Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
11th December 2012, 01:17 | #16161 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 934
|
I see. Yeah I think all non-BBC SD channels in the UK are 704x576 or 544x576. Not sure why the BBC persist with 720x576 when everything is sourced from HD anyway and thus there's no need for the extra columns.
__________________
TV Setup: LG OLED55B7V; Onkyo TX-NR515; ODroid N2+; CoreElec 9.2.7 |
11th December 2012, 03:01 | #16162 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
|
Quote:
Can't really comment on the 720x576 vs 704x576 issue, though I guess 18 samples of black each line aren't going to tax encoders too much. And not everything is sourced HD - lots of daytime is still SD originated, as is most of the News until the New Year when it moves to HD studios in Central London. (Newsnight, The Andrew Marr Show and Sunday Politics have already moved and are HD) So now SD-originated shows on BBC One are upconverted to HD and then downconverted back to SD for broadcast on SD platforms. (Previously BBC One HD and BBC One SD had slightly separate chains) |
|
11th December 2012, 04:04 | #16163 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 92
|
Whichever has the faster memory. I currently run a GT640 with 2gb of memory. It runs MadVR quite well, but it tends to struggle with some of the newer techniques, not because of processing, but because the memory is relatively slow DR3.
|
11th December 2012, 09:03 | #16164 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 301
|
madshi, on full screen madvr shows the seekbar when moving mouse to the bottom of the screen. Would it be possible to add an option for it to show when user presses the play button on remote? That's one of the nice features of WMC, when watching something it will show no UI items but when pressing play it will show seekbar and clock for couple of seconds so you can quickly check how much is left and what time it is.
Also is there any way to customize the seekbar overlay?
__________________
Windows 10 Pro 2004 with Media Center, 2 x DVB-C with cable cards MPC-HC (madVR, LAV Filters, XySubFilter) Sony Bravia 85X950H/85XH95 Yamaha RX-V685 Yamaha Piano Black NS-777/555/C444/YST-SW315 Last edited by Joniii; 11th December 2012 at 09:16. |
11th December 2012, 10:30 | #16165 | Link | ||||
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
I've been writing a thread on 704 vs. 720 issue with many DVD vs. Blu-Ray comparisons, both PAL and NTSC. (I even calculated aspect ratio differences) Which sub-forum should I post the topic on? It isn't finished yet (due to wrist pain and other stuffs) but I'll try post it soon. Quote:
NTSC version (even of the same title & studio) is a bit more complicated but still quite the same which non-ITU scaling should be more suitable. I think I can answer question (2) now at least. (I try to cover DVDs since the old time also to see what they've been doing) Almost every DVD studios now use about the same non-ITU standard for WS DVD (all over the world: Europe, Japan, US, etc.) for quite some time now. For 4:3 content I'm not very sure but I think it's the same now as well although much more late. For DVD world, they seems to adhere to ITU only for the 1st generation DVDs (~1997-2000) so it's quite clear that they decided to change (especially WS content). It's too difficult for me to get infos or samples of broadcasts over the world though. It's seems that some real-world standards/practices ignore ITU. For them "correct" or not by the book may be not important as end result. So overall if we have to choose one way over the other, I think it's a lot safer to left madVR as is, especially if you watch (PAL) DVDs. Quote:
As for broadcast, I'm not sure but according to this old thread here, the broadcast world seems to simply resampling 1920x1080 to 720x576. Quote:
Also as you know, things were a horrible mess at the time. Mass confusion on PAR, different committees came up with different standards, etc. So in my opinion we can't fully blame them as "wrong" as there was no clear & unify standard/explanation at first and when things got settled down it was somewhat too late, unlike HD. The results to date are evident in themselves, well established & messy even when we're moving to HD already. So yeah the standard is important but if it's not fully compliant with real-world as it is now (blame the old mess?)... I think at this point we should accept things as they are and find the most suitable way for them, not too strict on following ITU standard. Last edited by pururin; 11th December 2012 at 11:00. |
||||
11th December 2012, 10:45 | #16166 | Link | |||
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
My best guess right now is that those decoders which cause a freeze might not allocate enough surfaces for decoding + filling the madVR queues. But it's only a guess right now... Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
11th December 2012, 10:54 | #16167 | Link | |||||
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Ok, now to the tricky stuff:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
------- At this point we have 3 questions to answer. Could we please try to work all together on this? (1) Should the current solution stay default? Or should ITU become default? Whatever we decide on, the "other" solution would then be an option in madVR. (2) For PAL ITU, what exactly should madVR do? (2a) Should madVR crop the outer pixels? (2b) Which exact aspect ratio should be used? (3) For NTSC ITU, what exactly should madVR do? (3a) Should madVR crop the outer pixels? (3b) Which exact aspect ratio should be used? |
|||||
11th December 2012, 10:57 | #16168 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 301
|
Quote:
But yeah it might not be that simple. I'll ask again then
__________________
Windows 10 Pro 2004 with Media Center, 2 x DVB-C with cable cards MPC-HC (madVR, LAV Filters, XySubFilter) Sony Bravia 85X950H/85XH95 Yamaha RX-V685 Yamaha Piano Black NS-777/555/C444/YST-SW315 |
|
11th December 2012, 11:27 | #16171 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
