PS3 and Automatic Scaling.

london-boy said:
I have never argued which ones will look better!

Do you understand my point was merely about what is and what isn't HD-Ready? Jesus i have even given you the license agreement from EISA to prove my point! And you ahve proved my point by linking a page showing a 1024*768 plasma which is HD-Ready!
Click to expand...

Thats fine then, ill just tell my customers that TV number 1 is HD-ready it'll just be missing details that TV number 2 will have. Great ill be popular :)

From the agreement

" The mininum natvie resolution of the display or display engine is 720 physical lines in wide aspect ratio. " - Page 11

So 1024x768 covers the 720 physical lines requirement, it just does'nt comply with the widescreen aspect raio requirement, im assuming that BOTH requirements are needed for it to be cerified as "HD-READY"

In that case 1024x768 is not HD-READY as it has a pixel aspect raio of 4:3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most HDTVs shipped in the last ~3 years have an onboard Faroudja or Faroudja equivalent. I bought an RPTV DLP 30 months ago, it has HDMI and a Faroudja scaler.

The problem with scaling has always been going from interlaced to progressive or in some cases, the other direction. Scaling progressive to progressive is not an issue. Going from interlace to progressive requires alot more line buffering and a shitload of per-pixel heuristics to decide on bob/weave (e.g. the reason why Faroudja DCDi become popular, vs the old full-frame bob/weave strategy) That's because the TV can't know that the source was from video vs game.

Going from progressive to interlace is less difficult than the other direction, but some sets take shortcuts. A number of old sets scale from 720p to 1080i by first scaling to 540p and then outputing 1080i, but what you end up with is something like 960x540 line doubled to 1080i. The reason most people don't notice is that most if not all of the old CRT HDTVs simply can't display 1920x540 per field anyway. Most crap out at a much reduced horizontal resolution, and the best I've seen in recent memory was a CRT HDTV that could resolve 1400 horizontal pixels.

Perhaps Sony just decided that the PS3 is the console for the digital TV era, and that the old analog sets, with CRT and component inputs are going to constitute an ever smaller fraction of the total HDTV market which is doubling every year. MS decided to build a console with no HDMI and no HD optical media builtin, so MS made the decision to optimize for legacy TVs pissing off those with more capable sets.
 
mrboo said:
Thats fine then, ill just tell my customers that TV number 1 is HD-ready it'll just be missing details that TV number 2 will have. Great ill be popular :)
Click to expand...

By law, that plasma you linked, and all sets with the following:

- at least 720 horizontal lines (so the 1024*768 plasmas are fine)
- with HDMI (or DVI-HDCP), component and SD connections
- that can accept 720p AND 1080i at both 50Hz and 60Hz (ALL of them, or else it's not HD-Ready)

These are HD-Ready compliant. And as an employee of Currys, you are bound to tell customers whether something is HD-Ready or not. 640*480 sets are NOT HD-Ready by definition, and if a manufacturer forces you to put the HD-Ready sticky on a 640*480 (like those old plasmas), you are bound to report them, or liable for the consequences (returned tvs, refunds etc).

Customers are fully protected against false advertising and if they take home a TV that is not HD-Ready, after you or a colleague told them that the set is HD-Ready, they can get a full refund no questions asked. By law.


Now, the fact that 720p material will look better on 1280*720 sets compared to 1024*768 sets is a whole different argument. ;)
 
mrboo said:
Thats fine then, ill just tell my customers that TV number 1 is HD-ready it'll just be missing details that TV number 2 will have. Great ill be popular :)

From the agreement

" The mininum natvie resolution of the display or display engine is 720 physical lines in wide aspect ratio. " - Page 11

So 1024x768 covers the 720 physical lines requirement, it just does'nt comply with the widescreen aspect raio requirement, im assuming that BOTH requirements are needed for it to be cerified as "HD-READY"

In that case 1024x768 is not HD-READY as it has a pixel aspect raio of 4:3
Click to expand...
The aspect ratio on those 1024x768 plasmas is 16:9, the pixels simply aren't square. They have more pixels in width than most 1080i CRTs resolve those and are quite certianly HDTVs.
 
london-boy said:
By law, that plasma you linked, and all sets with the following:

- at least 720 horizontal lines (so the 1024*768 plasmas are fine)
- with HDMI (or DVI-HDCP), component and SD connections
- that can accept 720p AND 1080i at both 50Hz and 60Hz (ALL of them, or else it's not HD-Ready)

These are HD-Ready compliant. And as an employee of Currys, you are bound to tell customers whether something is HD-Ready or not. 640*480 sets are NOT HD-Ready by definition, and if a manufacturer forces you to put the HD-Ready sticky on a 640*480 (like those old plasmas), you are bound to report them, or liable for the consequences (returned tvs, refunds etc).

Customers are fully protected against false advertising and if they take home a TV that is not HD-Ready, after you or a colleague told them that the set is HD-Ready, they can get a full refund no questions asked. By law.


Now, the fact that 720p material will look better on 1280*720 sets compared to 1024*768 sets is a whole different argument. ;)
Click to expand...

1. You forgot the "must be wide screen" in you tally ;)
2. i dont work for currys, i work for seven oaks sound and vission :) I used currys as an example.
 
kyleb said:
The aspect ratio on those 1024x768 plasmas is 16:9, the pixels simply aren't square. They have more pixels in width than most 1080i CRTs resolve those and are by all means HDTVs.
Click to expand...

