23.976 fps movie on LCD 60 Hz [Archive]

Ghitulescu

30th December 2011, 09:42

HD ready displays always rescale the native material, unless feed from a PC. However, 24fps was never a PC compatible refresh rate, I think the minimum was always 60Hz (I'm not in an NTSC land, however I thought that NTSC-compatible displays always used 60i).
So, you can either triple the fps and feed it at 1360x768 (however no commercial video has such a frame size) or keep it at 24fps and either do yourself an upscaling or let the TV do it for you. Test all combinations and pick up the one that looks the best in your eyes.

pandy

30th December 2011, 16:53

However, 24fps was never a PC compatible refresh rate, I think the minimum was always 60Hz

Modern drivers support 24fps (and almost any reasonable combination) - NVidia drivers for example support own (defined by user in very flexible way) video modes.

hello_hello

30th December 2011, 18:26

So, you can either triple the fps and feed it at 1360x768 (however no commercial video has such a frame size) or keep it at 24fps and either do yourself an upscaling or let the TV do it for you.

How would you triple the frame rate?

The TV (32LG2000 HD Ready not FullHD) doesn't support 24p mode in 1360*768, if i change resolution to 1920*1080 i have the option to choose 24 Hz refresh rate. It's OK to play 1280*720 movie at 1920*1080 24 Hz instead native resolution 1360*768 60 Hz ?

I guess there's no reason why you can't. I had a look at the manual which is typically uninformative and basically all it says about film mode is
"This feature operates only in TV, AV and Component 480i/576i/1080i mode."
A bit further on in the manual it actually lists 24 and 23.97 as supported refresh rates in HDMI(DTV) mode at 1920x1080, but 1360x768 isn't a supported resolution in HDMI mode. The next one down is 1280x720. 1360x768 is only supported in PC mode and only at 60hz.

So yeah I guess there is kinda a special judder free setting for you. 1920x1080 with film mode enabled.

Thanks to this thread I got curious about refresh rates and as I use a PC for playback I started playing with the resolution. I always thought my TV only supported 60hz from a PC but it seems if I drop the resolution I can change the refresh rate. What I don't quite understand is neither of the standard 16:9 resolutions support anything other 60hz, but at 1360x768 I can actually get 72Hz or at 1600x900 I can get either 70Hz or 75Hz. The video card seems to think 72Hz is also supported but it doesn't display correctly.
So for me it seems using a PC I can get rid of the judder by dropping the resolution to 1600x900 and using a 70hz refresh rate, with reclock slowing the frame rate down to 23.333fps. Or dropping it to 1360x768 and using 24fps. I'll have to play around a bit more but so far it seems to work fine.

I must thank you. Without this thread I never would have played with resolutions and never would have known I can pretty much get some sort of 24p mode even though my TV doesn't support it. Well using a PC at least. I guess the Bluray player will be stuck in judder mode forever.

QBhd

31st December 2011, 04:36

Remicade

31st December 2011, 13:42

I know about 720p and 1080p from ATI Catalyst but it's OK to play at those resolutions who are not native resolution ?
Case 1 resolution 1360*768 (native for HD Ready), movie playing (1280*720) it's upscaled to 1360*768. Judder on, many many glitches on Display Stats in MPC HC.
Case 2 resolution 1920*1080 24 Hz, movie playing (1280*720) it's upscaled to 1920*1080 (??? I'm not sure I admit) then downscale to 1360*768 native resolution. Judder off, smooth image, no glitches on Display Stats in MPC HC.
In case 2 we have 1 operation in plus, theoretical the image quality it's a bit lower but we can observe this ?

amtm

31st December 2011, 18:28

Do you actually see any problems?

Remicade

1st January 2012, 00:08

Well for the moment with my settings I have tearing in 1080p 24 Hz. I still investigate the problem. The quality of the frames seems very similar to me, i'll put a sample on screenshotcomparison.com when it's up.

Remicade

1st January 2012, 09:28

Disabling LAV Video Decoder and no tearing.
I found a solution: If in Splash Player Pro (http://mirillis.com/en/products/splashexport.html) I activate Motion 2 (at maximum) judder disappear, the image is smooth fluid in the panning scenes.

Remicade

1st January 2012, 19:47

Another solution: SmoothVideo Project (SVP) (http://www.svp-team.com/wiki/Main_Page) a software who make motion interpolation like Splash. CPU usage is very high :(.

Remicade

1st January 2012, 19:48

On Phenom 920 with ATI 4670 I have 80% CPU load.
Splash use ~5-10% maybe I misconfigured SVP.

hello_hello

1st January 2012, 20:03

I too used to think that my TV would only do 60Hz, and it being a 720p TV I never thought to try some of the other "NON" standard resolutions that my ATI card can pump it... but one day I tried the "HD" resolution of 1080p24 (remember my LG is a 720p TV) and 'lo and behold, she works. The TV even reports 1080p as the resolution being input. Never has my 1080p movies looked better. Here is where I found this option

I definitely don't have all those options with my Nvidia card, although I'm thinking it's because I'm still running XP. I'll try Win7 in the near future and if it's more joyous as far as playing with the TV goes, I might have finally found a reason to upgrade Windows, at least on this PC.

