A
Amaris
Guest
I'll have to buy the White album again.
Movie Blurays: Pros and Cons
- Thread starter Timelord79 (he/him)
- Start date
I'll have to buy the White album again.
I get enough UV Rays while sitting out in the sun, thank you very much. I don't burn as easily as most though. Maybe I get the upscaled rays.
There's a thing called a contrast button on black and white TV's. You twiddle it, and it it makes the blacks blacker and the whites whiter. They've had them since the 60's. You can see things in the picture you couldn't see before. I don't know the math, but I know it happens. There's photoshop, too, and fractal programs and edge enhancement. You can get programs that can predict, to some degree, what the picture will be. But, as anyone who has used the zoom button on the DVD player knows, it is only guesswork and when you keep blowing up further and further, it doesn't work as well. Google 'upscaling algorithm' and 'image processing' and see. NASA have been doing it for years. J Allen, you should do look these up.
Here, for one:
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...s-to-hd-quality-with-gpu-accelerated-software
And, another:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-3TYMSFF-4&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1998&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1539341711&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=bf7e11b01b1eb2992e9d4fce7ceca77f&searchtype=a
And another:
http://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/
And another:
http://www.truview.com/
And:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/08/010824080532.htm
And:
http://www.medicaldesignbriefs.com/component/content/article/8386
And, for moving video;
http://www.notbored.org/nasa.html
Nice wind-up guys. Didn't work.
Here, for one:
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...s-to-hd-quality-with-gpu-accelerated-software
And, another:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-3TYMSFF-4&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1998&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1539341711&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=bf7e11b01b1eb2992e9d4fce7ceca77f&searchtype=a
And another:
http://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/
And another:
http://www.truview.com/
And:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/08/010824080532.htm
And:
http://www.medicaldesignbriefs.com/component/content/article/8386
And, for moving video;
http://www.notbored.org/nasa.html
Nice wind-up guys. Didn't work.
Last edited:
They read like a human that can think and make sense of the world.
Yours read like people who worked in Guantanemo Bay, interrogating people.
I think they could simulate a waterboarding splash, from what I read, using fluid flow equations.
No, hang on, fluid flow equations don't exist, they're a figment of my imagination.
Yours read like people who worked in Guantanemo Bay, interrogating people.
I think they could simulate a waterboarding splash, from what I read, using fluid flow equations.
No, hang on, fluid flow equations don't exist, they're a figment of my imagination.
Cheapjack. You really don't know what upscaling means, do you?
I'll try it again.
A DVD is somewhere around 440 pixels wide.
An HDTV is somewhere around 1080 pixels wide.
To "upsacle" is to make that 440 pixel-wide picture fit into that 1080 frame so it won't be a box on the screen.
The problem is there's no way for it to know what is between "Pixel A" and "Pixel B" because that information simply isn't there! So the BluRay player, sort-of, "guesses." It's a very good guess. But a guess none the less.
On BluRay that information is there since BluRay discs are given that information between "Pixel A" and "Pixel B" to create "Pixel A.5" The result is a sharper picture because now you've more information. Almost 3x the information when going from DVD to BluRay.
Do this.
Open MSPaint and click on the Text Tool. Use 14 point font and type a letter G in a fanciet font, say "Curlz Mt." Once typed, copy and paste it, select the crop tool and highlight this letter, right click on the box, select "resize/skew" and resize the selection by 500% both vertically and horizontally. Notice how it looks like a shitty mess? This is not to dissimilar from using the "zoom" button on your DVD remote. The information between pixels isn't there for the zoom button to know what's going on.
Now, in "upscaling" the program would be able to "better guess" at nuances of the letter to make it better. There's really not a good way for me to demonstrate this in Paint, but go with me. This method probably gets us in the neighborhood because in demonstrates the point. There's no way for the program to know what is going on between and round pixels if there's no information there. It can either "guess" (which upconverting does) or just say "Fuck it" and make every pixel five times larger. THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS HAPPENING! The information for the additional pixels on a DVD version of a movie simply isn't there! All upconverting does is take averages and of surrounding pixels and gets in the neighborhood. It does this very well, sure, but it doesn't do this as well as a BD. As I said in the space-station pic. If the space dock windows are less than a pixel wide on the DVD it then has to use FOUR pixels to get the "idea." On "upscaled" BD it takes this "idea" and runs with it to result in something a bit better but not as good as the BD which does have the capacity to represent that window as a single pixel.