Thus 702 is same correct as 720 pixels, 704 or 708,710 etc for 700 pixels in line, +-2% geometric distortions are equal to +-14 pixels - knowing fact that not many of us watching video with some ruler on screen i doubt that there is sense to have huge dispute about aspect distortions for normal view when most of TV (in past and nowadays) anyway doing strange processing and typical average Joe don't care even for geometric distortions +-5 - 7%. |
|
11th December 2012, 12:19 | #16173 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
For PAL (625 line systems based on ITU-R BT.1700) period that can be used for video is equal to 64-11.7=52.3us and for sampling 13.5MHz this give us exactly 706.05 pixels For NTSC (525 line systems based on SMPTE 170M-2004) this is 63.556-10.5=53.056us and for sampling 13.5MHz this give us exactly 716.256 pixels Also based on definitions from above mentioned standards some additional tens of ns can be used for displaying visible and valid video (and have full conformance with standard), we can assume that 525 system is capable to display almost all 720 pixels, and 625 system is capable to display around 708 - 710 pixels or all 720 - this functionality is provided by some HW companies (like ST Microelectronics for example). IMHO there is no sense to change current implementation - however if change anything then perfect size shall be arbitrary settable during for example calibration - then with help of ruler and after measurements final size should be applied especially that it will be display dependent type of settings. Some comment to above - it will horrible and nasty to perform decent (performance vs quality and coding time) resizer with arbitrary settings and subpixel resolution. Last edited by pandy; 11th December 2012 at 12:32. |
|
11th December 2012, 12:24 | #16174 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
The method I use is compare them to HD version (Blu-ray) which is free from these confusing stuffs. I found that trying to look for perfect shape or determine from picture edges area alone are not quite reliable. Especially in anime content, you can never be sure of the real shape. (what are "usable frames" that mandarinka mentioned?) Actually I intend to go in details about NTSC later but I'll post some quick example I've wrote: "1st, display full 720x480 DVD frame as 16:9 image (all software players do it like this) and compare it to Blu-ray disc: (These animated comparisons with debug texts below is just for quick example. The pictures are from anime Steins;Gate) Notice the use of non-ITU 720-based PAR =1.185 (32/27) and sample width=720 pixels. Those texts are debug messages of Dither which I use with AvsPmod+FFVideoSource for taking the screenshots. 2nd, display DVD according to Rec.601 spec by cropping 8 pixels off both sides and using the ITU Pixel Aspect Ratio =1.212 (40/33 for 16:9 NTSC) (Notice sample width=704) Now BD pic are cropped off 2.22% equally on all four sides (no AR change) to accommodate with Rec.601 DVD width (1440x810 cropped to 1408x792 to avoid rounding errors) You'll notice that neither 720 nor 704 (ITU) display is the right "true" aspect ratio. In terms of AR, both is not right (which way is better is to be measured after this) but the point for NTSC DVD is it's not that ITU must be correct and 720 is always 2.222% thinner (or 720 is correct and ITU must be 2.273% wider, on the contrary). In terms of picture information, it's quite clear that full 720 pixel DVD use the same width as full frame BD, i.e. Non-ITU DVD is usually BD-like." "Before you ask, no I didn't directly measure the difference in height between 2 versions because this method is not accurate enough (pics are much too small to do that). What I do is edit the BD pic at native 1080p resolution (sometimes higher, or lower but not too much) to match the full frame DVD picture, like when they cropped off the Hi-res master before scaling to DVD resolution, then calculate the difference between original and edited BD to aspec ratio values." = = = = = = The DVD above has 0.87% aspect ratio error for non-ITU display, 1.35% error for ITU display. The difference in AR error between the two is only 0.48% (too low to deem which one is better) but with non-ITU you'll get full (or nearly) picture information as BD, OTOH with ITU you'll always get less picture. => As you can see, for NTSC DVD it's not much about width (as they are usually the same as BD) but height, as they have the practice of cropping original picture off vertically, but not for PAL. (reason analysis for this production practice later) ==> Of all 21 NTSC DVDs (9 are animes) I did measure, the average AR error of Non-ITU display = ~1.126%, only 50.67% of 2.222...%. That is pretty even between 720 vs 704. Even if AR favors 704 a bit more, you'll still much more likely have to decide on whether cropping the sides off is beneficial. As for PAL DVDs, most of them are actual non-ITU (BD-like with non-ITU scaling) since almost 8-10 years ago from what I've found. I'm quite sure on this about Movies and newer animes (especially those with HD production), but I have only few real old anime samples as they are hard to find and match with BD re-releases. Also the situation for 4:3 content is somewhat different to WS content as I've said, they have different reason behind doing it. 4:3 tends to be ITU, I suspect this is because consumers couldn't see annoying side black bars when displayed with non-ITU method on widescreen monitor, and the black bars is much thinner in this case. So what mandarinka said might not contradict to mine as he said he mostly look at old animes (which many of them should be 4:3?). Quote:
Or maybe I could say DVD studios have been doing a great job managing their products on software display So IMHO you could wait much longer for more information to carefully decide later. (also maybe you might want to look at my comparison thread which I've not yet finished it may help you to decide at least a little) But if you are going at this now, my opinion is there is no need to change. Tons of DVDs are actually better with software method. Last edited by pururin; 12th December 2012 at 19:28. |
||
11th December 2012, 13:48 | #16175 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
It's not high priority, but it would be rather easy for me to implement, so there's no need to push it back.