I assume though your TV officially supports 1080p24? Mine doesn't. The reason I ask though is the way I understand it, it's called 1080p24 for just that reason, 1080p24 mode only works at 1080p and not lower resolutions. If that's the case it makes sense. If your TV supports 1080p24 mode then it probably only does so at 1080p even though it's not full HD. I think Remicade discovered the same thing.

In my case at 1080p my video card only shows 60hz as a possible refresh rate. I can use other refresh rates if I drop the video card's resolution but with mixed success so far, although I haven't had a chance to play around much yet. I did notice a couple of times I'd change the refresh rate and the TV would display a new resolution even though I'd not changed it on the PC. I'm not sure if the TV was simply getting it wrong... I'll have to play around some more.

hello_hello

1st January 2012, 20:09

Another solution: SmoothVideo Project (SVP) (http://www.svp-team.com/wiki/Main_Page) a software who make motion interpolation like Splash. CPU usage is very high :(.

I've never seen that before but if it works as advertised and doesn't make the video look like crap it's exactly what I've been looking for. It might be a better option than messing with refresh rates.
Giving it a spin is definitely on my to-do list for tomorrow.

QBhd

1st January 2012, 23:51

I assume though your TV officially supports 1080p24?

No it doesn't... there is nothing in the documentation regarding 1080p24 and even catalyst does not list it as a supported resolution... however with forcing it and the TV accepting it, I would say that the TV's EDID is incomplete (as Catalyst says in that screen shot).

QB

dukey

2nd January 2012, 01:19

reclock ?

Remicade

2nd January 2012, 07:32

Is a good choice if TV support 50 Hz, you speed video from 23.976 to 25.

hello_hello

2nd January 2012, 08:33

Is a good choice if TV support 50 Hz, you speed video from 23.976 to 25.

Trying that was one of my plans, but so far I'm unable to connect the PC at 50hz. If it works I'll probably settle for that. 50hz is never listed as a supported refresh rate by the video card though. I don't know if it's an XP limitation or it's because I'm connected via VGA. I'll have to try the PC via HDMI at some stage to find out. The TV definitely supports 50hz, at least via HDMI, as I'm in PAL-land.

Remicade

2nd January 2012, 17:09

Another interesting thing: Frame doubling interpolation (http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=288017), I try and works very well but seem to me in some moments very artificial ?

Ghitulescu

2nd January 2012, 17:42

Any modern TV featuring more than 100-120 Hz (double rate) does employ at least one such algorithm...

Remicade

3rd January 2012, 05:44

OMG the image with this frame double interpolation (is true interpolation or simply double the frame ?) is like soap opera (mexican drama:) ) it's not movie anymore. I prefer judder instead this...Interesting with Splash Player the movie with motion2 preset remain movie but Splash Player is far away from MPC HC and PotPlayer.....
I found PowerDVD have TrueTheater Motion with 2 options:
TrueTheater Motion: select this option to enable frame rate upsampling, from 24 fps up to 60 fps, to make panning scenes, particularly in action movies, play more smoothly. The Smoother option doubles the frame rate of the original movie content, while Smoothest can improve the frame rate of video content to 60 or 72 fps, depending on the output frame rate of your display
But I don't have hardware decoding and subtitle in my language are without diacritics.
So far changing the resolution of my LCD to 1920*1080 and choose between 23 Hz (I think it's 23.976 but ATI catalyst showing only integer ?) or 24 HZ seem to me judder free and Ctrl + J in MPC HC agrees with me: zero glitches the green line and red line are smooth. 3 years I watch movies without care but since I start to read forum I can't sleep for judder. Damn :).

hello_hello

3rd January 2012, 15:25

3 years I watch movies without care but since I start to read forum I can't sleep for judder. Damn.

Well I wouldn't say it keeps me awake but I know what you mean.
Have you tried PowerDVD's TrueTheatre Motion? If so, is it any good?

Remicade

3rd January 2012, 20:17

Nope I don't have the program.

Remicade

5th January 2012, 09:08

I read some reviews about TV and I found 24 p TrueCinema is activated only at 1920x1080 24 Hz.
...is a 32in 720p LCD TV with a native 1,366x768 resolution, so we were surprised to see that it supported a 1080p 24p signal from our Blu-ray player. At this resolution, though, the TV has to downscale the image to fit the TV's native resolution. We noticed more natural movement in tracking in fast action scenes compared to Sony's KDL-32V4000, which doesn't support 24p...

An screnshotcomparison: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/101357

diogen

7th January 2012, 22:13

3 years I watch movies without care but since I start to read forum I can't sleep for judder. Damn :).This has been said many times before (and I completely agree): you want to be
happy with the purchased gear - stop reading others' opinion/reviews...:)

Slow horizontal pans are the best to detect judder.
I think Titanic (the movie) has such a part when the ship leaves the dock.

But again, think twice whether you want to watch it...:sly:

Diogen.

Didée

7th January 2012, 22:52

Without using interframe creation algorithms, all flat panels (sample&hold type) suffer from judder when displaying 24Hz film. This is simply inevitable - each frame is staying static for ~40ms, but the eye is moving during that time. So you have inverse motion blur on the retina, plus double-images due to retina persistence.
(And blackframe insertion is mostly ineffective at such low image frequencies - it would only work out if you would accept visible flicker, like old CRT tubes.)

