be the best consumer set from several sources (some reviews based on the previous model)