Bullets 'n' Babes

Hey there, Just checking this site, when I saw this article from Whiggles.com. Its concerning Traffic on HD which seems to look crap on HD. It seems the HD version of traffic is: "480i upconvert."

Check out the articles:
http://whiggles.landofwhimsy.com/archiv ... alnut.html

It would be interesting to know what you lot think, I haven't got an HD Player or Bluray player yet, just content with my dvd player, if I get an HDTV then I may invest in a DVD Player which upscales normal DVD

This is ridiculous. If you don't have an HD transfer, then don't release the fucking HD disc.

I'll go HD next Christmas. Hopefully they'll stop releasing fake HD content before that.

tom2681 wrote:This is ridiculous. If you don't have an HD transfer, then don't release the fucking HD disc.

Indeed, this was exactly what I was thinking as well. If you look at some of the forum threads link on that page, you will see that the DVD Review from well known US sites say this was intended to look like that

The HD transfer looks horrible

A lot of these tech reviews are full of shit.

My eyes don't lie.

Your eyes don't like what?

Lol, typo.

This is disgusting, and yet another reason to be very wary about entering into the world of HD formats.

This is old, old news. What's more it was broadcast in actual HD a long time ago.

*moving to Technology now*

Yeah but who cares about the film anyway if it was some masterpiece that deserves HD then I would cry a bit.


Its pretty pathetic mind you, someone should grow balls and take them to court I say. But all them companies are too busy sucking each other off to care. I think some one could easily win a case easy, like the old MGM widescreen fiasco, they were took to court for similar lies and all the joe publics got cash from it.

In my eyes if you buy HD it means you get HD transfer, so to me they have blatantly lied to the consumers.

slasher13 wrote:Hey there, Just checking this site, when I saw this article from Whiggles.com. Its concerning Traffic on HD which seems to look crap on HD. It seems the HD version of traffic is: "480i upconvert."

Yuck. I'll be sticking with my Criterion which not only has oodles of extras not found on the HD-DVD version but should look better and especially when upscaled.

I wonder if people who reviewed it say it's fine as they didn't spot the issues and just saw a DVDesque transfer???

Markgway wrote:A lot of these tech reviews are full of shit. My eyes don't lie.

I have to agree there. Some reviewers go way overboard into obsessiveness over this stuff. It sounds like Traffic is particularly bad though.

Lourdes wrote:This is old, old news.

Thanks for letting us know when it was new news then

slasher13 wrote:if I get an HDTV then I may invest in a DVD Player which upscales normal DVD

They're cheap as chips now, under 100 notes. Don't for a BD or HD-DVD player will upscale too.

I still cannot see a dvd player Upscaling old standard dvds making them look any better, just makes no sense at all to me. Standard dvds look superb on my HDTV from about 6 foot away, no one gets much closer than that surley? Depends on the TV I guess, they all upscale a little different I guess.

I would like to see my dvds upscaled with a fancy dvd player, but honestly I dont expect much difference. I hope I am wrong mind you, as better quality would be even better, but you cannot make artifact/compression ridden transfers come to life I am sure and most big screens have it when you bump up a dvd to big scale.

Not all hd screens have good looking scalers. My projector has a very good scaler - and I must say standard definition (SD) DVD's look great on it... I tried various DVD "upscalers" but couldn't notice much difference on 1080i or 720p from the 480/576i/p images my projectore scaled up to it's native size. That may be because neither 1080 or 720 matches my projectors native resolution so it did some "work" on all of them...

However, it's been long since I stopped fussing about reviews. I use a few places for general guidelines but in the end I usually just plunge and check for myself...

gojensen wrote:Not all hd screens have good looking scalers. My projector has a very good scaler - and I must say standard definition (SD) DVD's look great on it... I tried various DVD "upscalers" but couldn't notice much difference on 1080i or 720p from the 480/576i/p images my projectore scaled up to it's native size. That may be because neither 1080 or 720 matches my projectors native resolution so it did some "work" on all of them...

However, it's been long since I stopped fussing about reviews. I use a few places for general guidelines but in the end I usually just plunge and check for myself...

Ahh I didnt think of the crap scalers in certian eqipment Mine in my Tv seems to be very good so far, no real problems and everything looks nice. Even non anamporhic dvds dont look to bad scaled up to fill the screen, which suprised me. They wont win medals, but still look ok.

Still I have yet to see true HD on my screen yet.

Yer in fer a surprise

romerojpg wrote:I still cannot see a dvd player Upscaling old standard dvds making them look any better, just makes no sense at all to me.

Why? You're increasing the resolution. In my experiance it does make a difference not as much as most make out IMO though. I found going from Scart so Interlaced to a Progressive image made more difference.