To minimize this unwanted judder (not the 24Hz judder itself, but the inevitable side-effects that happen on the retina), interframe creation is a must.

The trick to minimize the judder while not creating the dreadful "video-look" is rather simple: don't make full-vector interpolation, but only fractional. Say you have 24fps film, and a 120Hz TV panel. The "obvious" interpolation strategy is to create new interframes at 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% time positions. This is full-vector interpolation, very smooth, and ... looks like video, not film. :scared:
Using only fractional-vector interpolation, interframes are created at e.g. 12.5%, 25%, 37.5% and 50%. Et voila. The panel<>retina related judder is vastly reduced, but the observed characteristic still is "film".

This works pretty good on TV sets capable of at least 120(100) Hz physical refresh rate. With PC monitors (still) mostly limited to 60Hz, this strategy can not be employed at its full strength.

diogen

7th January 2012, 23:07

...each frame is staying static for ~40ms, but the eye is moving during that time.I don't get it...

What is the difference (in terms of observed frames) between a cinema presentation and proper 5:5 playback on a 120Hz device?

Diogen.

Didée

7th January 2012, 23:15

Proper 5:5 playback? Define "proper", please. :)

diogen

7th January 2012, 23:48

Spitting out every frame 5 times, i.e. showing 24 frames in one second (120Hz TV).

Unlike the first generation 120Hz TVs that were frame-doubling 60Hz.

Diogen.

Didée

8th January 2012, 00:15

It makes no difference if you show a frame 1 time for 40ms, or 2 times for 20ms each, or 5 times for 8 ms each. Everytime the picture "is there", it is the same/old picture at the same/old spatial position, whilst the eye meanwhile has moved on.

We're talking about calculating *new* interframes, creating intermediate spatial positions of moving objects.

diogen

8th January 2012, 00:20

We're talking about calculating *new* interframes....No.
We are talking about judder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judder#Telecine_judder), i.e. different frames are shown for different amount of time.

Proper 5:5 playback is identical to cinema presentation. What I'm after (no judder).
Whether you prefer smooth soap-like video to 24fps film is personal (I don't).

Diogen.

Didée

8th January 2012, 00:27

Ah, okay. Though I was not talking about creating soap, in contrary. I was talking about avoiding retina-blur/judder without creating soap.

Your question about displaying 24fps judder-free on a 60Hz display is very easy to answer: it's impossible, period. Thread can be closed now. Satisfied?

Edit - oops, darn, this isn't your thread in fact. :D

diogen

8th January 2012, 00:41

...question about displaying 24fps judder-free on a 60Hz display is very easy to answer: it's impossible, period.Right. 60 is not divisible by 24...:)

Some 25+ years ago, around the time of the first Terminator, James Cameron was advocating to
switch motion picture movie-making to 48fps (to reduce judder you are talking about). It went nowhere.

He might have a better chance with 3D...:)

Diogen.

Didée

8th January 2012, 01:10

Well, Peter Jackson lately has filmed "The Hobbit" in 48fps, didn't he?

To give a visual hint on what I talked earlier above - (full-vector interpolation vs. partial-vector interpolation), here's a package with 3 videos to compare:

http://www.mediafire.com/?wuo1d4p2sfinv02 (~12MB @MediaFire)

Quick & dirty comparison of the effect of interframe-calculation on film sources.

Since most people will watch on a PC-monitor, and most monitors are limited to 60Hz refresh rate, it was chosen to make the
comparison based on a 20fps source instead of a 24fps one. The effect is the same in the end, just a little more pronounced.

Before watching, make sure your monitor _IS_ set to 60Hz refresh rate.

"film20fps.avi"
---------------
This shall be the "movie". Without interpolation tricks, it will play with 3:3 pulldown. Shudder, judder, flubber.

With all respect to "film look", this is not film look, really. This is just pathological ...

"full-interpolation"
--------------------
This is the result of an "ideal" motion interpolation, working at 100% relative interpolation.
The video plays very smooth, sure. But this is not "film look" anymore. This looks like ordinary "video" ... way *too* smooth
for a cinematic movie. Call it "soap opera look".

"partial-interpolation"
-----------------------
This is the result of an "ideal" motion interpolation, working at 50% relative interpolation.

This video is observed vastly more "smooth" than the 20fps movie, however it does not exhibit the overly-smooth video/soap-opera look.
It is much closer to what one would suppose the "film look" to actually look like. Just without the distracting judder-wobber that
can be seen when playing the 20fps video.

Mind you: I don't like soap-opera look for cinematic movies. But I don't like retina-blur/judder either.
The point is that interframe creation does not necessarily create the soap-opera look. You just need to use it appropriately.

diogen

8th January 2012, 01:24

Well, Peter Jackson lately has filmed "The Hobbit" in 48fps, didn't he?Could be, don't know.

I think it is very material dependent.
IIRC the first HD version of Elephants Dream was 60p and looked very good.
There are some 1080/60p clips from Avatar floating around that look gorgeous.

