Super Resolution Coming To DVD Players (960P)

bhampton · 03-04-2008, 12:31 PM

Quote "You want to be an elitist and only watch HD?"

That sounds good to me.

-Brian

Stew4HD · 03-04-2008, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bravestime

Well I guess I failed to convey my point to you.

I give up!

You had a point?

Dare · 03-04-2008, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pendragon

The link you supply does not do justice to what can be achieved. It's possible that the translation of the images to pdf may be limiting the quality. I would suggest a better example:

http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~milanfar/pu...engesIJIST.pdf

To be honest, I don't see anything in that document either that is particularly impressive. I "rezzed up" images in photoshop for print purposes for years, and this doesn't look any better than anything else I've seen. A particular problem that I see that has always dogged up-rezzed images is rounded corners. I see lots of blunting with smaller details "filling in". There is also an overall softening of the image. It's better than jaggies, which is what upconversion is supposed to address, but it would be no substitute for a real high-res image if one was available.

It's always nice to have the multiple frames that are available in film to help, but the cases where that information is available is limited. Unless we're talking about recent Coen Bros. films, you very rarely have long lingering still shots that could be used for this method. And even then, it only gets you so far.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pendragon

In particular, note the improvement in processing illustrated by example frames going from figure 6b to 6d. Having ground truth in figure 6a is a useful comparison. Figure 8 also shows significant processing improvements. I will grant there will be source material that is not conducive to improvement.

Realtime demonstrations are already being offered and the results sound interesting. I wouldn't doubt the demos have been tuned to the source material and there is still a lot of work to be done. However, given the sheer processing power of Spurs and Cell, there are a lot of cycles to burn. The theoretical peak rate of Spurs is 96 GFLOP and the PS3 implementation of Cell provides 288 GFLOP to the application (16 bit mode). For a SD data stream through Spurs, that's 9,000 floating point operations per pixel! Assuming 20-50% efficiency, one is still left a very generous number. My gut sense from doing high-end image and signal processing over the past 35 years is a PS3 could likely do this enhancement on a HD stream, excluding decoding costs.

Though I am a cynic by nature, I don't bet against mathematics.

The only real benefit of having that much processing power is how fast it can do it. A slower machine should be able to do the same job, just not in real time. So far I have seen no upconversion that compares to the real thing. I would be happier than anyone if they found a way to convert standard DVD to genuine high definition. I have DVDs of the real versions of the original Star Wars movies that I would love to see in high definition, but aren't likely to ever appear on Blu-ray. I would be the happiest person in the world. But alas, it has not been done, and I'm not holding my breath.

ssjLancer · 03-04-2008, 01:08 PM

Lets wait until we see what an actual dvd release looks like with sr and not a demo or super high res photos.
Alot of people are getting ahead of themselves here.

And if this player is around $150-200 its doomed, who is gonna buy a dvd player for that much? if its hard for j6p to notice the difference between upscaled dvd and BD, why would they spend the cash if the difference between 2 upscaling methods is even smaller?

Lee Stewart · 03-04-2008, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssjLancer

Lets wait until we see what an actual dvd release looks like with sr and not a demo or super high res photos.
Alot of people are getting ahead of themselves here.

True . . "the proof is in the pudding."

Quote:

And if this player is around $150-200 its doomed, who is gonna buy a dvd player for that much? if its hard for j6p to notice the difference between upscaled dvd and BD, why would they spend the cash if the difference between 2 upscaling methods is even smaller?

Ever heard of Oppo?

Do a search on Amazon or BB or CC for UP DVD players. MANY fall into that range.

It is not really the price of the player per say. It is the fact that the player is all you need - no expensive software.

And it has to be better than a 1080 UP DVD player or else it would fail. Do not get confused with measuring 1080 versus 960. There will be other parimeters that will have to be looked at.

PFC5 · 03-04-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssjLancer

Lets wait until we see what an actual dvd release looks like with sr and not a demo or super high res photos.
Alot of people are getting ahead of themselves here.

And if this player is around $150-200 its doomed, who is gonna buy a dvd player for that much? if its hard for j6p to notice the difference between upscaled dvd and BD, why would they spend the cash if the difference between 2 upscaling methods is even smaller?

One point mentioned that seems to have flown over everyones' head is whether any of the HDTVs CAN accept a 960p signal.

If they can SD DVD players with this tech WILL hurt BD badly because most people would not re-buy any catalog titles on BD and BD would be a day/date format only. That would make buying into BD for the cost of a player too high for even more people than it is now.