What connection do you have to your LCD? I hope it's not crappy scart.

romerojpg wrote:I would like to see my dvds upscaled with a fancy dvd player, but honestly I dont expect much difference.

You're better off waiting to use your HD Player now as those upscale well too.

I can't tell the difference between my DVDP upscaling to 720p or 1080i at all. I'm not purist like you though.

From what I am reading upscalers make little or no differece anyway, so no way I will bother with one of them.

You cannot get better picture from upscalling as you are not increasing the resolution at all, your just splitting the lines of the origanal source and thats not increasing resolution in any way, that makes no common sense at all to me, its still the exact same amount of lines in the end. Try it on your PC, take a picture and upscale that, it does not make the picture better at all, if anything it can do more worse than good.

My TV apprently upscales far, far better than most upscaler dvd players anyway, so it wouldnt be good for mine anyway I am sure. Just a waste of time in the end. I use RGB scart and its a quality one too the pictures pretty much as you would expect, perfect apart from the fact dvds look like crap large scale anyway as you see so much wrong in the transfers.

You will be able to see the difference between 720 and 1080 if you had a large screen I am sure obviously you wont see it on a 32 incher or smaller, if you can your eyes are amazing and your sitting 1 foot from the screen Saying that a PC LCD is easy to see when something ruiing at high resolutions, so its odd we dont see it as much on HD TV's.

romerojpg wrote:You cannot get better picture from upscalling as you are not increasing the resolution at all, your just splitting the lines of the origanal source and thats not increasing resolution in any way, that makes no common sense at all to me, its still the exact same amount of lines in the end.

Coming from a man whose never seen or owned such a equipment . Ask Tom he's able to describe it well.

The same theory can also be applied to CDs. Using DVD-Audio Solo you can master your own 192Khz 24-Bit Stereo DVD-Audio disc which sounds much better than the 44Khz 16-Bit Stereo CD original. The original CD can sound tinny whereas the copy does not.

I'm surprised you've not given DVD-A and SACD ago both unfortunately offer limited software but sound infinitely better than CD.

Agreed you'd think they'd sound the same but they don't.

romerojpg wrote:My TV apprently upscales far, far better than most upscaler dvd players anyway, so it wouldnt be good for mine anyway I am sure. Just a waste of time in the end.

It won't be upscaling if it's fed a 576p or 480p image. That negates the entire point of getting an upscaling DVD player, which all need an LCD or Plasma to be any use.

romerojpg wrote:I use RGB scart and its a quality one too the pictures pretty much as you would expect, perfect apart from the fact dvds look like crap large scale anyway as you see so much wrong in the transfers.

Believe me Romero and you know I'm no expert RGB Scart is Interlace and utter crap compared to at least Component which is at least Progressive.

You'll see what you've been missing when you get an HD Player and watch DVDs using it. What's the point paying all that money for a TV and then using a Scart connection??? That makes no sense to me.

Sure it's better than a Composite feed (the yellow cable or through Scart) but that's not saying much. My sister £30 Freeview box uses the same technology you're using on your £1200 TV. A ruddy scartb cable.

You've convincing yourself you don't need a new DVD Player as you've just spent a small fortune on a TV which is understandable but don't bee fooled to think you're getting anywhere the best out of your TV by using Scart!

romerojpg wrote: I use RGB scart and its a quality one too the pictures pretty much as you would expect, perfect apart from the fact dvds look like crap large scale anyway as you see so much wrong in the transfers.

WHAHAHA! What a fucking moron you are! Shitty interlaced Scart, 480p/576p (which are progressive scan, not HDTV resolutions) are night and day compared to interlaced. Running progressive scan ain't upscaling, it's simply showing a the complete image minus scanlines at SD resolutions.

obviously you wont see it on a 32 incher or smaller,

Upscaling probably not, but progressive scan yes. Fucktard, ditch those Scart leads and use Component.

bradavon wrote:

romerojpg wrote:You cannot get better picture from upscalling as you are not increasing the resolution at all, your just splitting the lines of the origanal source and thats not increasing resolution in any way, that makes no common sense at all to me, its still the exact same amount of lines in the end.

Coming from a man whose never seen or owned such a equipment . Ask Tom he's able to describe it well.

The same theory can also be applied to CDs. Using DVD-Audio Solo you can master your own 192Khz 24-Bit Stereo DVD-Audio disc which sounds much better than the 44Khz 16-Bit Stereo CD original. The original CD can sound tinny whereas the copy does not.

I'm surprised you've not given DVD-A and SACD ago both unfortunately offer limited software but sound infinitely better than CD.

Agreed you'd think they'd sound the same but they don't.