But real life footage I prefer in film fps.
Just like Chaplin in 16fps...:)

Diogen.

Didée

8th January 2012, 01:41

BTW, when I happen to watch a 24fps film directly at the PC, I switch the display to 48Hz ;) and mostly use a 50%-style realtime interpolation like shown in the comparison.

hello_hello

8th January 2012, 15:20

This has been said many times before (and I completely agree): you want to be
happy with the purchased gear - stop reading others' opinion/reviews...:)

Would that be pretty much the same as being happy with your encodes rather than reading other peoples opinions on how large the file sizes need to be? ;)

Remicade

8th January 2012, 21:07

Finally I stop at this config: LCD 23.97522-23.97523 (reported by madVR, 23.975 reported by Reclock). One thing I don't understand: Reclock speed the media to 24 fps and madVr report 1 frame repeat at x hours, if I tell Reclock to play the file at original speed (23.976 reported by madVr and Reclock) madVr report 1 frame repeat every 1.13 minutes. Why ? It's not logic.
Vsync interval and Movie frame interval is the same 41.71 ms.

hello_hello

9th January 2012, 04:08

It still might be a Vsync problem. Have you tried enabling reclock's vsync correction and adjusting the vsync position? You can read about it in the readme file.

Apparently the Vsync adjustment has problems with the WMR9 renderer, although while it seems to work for me it doesn't fix my tearing problem when I change resizers, which I think also relates to the odd missed or repeated frame. nNeither does adjusting the Vsync using MPC-HC's own options.

If your player has options for adjusting Vsync try them, or in the case of MPC-HC at least, you can adjust a few GPU settings. In my case selecting "wait for flushes" fixed the tearing problem. Just some other ideas for you to try.....

Remicade

9th January 2012, 07:04

I will try different V-sync options in Reclock and MPC.
I use MPC HC 32 bits with madVR + Reclock, if I enable Reclock madVR it's happy :) if i disable the number of repetead frame increase dramatically. I made an experiment at 1360*768 60 Hz madVR+Reclock (59,97 shows madVR) it's much better, the movie it's more fluid then EVR alone without Reclock. Seems to me Reclock make a big difference in playing movies?

ramicio

9th January 2012, 15:33

Ghitulescu

9th January 2012, 16:20

It's still humorous to see people thinking judder is simply because of low frame rates instead of the 3:2 pulldown stuff. What would going to 48 FPS solve? Nothing. It would look nicer, but you'd still be playing 48 FPS into 60 Hz. You would need a 240 Hz panel for even durations. This myth about peak and hold being a problem is also humorous. The film industry needs to just go digital and adopt an NTSC frame rate. And formats need to be open to not restrict what can be compatible. Blu-ray won't even do anything more than 1080p24. To go 30 or 60 they must interlace. Pathetic. HDMI is also a huge bureaucratic fail.

Sometimes the business decisions are not understandable by most people having nothing in common with that business.

While I agree that the current HD standards failed to achieve the long felt need of universal compatibility, they however solved the issue of stock materials. A normal user doesn't have stock material. Only if s/he has and wants to conserve it, only then s/he'll understand the need for a compatible/scalable format.

Like I hoped several years before for 1080p, I hope that the 4k standard will finally solve this problem. However, seeing the path the industry took (at the instigation of media content producers and distributor) I slowly begin to have the same "déjà vu" impression.

Concerning 24p and 1080, all players and TVs and/or projectors (above a certain price tag) sold last years could natively display 1080p24 so a movie shot on 35mm at 24fps could have been seen as in cinemas, no 3:2 or other fancy pullups, no interlacing/deinterlacing gimmicks etc. Nothing stands against a kino-like feeling. Issues with 24p may have those watching them on a PC whose components cannot accomodate 24p (one non-compliant component is enough to spoil everything).

ramicio

9th January 2012, 16:28

There are still TVs which only run at 60 Hz. Plasmas are a good example set. It's not something determined by price. You can either go with a TV with good specs and not have the cinema "24p" stuff, or go with LCD garbage with stupid colors and contrast and have your "24p" cake. The source has nothing to do with it. There is no PC that can't output 24 Hz to an HDTV. It's the TVs that are the missing link.

And on an added and unrelated note judder doesn't come from low frame rates. I can set my monitor to 75 Hz, play a movie, use reclock to up the frame rate to 25 FPS, and holy crap, no judder on pans! But I don't live in PAL land, and I like the notes in the music played in movies to be in their real frequencies. It's especially painful to hear songs I know being sped up. Then there's gonna be your doubters who come in here any say "Oh you upped the frame rate, so that's why there's no judder." Tards, it's only a 1 FPS difference.

Ghitulescu

9th January 2012, 16:50

It's the other way round: the LCDs have/had the 24p issue (they were driven internally at 60Hz, some are still driven at 60Hz even today), while the plasmas accomodated 24p almost from day 1. Do not confound the ability to accept a signal with the native processing and displaying.

