What the heck is "True HD" anyway?

... If you say so... Any chip that can be called a scaler will show a better 720p when there's some free AA on it (as it's downsampled from 1080p which has double the pixel count), then a straight 720p picture with no AA.
What about down samples from 1080i... shitty deinterlacing?
 
I wonder what people will call it when they release 1200p. I think I'll call it "BD" for Beyond Definition.

1200p? l'inq allready had an article on these "xd" resolutions etc. It'd better be a leap (like 4864x2048 or something)
 
Not really, the base image is still 1920x1080, 1080i's only problem is that it only displays 540 lines of those 1080 at one time.


anyway given the actual (real) resolution of HD media all this 1080P>* is a buncha crap for nothing.
But I guess resolution is one of the easier things for people to grasp "omg its a way bigger number, nevermind that I have a 40" set which I set 10 feet back from"
 
Well, it's that "broadcasting" ca-ca that's the problem. Damn the air as a transport medium!

So, what would a 10mb/s stream support max-resolution wise after compression? :smile: Or are we all going to need 100mb/s connections for the eye-popping res?
 
Well, it's that "broadcasting" ca-ca that's the problem. Damn the air as a transport medium!

So, what would a 10mb/s stream support max-resolution wise after compression? :smile: Or are we all going to need 100mb/s connections for the eye-popping res?
I'm alluding to the telecine process(and digital film also sucks) and also the compression which means that even bluray and hd-dvd 1080P isn't the "full" 1920x1080.
I believe because of the .7~ res rule(starts with an N,nyist or something) you'd have to a 4K film scanne to get the full 1080P.
Because of that typical film resolution is something like 1300-1500x800-900.
Puts it well within reach of 720P :D

Broastcasts are pretty pathetic, especially directtv.
 
Back
Top