It does'nt matter if the pixels are parallelograms, the panel is 1024 pixels in width and 768 pixels in height, and thats a 4:3 ratio. were as a 720p panel is 1280 pixels in width and 720 pixels in height and thats 16:9 widescreen. The PC monitor im using right now is 1440 pixels in width and 900 pixels in height and thats a 16:10 ratio. Having non-square pixels does'nt add more pixels to the panel.
 
mrboo said:
It does'nt matter if the pixels are parallelograms, the panel is 1024 pixels in width and 768 pixels in height, and thats a 4:3 ratio. were as a 720p panel is 1280 pixels in width and 720 pixels in height and thats 16:9 widescreen. The PC monitor im using right now is 1440 pixels in width and 900 pixels in height and thats a 16:10 ratio. Having non-square pixels does'nt add more pixels to the panel.
Click to expand...

If the panel is physically 16:9 (as the plasmas are) then it really is 16:9 and not 4:3 no matter what the resolution is. Using a 1024x768 16:9 panel with 720p simply looses a bit of the horizontal resolution.
 
breez said:
If the panel is physically 16:9 (as the plasmas are) then it really is 16:9 and not 4:3 no matter what the resolution is. Using a 1024x768 16:9 panel with 720p simply looses a bit of the horizontal resolution.
Click to expand...

It is also worth noting that some of the higher end plasmas from Panasonic (1024*768) actually offer better image quality than some of the 1360*768 or 1280*720 sets even if the Panny sets have less pixels. The quality of the scaling, the contrast and colour reproduction are all very very important and sometims can give much better results than a set with just 23% more pixels, especially when watching movies.


Can we get back on topic?
 
yea, I'm one of those who have found the scaler in 360 to exceed the quality of the one in my tv... yea.. I'm cheap :rolleyes: so shoot me.

Personally I think it's great that Ms offers users the option rather than forcing us to use the one in our tvs (if we have one).
 
To me this doesn't personally matter. A really well setup 480p system still looks great IMO and the difference is 540 lines vs 480.
But this industry isn't just about facts and specs. It's also about things like perception and bragging rights.
And I think this is a suprising decision that handed MS an important opening to pick away at.
 
And after 9 pages of discussion encompassing mostly things that have nothing to do with the topic, i am still amazed that there is no scaler in the PS3.

I understand the reasons why Sony didn't put it there, i just think that the advantages of having one far outweight the "disadvantages".
Or maybe Sony just finished the money and couldn't put one in! :devilish:
 
london-boy said:
And after 9 pages of discussion encompassing mostly things that have nothing to do with the topic, i am still amazed that there is no scaler in the PS3.
Click to expand...

Oh, if I change context from how many people this will really hit, yeah I'm amazed that they are not requiring everything to do 1080i and 480i no matter what else it does. I mean, that's the safety zone right there. That they're doing 1080p on some titles without requiring 1080i for all titles is quite a head scratcher to me. The easiest way to have gotten there probably would have been with a scaler, but whatever.
 
patsu said:
:yes: Under modern PS3 economy, the above should be revised to:

eBayers + importers (0.1%) and rich innovators who bought from them at >4 times above market value
normal innovators (2.4%)
early adopters (13.5%)
early majority (34%)
late majority (34%)
laggards (16%)
Click to expand...

Yeah well i think the importers are still "innovators". Just a bit extreme :LOL:


(yes i have given up all hope of even trying to stay on-topic...)

A Laggard would be basically someone who buys a PS1 today... Ok that is an extreme laggard. I think PS2 is still in a stage between "Late Majority" and "laggard" as it is still going quite strong. Once PS3 launches, we could say that only laggards will be buying PS2's. Cheapskates. :devilish:
 
geo said:
Oh, if I change context from how many people this will really hit, yeah I'm amazed that they are not requiring everything to do 1080i and 480i no matter what else it does. I mean, that's the safety zone right there. That they're doing 1080p on some titles without requiring 1080i for all titles is quite a head scratcher to me. The easiest way to have gotten there probably would have been with a scaler, but whatever.
Click to expand...

Well i think this goes hand in hand with all those unsolved mysteries we have encountered in our long and suffered gaming lives. Like why exactly pro-scan was disabled from European Xbox and GC games but not PS2... :???:

I think it goes under the category "It's just one of those things..."
 
If there is/are indeed off-limit scaler(s) in PS3... can someone point it/them out in the PS3 motherboard shot ? I'm curious again :)
 
mrboo said:
I completely understand that people are using old sets and dont want to upgrade them, why fix it if its not broke? But bashing Sony because there old set only does 1080i is quite frankly, silly. There old sets and there not going to be up-to date in terms of specs and functionality. And for future displays? OLED is IMO and from what ive seen of it perhaps the most promishing, just got to wait for it become affordable. And Brightside are working on reducing the costs on there "true" HDR displays.
Click to expand...
What is really silly is this : when you have the pretention to sell a computer, and when you know that compatibility is the key for computer, you try at least to be compatible with at least ANY KIND of display devices if you want some credibility, especialy if you're like sony a giant in electronic devices.

Sorry for bashing sony but, they really want try to get beaten or what.????

EDIT // Sorry london boy for my bad grammar, beaten is better I guess ;) anyway at least they want to get hurt.
For S&M that may be why KK looks so entertaining in public==>His wife beats him lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Dldsr 1620p Frame Generation Problem
Replies
4
Views
396
homerdog
homerdog
Cyan
Microsoft's Auto SR: Universal AI upscaling discussion.
Replies
4
Views
715
DegustatoR
D
Cyan
Lossless Scaling. Machine learning Frame Generation and upscaling on ANY GPU!
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
12K
gamervivek
G
M
Interesting old GPU architecture
Replies
17
Views
2K
Ailuros
Ailuros
R
Gaming and gaming hardware trends
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
eastmen
E
Back
Top