Concerning the TV/monitor issues (I've said this in another thread): there are not so many signals a TV must cope with, in USA even less :). Any TV can accept 24/1001 or 30/1001 (within the tolerances of its PLL) whereas a monitor has to be more stricter, as there are 1001 different signals, sometimes very similar; a wrong decision can make the image instable. As someone already said, true multisynch monitors are extremely scarce today, the vast majority are only "discrete" multisynch, ie several refresh rates, H and V timings but not continuous ranges. If the manufacturer doesn't list 24/1001 as supported, well, one cannot force the otherwise 24p-capable monitor to display it, like a TV does. The same is true for the graphic cards, the upper range series have several quartz xtals for each base H and V timings, the budget series have less or try to "software emulate" them in drivers.

ramicio

9th January 2012, 16:59

I see fewer plasmas that can't change their display modes than ones that can. The ones that use stuff like 48 Hz and 96 Hz are the multi-thousand-dollar Pioneer types. Any plasma you can from a chain store is going to be the 600 Hz subfield type, with their panel running at 60 Hz. I did not mix up anything.

I can't even comprehend what you're try to get at in your second paragraph. TVs and monitors are the same anymore. It sounds like you're referring to CRT stuff. As I recall people could force CRTs to run whatever they wanted outside of what the monitor listed as officially supported, as long as the H and V numbers made sense.

diogen

9th January 2012, 19:12

The ones that use stuff like 48 Hz and 96 Hz are the multi-thousand-dollar Pioneer types. Any plasma you can from a chain store is going to be the 600 Hz subfield type, with their panel running at 60 Hz.Pioneer exited (http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2009/gb20090212_424440.htm)the plasma business in 2009. You probably meant Panasonic.

You can get 24p-capable plasmas for much less than "multi-thousand"
http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/lg-50pz550/4507-6482_7-34472675.html

And I don't think the LED LCDs are (much) worse than plasmas in terms of color gamut.

Diogen.

ramicio

9th January 2012, 19:25

The panels still operate at 60 Hz and use 3:2 pulldown. For 24p, my plasma can do either 3:2 pulldown or switch to 48 Hz, which flickers like hell. No, I meant Pioneer. They did the high-end, overpriced plasmas that were able to change display modes. Even so, changing display modes takes time and is retarded. What I want is to switch between 24, 30, and 60 seamlessly. It's called 120 Hz. TVs need to adopt better input flexibility, and it's something I will "troll" and argue about to my death. You want me to stop talking about it? You'll have to kill me. Come try it. LCD tech is pathetic in contrast, color, and response compared to plasma.

diogen

9th January 2012, 19:31

... it's something I will "troll" and argue about to my death.By all means...
Just make sure it has (at least remotely) something to do with reality...:)

I use projectors. Have no first hand experience with LCD/LED/plasma...

Diogen.

ramicio

9th January 2012, 19:35

People just seem to think a troll is a person who is anything but positive in a conversation anymore. I don't like to argue, I just don't give a crap about anyone else's point of view, and am not going to change mine. I think the whole yuppie/hippie attitude of being optimistic and having an "open mind" is just an excuse to have no convictions and to try to release any responsibility of self control away. Notice it's the same kind of people who want to be controlled by some governing force, who believe they need to be directed and no human can be accountable for their actions. The very people who think humans are not above animals and deserve to be treated like cattle. A troll is something that stands at his bridge and collects a toll, not someone in the internet who likes to argue their point.

Didée

10th January 2012, 00:05

This myth about peak and hold being a problem is also humorous.
The humorous part is you. Well, to me at least.

Peak&Hold / Sample&Hold being a problem (with film rates) is not a myth, but a technological/bio-sensual necessity. (If each one picture stays still for 40ms, but in the same 40ms the eye is moving on because it is actually tracking inter-frame motion, whaddoyou think is going to happen?)

But there's probably no point to extend on this, because you

don't like to argue, I just don't give a crap about anyone else's point of view, and am not going to change mine.

ramicio

10th January 2012, 01:59

It doesn't matter because the source is already motion blurred at those frame rates at the source. Try again.

Didée

10th January 2012, 02:40

Nope. Motion Blur does play a certain role, sure. But when it comes to effects of interaction between {sample&hold displays} and {human visualisation system}, then it's a much more minor role than usually assumed.

There is {something} on the screen. No matter if motion-blurred or not. This {something} is displayed static for a frame's time slot, and in the same time slot, the eye is moving.

The necessary consequence is: during the integration time of one frame, what actually happens on the eye's retina is that the motion is running backwards, I repeat: backwards in space, during the time slot of each one frame.

And that's the reason why things like interframe-creation actually make sense on modern TVs.

hello_hello

10th January 2012, 04:05

It's still humorous to see people thinking judder is simply because of low frame rates instead of the 3:2 pulldown stuff.

Who said they could see judder because of low frame rates? If you're referring to the effect I've referred to as "jitter", which I think is the same thing referred to as 24p strobe, then they're two completely different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24p#Disadvantages_of_24p

I don't think anyone even remotely suggested going to 48p would solve judder problems if your still refreshing at 60hz.

Your reference to using ReClock to up the frame rate seems to forget ReClock can time stretch the audio to maintain pitch.

Flickering problems with Plasmas running at 48hz is probably the reason why most Plasmas use 96Hz instead these days.

I don't know much about the Peak & Hold phenomenon but I'd suspect it's more of a problem at speeds lower than those at which motion blur becomes a factor in perceiving motion. At least that's how "jitter" seems to be effected on my TV.