I have seen upscaler dvd players in use, never owned one mind you. I saw NO differnece at all, nothing and hell thats enuff for my eyes to see its worthless.

Sound and vision are very different, you can turn mono into superb 5.1 surround, you cannot turn a grotty non anamorphic dvd with 200 lines of resolution into anything much better and nothing I have seen or read can convince me of that. Maybe if your upscaler in your equipment is shite to start with then yes it could be better. The one in my TV is pretty good as far as I know.

bradavon wrote:

romerojpg wrote:My TV apprently upscales far, far better than most upscaler dvd players anyway, so it wouldnt be good for mine anyway I am sure. Just a waste of time in the end.

It won't be upscaling if it's fed a 576p or 480p image. That negates the entire point of getting an upscaling DVD player, which all need an LCD or Plasma to be any use.

You lost me now as far as I know an upscaler scales up ALL images fed to it? 576p or 480p included, but I havent read into it that much so may be taling bollocks

bradavon wrote:

romerojpg wrote:I use RGB scart and its a quality one too the pictures pretty much as you would expect, perfect apart from the fact dvds look like crap large scale anyway as you see so much wrong in the transfers.

Believe me Romero and you know I'm no expert RGB Scart is Interlace and utter crap compared to at least Component which is at least Progressive.

You'll see what you've been missing when you get an HD Player and watch DVDs using it. What's the point paying all that money for a TV and then using a Scart connection??? That makes no sense to me.

Sure it's better than a Composite feed (the yellow cable or through Scart) but that's not saying much. My sister £30 Freeview box uses the same technology you're using on your £1200 TV. A ruddy scartb cable.

You've convincing yourself you don't need a new DVD Player as you've just spent a small fortune on a TV which is understandable but don't bee fooled to think you're getting anywhere the best out of your TV by using Scart!

My dvd player isnt progressive, so thats pointless getting it for that anyway and from comparsions etc.. I have seen over the years and testing I did for my last TV etc.., Scart VS components is pretty much in the eye of the beholder on most pieces of equipment. On projectors I saw a difference mind you, but most the time I have never seen a leap up from scart thats for sure. If scart was that bad, they wouldnt reccomend it at all for any equipment.

Obviously I wont be using Scart for HD dvd player etc.. HDMI all the way.

I do not need a new dvd player, I need no convincing at all, the one I have is superb thru Scart, all the reviews of my machine at the time also said so. I beleve them over anyone else, and my own eyes too

and Eva as I said above non of that would make any difference as I dont have a progressive scan dvd player. If I did then I would change cables.

Seriously remember most DVDs are encoded Progressively!

EvaUnit02 wrote:WHAHAHA! What a fucking moron you are! Shitty interlaced Scart, 480p/576p (which are progressive scan, not HDTV resolutions) are night and day compared to interlaced. Running progressive scan ain't upscaling, it's simply showing a the complete image minus scanlines at SD resolutions.

Upscaling probably not, but progressive scan yes. Fucktard, ditch those Scart leads and use Component.

You managed to condence my whole post into a few "eliquent" words

romerojpg wrote:Sound and vision are very different, you can turn mono into superb 5.1 surround, you cannot turn a grotty non anamorphic dvd with 200 lines of resolution into anything much better and nothing I have seen or read can convince me of that.

Huh? Where did non-anamorphic poorly mastered DVDs come from? Obviously I'm talking about anamorphic progressive encoded properly mastered DVDs and yes you can improve upon them.

romerojpg wrote:Maybe if your upscaler in your equipment is shite to start with then yes it could be better. The one in my TV is pretty good as far as I know.

I'm 95% sure you're mistaken on what your TV is doing. Think about it you get an upscaling DVD playing it takes the 480p/576p signal and upscales it to either 720p or 1080i (some even 1080p) and displays it on your LCD or Plasma TV. Which you need to handle the upscaled image.

If the LCD and Plasma automatically upscaled then there would be no need for an upscaling DVD player. You're not upscaling shit and watching your DVDs in yucky 480i or 576i. Obviously they look better as you've got a bloody good TV, but don't fool yourself (as you are to save cost) that it's the best you can get out of them.

romerojpg wrote:You lost me now as far as I know an upscaler scales up ALL images fed to it? 576p or 480p included, but I havent read into it that much so may be taling bollocks

To what? It's just recieving a signal it's fed. If your DVD player has no upscaling capabilities how is it going to pick what to upscale to:

720p
1080i
1080p

Answer the TV can't.

romerojpg wrote:My dvd player isnt progressive, so thats pointless getting it for that anyway and from comparsions etc.. I have seen over the years and testing I did for my last TV etc.., Scart VS components is pretty much in the eye of the beholder on most pieces of equipment.