Well, I'm not in a hurry with this, but it seems there are several people here right now with an opinion about this topic, so it's probably a good time to discuss it now. If I wait a couple more weeks/months, maybe those people won't happen to be around at that time. |
11th December 2012, 15:22 | #16177 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
didn't mean to hold you back on this topic though , just mean you can take time discussing and gathering info and implementing it later. Because I feel there are a lot of details: Broadcasts, DVDs, various Cams, capture cards etc. Each has different proportion in following ITU, none of them are strictly all ITU. I forgot to mention earlier that most anamorphic clip out there are non-ITU approach. Most encoders just crop few pixels off if they think the edges are too dirty, and have custom PAR specified (usually 720-based like decribed on the bottom of this page). That happen to be somewhat best solution for NTSC DVD, better aspect ratios than both 720 or 704. I would vote on keeping current solution as default and ITU can be turn on when needed. At least users can see whole image first before decide. ITU always come with cropping so ITU as default could lead to undesirable result without knowing, pic got automatically cropped off before display. Average user that didn't know this will be automatically stuck with ITU. About PAR, My understanding is as JEEB mentioned: NTSC: 40.0/33.0 for 16:9, 10.0/11.0 for 4:3 PAL: 16.0/11.0 for 16:9, 12.0/11.0 for 4:3 p.s. You know, I really appreciate that there will be a user friendly and precise software solution for this matter. I bet in the ~15 years history of those DVD software players many must had raised this topic before but I guess those companies deemed it unnecessary. Last edited by pururin; 11th December 2012 at 16:04. |
|
11th December 2012, 16:15 | #16178 | Link |
契約者
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,576
|
Just want to note that for all my DVDs whose sales started like few years ago, maybe 5 and newer, 720x480->853x480 is the only correct way of scaling. It may still not match to BD for example, because it is badly made and they cropped something for some reason, but its still the closest. And there is never any black bars, except maybe 2px at top or bottom (not always) and 1 semi-dark px at sides (can also be pixel that is brighter than needed but anyway it contains useful information). Still it happens there is no even single semi-dark one in some cases. It is actually valid for most older my dvd's too.
So the current madvr behavior seems to be alright. Except that I'm not really happy with stuff I reported before, when we have 1919x1080 resolution at the end (or was it fixed? didn't payed attention) Edit: imho it is too late for enforcing any standard when the standard itself is almost dead. Whatever way will be chosen will leave some of the content "broken" and making more options will just confuse users further. Even if user will ask which option should be chosen for scaling, he won't get an answer until person he asks will see and check the actual content (there is not much content that contains perfectly round circles or something). You're not going to compare each dvd to bluray before watching it. Means it is useless. Just leave everything as it was for years and everyone is used to. Last edited by Keiyakusha; 11th December 2012 at 16:57. |
11th December 2012, 16:33 | #16179 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
|
Hi,
I have something unclear hope somebody can answer it.. I use my laptop (dual graphic cards - intel iGPU 3000 and ATI 6770M) as a HTPC, it connect to panny plasma ST50 via HDMI-HDMI cable. This TV is euro model and doesn't have black level control unlike NA model. I assume it's at Standard (16-235) so I set dymanic range inside Intel graphic properties to Limited (which is RGB 16-235 ??) and set both Madvr/Lav video decoder at PC level (0-255). Everything work fine but not sure if it's the best configuration for me Changing anything makes my screen completely washed out. |
11th December 2012, 17:11 | #16180 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,049
|
Quote:
HDMI connection (HDMI mode) use always Limited Quantization Range (i.e. 16-235 for Y and 16-240 for Cx), Full Quantization Range is used only for DVI connection (over HDMI/DVI). |
|
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
|
|