Just out of curiosity, why don't you seem to be able to discuss a subject rationally without needing to invite someone to kill you, threatening to kill others, or using labels such as idiot or retard for anyone you even think mightn't agree with you 100%.
Where you find a connection between having an open mind and wanting to be controlled or treated like cattle I don't know, but obviously it's untrue to the point of being ridiculous. I don't see anyone here having bent to your viewpoint simply because they're too open minded to form their own opinions. We all have our own viewpoints based on our own experiences, so as much at it might shock you, having an opinion on a subject based on yours simply makes you just like everyone else here.
Well.... except for an apparent paranoia. ;)

ramicio

10th January 2012, 14:01

Didée

10th January 2012, 17:05

@ramicio:

Erh, no. Point is that I am talking about technical (and bio-sensual) imperatives.

You are talking strong four-letter-words, but seemingly you don't fully understand the technical imperatives.

If you insist on the motion-blur thingy - here's the same sequence again (http://www.mediafire.com/?9ymxtxhhscs3jfg), this time with "film20_MB.av", wich provides a full motionblur (360° shutter).

- It still wobbles.

- the presence of motionblur does not solve the issue.

- The explanation why it doesn't solve was already given.

- If you don't understand, I can't help.

ramicio

10th January 2012, 17:18

Still can't interpolate frames from something with massive motion blur applied. It might work for something with a pretty open shutter, but those films are rare. It still doesn't change the fact that jackasses are now wanting to make movies that still don't divide evenly into refresh rates, or that there is no known way to transport these frame rates over a wire in the consumer market. I didn't know "ass" consisted of four letters.

That example is quite stupid. Of course something 20 FPS is going to be choppy. It's not going to be smooth on any kind of display. Of course 60 FPS looks smoother. It will be smooth on any display. Seriously, focus on one non-moving point with the lower frame rates, and it still judders. It's not because of motion tracking on a peak-and-hold display. Keep trying.

Ghitulescu

10th January 2012, 17:30

The ones that use stuff like 48 Hz and 96 Hz are the multi-thousand-dollar Pioneer types. Any plasma you can from a chain store is going to be the 600 Hz subfield type, with their panel running at 60 Hz.
It happens that I own such Pioneers (in fact, apart from the SAT receiver all the others are equally Pio). The panel is driven not at 48 neither at 96 but at 72, 75 and 100 (it's the European version, as the US one seems to have replaced 72 with 60).
I can't even comprehend what you're try to get at in your second paragraph. TVs and monitors are the same anymore. It sounds like you're referring to CRT stuff. As I recall people could force CRTs to run whatever they wanted outside of what the monitor listed as officially supported, as long as the H and V numbers made sense.
They are not the same. The monitors have a specific target - gamers and professionals (A/V/P, office and programmers). The gamers need the minimum minimorum at latency times, the A/V/P want a perfect colour calibration, the office need a higher refresh rate. And I never heard of a plasma monitor for PC. Where does your TV fit? ;)

Pioneer exited (http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2009/gb20090212_424440.htm)the plasma business in 2009. You probably meant Panasonic.
Panasonic bought both the technology and some facilities from Pioneer :)

ramicio

10th January 2012, 17:35

I haven't seen any current lines of plasma accept a 72 Hz signal. They all have a refresh rate of 60 Hz, anymore. I haven't seen any recently even accept anything other than HDMI and other cinema-oriented inputs. Even when I look at the manuals of any TVs that do happen to have a VGA input, you only have the options of 60/1.001 or 60 Hz. Why does office need a high refresh rate? I would think for general office, people simply don't care. If anything for high refresh rate, that should also be attributed to gamers. Monitors are not targeted towards anyone but consumers. Gamers fall into that area. Professionals who do photo or A/V have their own lines of monitors, and don't go to stores like Best Buy to get a monitor, or any other piece of internal hardware.

Ghitulescu

10th January 2012, 18:30

I don't know how is in the US, but in Europe there are health regulations, mostly derived from Swedish norms. One of them require a certain minimum fps, IIRC 75Hz, not to generate eyes fatigue.
The distribution is as I said, gamers and regular consumers, and professionals (office, AVP and programmers). And yes I know the market is split, also that a regular consumer generally can't afford buying one pro monitor should it be allowed (in Europe) to get access to a pro supplier. ;) If one is to judge from eBay, there are far more US individuals that sell pro gear than EU ones ...
Anyway, the high refresh rates of LCDs (as they share both the A/V and PC market) make them not really suitable for TV (the panel manufacturers are not that happy to hold several different lines), so they "marketed" the 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, 600Hz "balloons" - which actually aggravated the judder and forced them to find patch-solutions to patch-solutions, namely the Intelligent Frame Creation, Motion Interpolation and other StarTrek fantasies ....

ramicio

10th January 2012, 18:38

Gamers are regular consumers who simply buy more than a single video card, and ricey (as in rice burner) peripherals. Offices use consumer-grade stuff for workers, bought from companies like Dell, HP who just put an enterprise price tag on everything to rob companies. It's just so egregious to see you spewing the same old crap. TV makers didn't use numbers like 120, 240, 480 because of problems. It's all marketing. I don't care what continent you are on. The average idiot thinks more is better, always. I don't see how high refresh rates of an LCD doesn't work for TV. Maybe you worded something wrong. Having a higher refresh rate like 240 Hz for a 24 Hz does NOTHING. The image is held there. It is not flashed 10 times. The problems simply don't arise in the theater, and theaters don't use film anymore. They use DLP, and the image is held there. But since it costs tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for one of those projectors, they only need to play back one frame rate (24/1.001) and they can display the movie just fine. I suggest you actually research products in the US, and even spend some time over here and consume our products before you people from Europe start shooting off at the mouth about how stuff works in Europe.