Now, go back to text tool, select a bigger font (say 72 pt. since this will be about the same size as out "zoomed" G) and retype that G. WOW! It's defined, clear, and nifty. Welcome to the world of BluRay. More information, results in better, defined, pictures! More pixels means more subtle nuances! Notice how the curl on the op of the letter is extended out a bit better and not just a closed loop! Who knew?!
I'll try it again.
A DVD is somewhere around 440 pixels wide.
An HDTV is somewhere around 1080 pixels wide.
To "upsacle" is to make that 440 pixel-wide picture fit into that 1080 frame so it won't be a box on the screen.
The problem is there's no way for it to know what is between "Pixel A" and "Pixel B" because that information simply isn't there! So the BluRay player, sort-of, "guesses." It's a very good guess. But a guess none the less.
On BluRay that information is there since BluRay discs are given that information between "Pixel A" and "Pixel B" to create "Pixel A.5" The result is a sharper picture because now you've more information. Almost 3x the information when going from DVD to BluRay.
Do this.
Open MSPaint and click on the Text Tool. Use 14 point font and type a letter G in a fanciet font, say "Curlz Mt." Once typed, copy and paste it, select the crop tool and highlight this letter, right click on the box, select "resize/skew" and resize the selection by 500% both vertically and horizontally. Notice how it looks like a shitty mess? This is not to dissimilar from using the "zoom" button on your DVD remote. The information between pixels isn't there for the zoom button to know what's going on.
Now, in "upscaling" the program would be able to "better guess" at nuances of the letter to make it better. There's really not a good way for me to demonstrate this in Paint, but go with me. This method probably gets us in the neighborhood because in demonstrates the point. There's no way for the program to know what is going on between and round pixels if there's no information there. It can either "guess" (which upconverting does) or just say "Fuck it" and make every pixel five times larger. THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS HAPPENING! The information for the additional pixels on a DVD version of a movie simply isn't there! All upconverting does is take averages and of surrounding pixels and gets in the neighborhood. It does this very well, sure, but it doesn't do this as well as a BD. As I said in the space-station pic. If the space dock windows are less than a pixel wide on the DVD it then has to use FOUR pixels to get the "idea." On "upscaled" BD it takes this "idea" and runs with it to result in something a bit better but not as good as the BD which does have the capacity to represent that window as a single pixel.
Now, go back to text tool, select a bigger font (say 72 pt. since this will be about the same size as out "zoomed" G) and retype that G. WOW! It's defined, clear, and nifty. Welcome to the world of BluRay. More information, results in better, defined, pictures! More pixels means more subtle nuances! Notice how the curl on the op of the letter is extended out a bit better and not just a closed loop! Who knew?!
No.
Fonts are stored as vectors anyway. It's something to do with the difference between vector and raster graphics. They're stored as equations and can be made bigger and bigger.
If you can't guess what's there, how does the zoom button work on a DVD, and how do you explain the 7 sites I mentioned, that states you CAN guess what's there, quite explicitly, and it is being done right now? You can only do it to a limited extent.
On UK Channel 5, they watched a DVD on a bluray, upscaled, and watched the bluray version on the same screen. They said the bluray was better, but there was not much differennce anyway. It was hard to tell, if upscaling is done well, cos there's only a 4-6 times more pixels. That's why it's so hard with those Trek cOre caps. But, they wouldn't be able to go up three more steps to ultra high def, I don't think without it being obvious.
Fonts are stored as vectors anyway. It's something to do with the difference between vector and raster graphics. They're stored as equations and can be made bigger and bigger.
If you can't guess what's there, how does the zoom button work on a DVD, and how do you explain the 7 sites I mentioned, that states you CAN guess what's there, quite explicitly, and it is being done right now? You can only do it to a limited extent.