How are you somehow an expert on this subject? Ignoring all the experts (not me) and convincing yourself Interlaced is good enough.

Why did you bother buying a new TV to then just feed it a Scart signal. I don't see the point. As for Scart vs. Component that's a pretty worthless comparison as both are just analogue transport methods.

Obviously an Interlaced signal fed through both will look nigh on identical. Was the test done with a Progressive signal feed through the Component?

romerojpg wrote:On projectors I saw a difference mind you, but most the time I have never seen a leap up from scart thats for sure. If scart was that bad, they wouldnt reccomend it at all for any equipment.

Of course they would, for a few reasons:

1. It's cheap.
2. Historically in Europe Scart has been the norm.
3. Most sellers don't know shit and think Scart "is it".
4. Virtually every TV in the UK has Scart and up until (relatively) recently has the best we can get.
5. Most people think Scart is the best.
6. Scart is still sadly the best for all Freeview boxes and Standard Sky boxes (I think Sky+ has Component)

Case in point I bought my £500 DVD player with upscaling HDMI capability and the seller on the phone recommended I buy a £100 Scart cable. I didn't say anything but thought "do you really have any idea what you're selling"? A scart no matter how good it is is NOT the right cable for this equipment.

Just because Scart is better than Composite or S-Video it doesn't make it good.

romerojpg wrote:Obviously I wont be using Scart for HD dvd player etc.. HDMI all the way.

If you're really serious it's worth testing both HDMI and Component. I've heard some reports that on some players Component looks better.

Don't discount DVI too which is identical to HDMI but has no audio support.

romerojpg wrote:I do not need a new dvd player, I need no convincing at all, the one I have is superb thru Scart, all the reviews of my machine at the time also said so.

Obviously it got good review when you bought it but would it today? I doubt it. I still wonder why you bothered paying all the money for a TV. Sure it may look superb I don't doubt that but can it look even better? Definitely.

Anyway you'll see when you do end up getting an HD player (which will offer you DVD upscaled and progressive) what you've been missing.

I thought you were serious about your AV? I guess not . Still you did buy a swanky Sony 6.1 Amp to then only plug 5.1 speakers into it. I never did work that one out

I cannot be arsed to get into Quote Wars.

Scart
The difference between RGB Scart and component video is so miniscule you probably need a degree and expensive equipment to find it. If Romero is using RGB Scart there's no real need to upgrade. And note, Scart doesn't equal better than composite or s-video. Scart can contain composite signals and it can contain s-video signals, meaning it's no better "just simpler". RGB scart is better than composite and s-video though. That is the beauty of scart really, one connector, one cable that does it all. I.e. if I hook my dvd-player up to my tv using the RGB Scart connector I can on my tv select to switch between composite, s-video and rgb signals for instant comparisons between the three...

Progressive
Most (all I've seen) progressive players don't care if the contents is progressively encoded or not. There simply isn't a way for the player to know without doing expensive (in time) scanning of the video. Thusly it reads the video signal fed from the MPEG2 decoder, looks at the pulldown flagging and decides wheter the flagging is correct or tries to restructure it.

"Upscaling"
As for upscaling. ANY LCD or Plasma screen with a native resolution other than 480/576 must do upscaling... otherwise Romero would be looking at window boxing. What is upscaling? Just a simple resize... something even your LCD monitor can do without specialized hardware. Now, given that any progressive display worth it's materials must do deinterlacing - I can safely say that the need for a progressive DVD player today is miniscule. It was an issue "earlier" as the first (few) displays and (mostly) projectors just displayed what they got fed - but not today.

So Romero is right, his TV does upscale - or resize. And Brad is wrong The TV takes whatever it is given, and resizes it to the same resolution as it's LCD/Plasma panels native resolution (i.e. scaling a DVD image from 720x576 to say 1366x768 if that happened to be the native resolution of the screen...)

This is where HD/BRD and "True-HD" 1080p is so sweet. All HD discs are stored in 1080p/24 (for film based material). Meaning, there's no need for scaling, no need for deinterlacing, and just direct pixel to pixel mapping sweetness. FINALLY they got something right! (This also means the content on the disc is exactly (or can be) the same from region to region, no need to encode this for 576 25fps and that for 480 ~30fps.)

Still I may invest in a new Standard dvd player as there's some staggering machines out now and the picture is as good as it will ever made a dvd look. Oppo 981 apprently is as good as machines get for standard dvd, beating £1000+ machines in every department and only costing somethiong like £170, not sure if I want to buy another one, but hell my Sony player is 3+ years old now and sure tech has moved along, even a little.

But I am sure HD DVD and Blue Ray machines will play normal dvds perfectly soon and make them look as good.