Didée

10th January 2012, 20:07

That example is quite stupid. Of course something 20 FPS is going to be choppy.
No, not stupid at all. You americans have been trained from birth till grownup with 3:2 pulldown, wich is "repeat: 2times-3times-2times-3times". When playing 20fps on a 60Hz display, the pattern is "repeat: 3times-3times-3times-3times". That's not too far away from what you guys are "used to see". Yes, of course 20fps overall appears more choppy than 24fps. But it perfectly shows the basic issue (reverse motion blur build-up on the retina), and without any fps/refresh-uneven-division getting in the way.

As already said: it shows exactly the issue. Just a little more pronounced, (but not utterly much).

And, for the sake of heaven, really .... I have the same sequence at 24fps, with and without motion blur. And when playing on either my PC (monitor at 48Hz), or on my HD-TV with motion-flow deactivated, then it wobbles exactly the same way as the 20fps sequence does. And this doesn't come as a surprise. it is exactly what is to be expected.

Technical necessities, you know, or don't.

ramicio

10th January 2012, 20:10

Ghitulescu

10th January 2012, 20:31

Gamers are regular consumers who simply buy more than a single video card, and ricey (as in rice burner) peripherals. Offices use consumer-grade stuff for workers, bought from companies like Dell, HP who just put an enterprise price tag on everything to rob companies. It's just so egregious to see you spewing the same old crap.

That is the common "myth" shared among those not having access to pro gear.
I own pro gear and I can tell you - my pro headphones beat hands down any Monster Dr Beat 500€ (now, this is robbery, like any Monster cable of 15.000$ pro linear meter), all Panasonic VCRs suffer from power supply issues, the pro ones don't (at least I haven't seen a single one in 30 years), consumer Sony TVs fail from the same PSU issue while the studio monitors may run non-stop for weeks, my pro DVD player based on Philips runs non-stop for days in a loop while it's civil brothers die after a few summed days (yes, the civil versions of optical pickup from Philips are prone to fatal defects within 2 years, and this includes High End gear that all use Philips optics) and I can go on and on ... The price tag is set so high to prevent the regular Joe to have access to them, but between a Mark Levinson of 10.000$ and a Tascam of only 1500$ I'll take eyes closed the Tascam. The same against a 500$ Denon.

But enough with this off-topic subject.

I still am convinced that an LCD supports natively 24/1001 only if specially designed so, not due to some smart tricks in the driver of the graphic card, and this is mainly a matter of [bad] luck. So, on-the-fly resampling (speed up/down) remains actually the only viable solution. We, here in PAL land, like the OP, are accustomed to 4% speed-up, so what's 0.1% speed down I may ask? ;)

ramicio

10th January 2012, 20:41

Ghitulescu

10th January 2012, 21:20

There is a difference between overhyped trash and regular consumer gear that is priced appropriately. Offices use consumer-grade computers priced at enterprise levels. We're not talking data center and server stuff here, we're talking desktops. There are no laws anywhere that prevents a person from buying pro gear. They are not priced so high so regular people don't buy them. WTF are you smoking? Enterprise/pro stuff is priced high because money is no object to businesses. If they need something they will spend what it costs. Gamers don't buy pro gear. They buy fake pro gear, ricey stuff, like the overhyped Beats you mentioned.
Some items you can't buy in Germany as a "civilian" because they are taxed differently and you cannot do it (and the seller cannot fill in the tax forms - it's a bit more complicated).
And pro gear, be it desktops, are never sold as they are - the company that sold us some Dells is required to solve ANY incident within 1 hour or they face penalities. Imagine they have to keep several engineers on stand-by for the "case of the cases" - who's gonna pay them and from what money, may I ask? :) Also with the package comes often with service, which is not really cheap, because enterprise desktops are not valuable because they have who-knows-what CPUs or RAM or HDDs, but they contain confidential data - this darling costs a lot (NDA, insurances etc.). A business laptop is light, made of magnesium alloy and has non-glaring screen. It survives harsh conditions. A consumer laptop is "ergonomically" designed, has a low battery std-by and a reflecting display (or they have to add some 100-200€ to get a non-glaring one). I'm not saying the business world is fair, but people are generally missinformed.

Ghitulescu

10th January 2012, 21:34

Offices use consumer-grade computers priced at enterprise levels. We're not talking data center and server stuff here, we're talking desktops.

Sorry for this second message, I overlooked this.