On UK Channel 5, they watched a DVD on a bluray, upscaled, and watched the bluray version on the same screen. They said the bluray was better, but there was not much differennce anyway. It was hard to tell, if upscaling is done well, cos there's only a 4-6 times more pixels. That's why it's so hard with those Trek cOre caps. But, they wouldn't be able to go up three more steps to ultra high def, I don't think without it being obvious.
Yes, well it's quite easy to extrapolate simple lines and curves and guess the most likely letters and numbers, especially when you already know what the letters and numbers look like.
You do realize what those numbers actually mean, right?
640*480 (480i) = 307,200 pixels
1280*720 (720p) = 921,600 pixels
1920*1080 (1080p) = 2,073,600 pixels
So in order to 'upscale' from 480i to just 720p, the player has to create 614,400 pixels. In order to move from 480i to 1080p, the player has to create 1.7 million pixels. Per frame.
Humans know what the letters look like, you can get AI programs, too, and you can get fractal programs that infer more than straight lines and curves, not perfectly, of course.
I read that you can actually get higher than film defintion, see writing you can't see on 35mm, using these methods.
I read that you can actually get higher than film defintion, see writing you can't see on 35mm, using these methods.
Irrelevant, and you know it. They do it. Take it from a shop window advert or the net, they do it. Stick a standard DVD in a bluray and it will play. Stick an american DVD in a European player and it will play. They do it all the time. My £60 player could do it. The one they did these transfers on just cost about a hundred times more and had a much bigger menu, when you pressed the right button.
Once again, you fail to see the point. You can use a search engine, but you certainly don't understand. Your posts don't read like that of someone who can make sense of the world. They read like someone who does not have a clue. I would like you to post a link that actually has something to do with the movie in question. A review, a website about the movie being upscaled. No more crap having to do with still photography or NASA or supposed HD upconversion pictures that are practically thumbnail size.
Guantanamo Bay? (Not to mention other posts about how a bloke with a retina implant would be able to see it) And you accuse us of "winding up"? Looks like you have a talent for that. Your eyesight and logical reasoning could use some work though.
Guantanamo Bay? (Not to mention other posts about how a bloke with a retina implant would be able to see it) And you accuse us of "winding up"? Looks like you have a talent for that. Your eyesight and logical reasoning could use some work though.
Fonts are stored as vectors yes, and if you zoom in on them in a vector based program they will get bigger and bigger. But if you place them in a resolution dependent format like tif, jpg or digital video, they will pixelate like any other picture.
The best software available for a PC won't interpolate a resolution dependent picture well enough to give a new photographic image a greater crispness than the old one when you are quadrupling it's size, because it is impossible. And that's just for one frame, with the fastest PC and best software available.
Cheapjack is still tryng to make sense of the world.
I think we all got it a hundred posts ago... except for Cheapjack.
Yes, it can, and they've done it. They stuck a standard DVD in a bluray player on Channel 5's gadget show and it made up the four-six times more pixels. They do it. NASA do better things.
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...s-to-hd-quality-with-gpu-accelerated-software
I've been reading since I was five. Please read back to me what this site name says.
Here, in case your browser crashes:
Fremont (CA) - A company called ArcSoft Inc. has developed a graphical upscaling software application. The program takes lesser quality video and converts it (upscales it) to HD video using advanced upscaling algorithms. These algorithms allow for realistic or life-like 1080p presentations from significantly lesser sources, such as those captured by cell phones. The extensive compute needs of the algorithms have been applied to the massively parallel GPU and Nvidia's CUDA software engine, allowing for real-time conversion and playback with an 80% lower CPU requirement.
http://www.tgdaily.com/software-fea...s-to-hd-quality-with-gpu-accelerated-software
I've been reading since I was five. Please read back to me what this site name says.
Here, in case your browser crashes:
Fremont (CA) - A company called ArcSoft Inc. has developed a graphical upscaling software application. The program takes lesser quality video and converts it (upscales it) to HD video using advanced upscaling algorithms. These algorithms allow for realistic or life-like 1080p presentations from significantly lesser sources, such as those captured by cell phones. The extensive compute needs of the algorithms have been applied to the massively parallel GPU and Nvidia's CUDA software engine, allowing for real-time conversion and playback with an 80% lower CPU requirement.
Last edited:
Might actually want to read the whole article...
They make a claim then subtly back off.