I own two pro computers from Siemens, they have been used non-stop for 5 years then replaced (there is a 5-years short business term plan here, it applies everywhere, computers, cars, wives) when I've bought them. They work now as my internet PCs (one is this one I am writing right now at). Unlike other Siemens PCs I had, they do not care about this at all (I'm still using them 24/7 for 4 years now). I please ask you to use a consumer HDD for 9 years almost non-stop :), most of them do not reach the 5th year in office conditions (8hours/day, 5days/week). The fan is silent and is better regulated as in consumer types. The air flow is superb designed, the PSU is special - the only negative thing is that they can't be so easily upgraded.

ramicio

10th January 2012, 21:35

So it's because of the EU and not specifically Germany? It sounds like VAT-related stuff. The US should be under that kind of tyranny soon enough. Here, Dell doesn't do anything for support, even for server stuff. We had a server not accept either of two of THEIR brand NICs without flipping out and crashing, they didn't do anything. When components in our work desktops die, we find it easiest to put aftermarket stuff in there. Even with warranties, the consumer can get the same level of service the businesses get. Say you're doing a hard drive RMA. Businesses get the service quick because they put credit up in case the warranty isn't covered, and they send out a hard drive before they receive it. A consumer can get the same level of service simply by providing a credit card number. Enterprise stuff is entirely overpriced, and it's simply because it can be.

And an enterprise hard drive is no different than a consumer one. There is no NASA technology involved. The only differences usually are firmware, to better work with RAID cards. Other than that you have the faster spinning and SAS. None of that makes them technologically superior to last any bit longer. There are plenty of consumers with old hard drives. Most people just have higher demands and upgrade hard drives as a need for space.

Didée

10th January 2012, 22:21

Yes, it very far off from what "we" are used to seeing. 3:2 is not 3:3. Frames judder in panning scenes in movies, even on non-peak-and-hold displays because each frame is not on the screen for an even duration. As I said, you should put your money where your mouth is actually live in the US instead of insinuate you even begin to know what you're talking about based on theory. WTF monitor are you running that can take a 48 Hz signal?
The middle sentence is too long/confusing, I don't fully get it. Why should I live in the US? To get experience with the limited/crippled hardware you (seem to) have over there?

I run a WTF fuggin' Eizo Foris, capable of fuggin' 24Hz, fuggin' 25Hz, fuggin' 30hz, fuggin' 48Hz, fuggin' 50Hz, and 60Hz.
And that's not only "accepted signal" - when set, the panel actually refreshs at those rates. No judder, no internal pulldown tricks.

Similar my TV-set (a Samsung eLED LCD) uses a panel that operates at 100/120 Hz physical refresh rate, automatically switching acc. to input signal. Feed it with anything - 24p, 25i/p, 30i/p, 50p, 60p - no uneven pulldown, no pulldown-related judder.

Well, regardless whether-or-not "I don't even begin to understand what I'm talking about"....
....you, at least, seem to live where nothing except fixed 60Hz seems to exist? Dunno behind which moon that is, but it can't be Luna. It must be much farther away.

Guest

10th January 2012, 23:12

Gents, let's please keep it nonpersonal and avoid rule 4 vocabulary. Thanks!

ramicio

10th January 2012, 23:25

Exactly. We have crippled hardware, and I hate it, and it's mostly people chiming in from other places who have no idea how bad it is here in regards to even niche markets disappearing (pretty sure the whole global economy is turning into this, slowly, though). Our panels stay at their refresh rates, they do not change refresh rates based in input video signal. It sucks. The only thing I miss about CRTs is the huge variety of resolutions and refresh rates you could run. I don't miss the eye strain, however.

Didée

10th January 2012, 23:47

@neuron2: I would prefer so, definetly. (Though on my part, I'm not seriously cursing, but only joking.)
But then, it's not easy when you "theorize" about the impossibility of squaring a circle, and are then faced with "you don't know what you're talking about" and "come to the US where everything is different".

On a more constructive note, and strictly related to the original 24/60 problem:

When one is going to play some 24fps FILM and one is stuck with a fixed 60Hz display, one could use motion interpolation to at least lessen the judder from 3:2 pulldown:
instead of "A-A-B-B-B", construct "A-A-I-B-B", with "I" being the motion-interpolation between A and B.

With Avisynth's MVTools, this would basically go like

clip_at_24fps
[create vectors & superclip]
MFlowFPS(last,super,vector_bckwrd,vector_frwrd,num=0) # double the fps ...
Selectevery(4,0,0,1,2,2) # ... and select as needed

This should be an acceptable compromise between reducing the 3:2 judder, and not creating the soap-opera look.
As usual, the interpolations may contain some artifacts here'n there, but in this configuration they are hardly noticeable (only 16ms frame time, and only 1 out of 5 frames).

ramicio

11th January 2012, 00:19

It doesn't work, I don't care to alter my video, and I don't want an AVS script for every media file I have. I don't mind the soap opera look, it's just that there's no way to interpolate smoothly to any display I own, and even so, I don't want added fake frames with artifacts (alluding to the TVs creating 4 fake frames, not your script which creates one.)

I actually tried the 48 Hz mode on my TV. It does work, but it introduces very horrible flicker. I don't know if it's just my eyes, but I really can't watch it. I could watch a bland, lifeless movie on it with no brights, though.