The key is IF HDTVs can accept that signal. I do not thing most HDTVs can, which is WHY it is more likely a tech for HDTV displays than for players at this point. I think if it is in the display it could really make true HDM a moot point, but then people would have to replace the more expensive HDTV compared to a cheap SD DVD player.

It will likely take several years for this all to play out, but having this in a display would be sweet since it would improve SDTV signals which need it even more than SD DVDs do.

I will say this though. The BD player mfg better start getting ALL the HD audio decoders in ALL players over the next year if they want to further differentiate themselves from this tech. Having discs with HD audio but not making the equipment with HD audio decoders for a reasonable price WILL hurt BD when this tech comes along.

Dare · 03-04-2008, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFC5

...
If they can SD DVD players with this tech WILL hurt BD badly because most people would not re-buy any catalog titles on BD and BD would be a day/date format only. That would make buying into BD for the cost of a player too high for even more people than it is now.
...

There are redundant simultaneous threads going on today, so I'll just quote myself from another thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dare

Why is everyone so worried about upconversion? I hate to break it to you, but the general public wasn't going to abandon DVD for Blu-ray anyway. Picture quality has never been a factor in which format the public decides to support. It has always been about convenience and reliability, and Blu-ray offers nothing that DVD doesn't already have.

Geeks. Sticklers. Us. We will insist on the real thing. Nobody else will care.

...

I've been badmouthing upconversion in other threads, but I'm actually in favor of it. It'll never match genuine HD, but sometimes lower resolution is all that's available, and anything that makes that material look as good as possible can't be a bad thing.

But really, upconversion isn't even a factor for why people will stick with DVD. It's nice, but picture quality is just not a priority in most people's lives. It's good enough already, even with rudimentary upconversion, or no upconversion at all.

tomes · 03-04-2008, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFC5

One point mentioned that seems to have flown over everyones' head is whether any of the HDTVs CAN accept a 960p signal.

If they can SD DVD players with this tech WILL hurt BD badly because most people would not re-buy any catalog titles on BD and BD would be a day/date format only. That would make buying into BD for the cost of a player too high for even more people than it is now.

The key is IF HDTVs can accept that signal. I do not thing most HDTVs can, which is WHY it is more likely a tech for HDTV displays than for players at this point. I think if it is in the display it could really make true HDM a moot point, but then people would have to replace the more expensive HDTV compared to a cheap SD DVD player.

It will likely take several years for this all to play out, but having this in a display would be sweet since it would improve SDTV signals which need it even more than SD DVDs do.

I will say this though. The BD player mfg better start getting ALL the HD audio decoders in ALL players over the next year if they want to further differentiate themselves from this tech. Having discs with HD audio but not making the equipment with HD audio decoders for a reasonable price WILL hurt BD when this tech comes along.

I don't think anybody is saying that the final output will be 960P. On LCD's, even if supported this would not be ideal, since it is a fixed pixel display. I think the 960P either indicates that they are able to double the lines by interpreting multiple frames, or even better double the pixel count in BOTH directions, thereby quadrupling the resolution through interpretation. Further process will in any case upscale this to 1080P for final output to a HDTV.

If priced right ($100 or less) it could become mainstream and threaten Blu-Ray, but it is also possible it gets relegated to highend dvdplayers,tv's, projectors and receivers as a special feature to sell the more expensive models over the cheaper ones. (like Denon sells blu-ray players with the REON Chip, Toshiba sold XA2 with it, or Mitsubishi sells Projectors with that same chip). Instead of threatening Blu-Ray it may appeal mainly to the people who also own that format but wants to get the best quality possible in any format. (and to support vast movie collections they may have on older formats)

Lee Stewart · 03-04-2008, 02:08 PM

Here is an article from August 2007:

Upconversion DVD players gain popularity

Quote:

AUG. 31 | As the studios take sides and the HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc camps lobby for consumer support, owners of high-definition TV players are looking more and more to upconversion DVD players, which offer better picture quality for much less money.

Upconversion provides a pure digital signal without converting it to analog during the transfer from player to TV. They’ve been around for several years but are gaining popularity as more people buy HDTVs. And the players cost less than $100.

“I can tell you that the interest in upconverting DVD players has been growing as people get high-def home theaters and given the fact that the format war is keeping people on the sideline of the next-generation format,” said Brian Lucas, Best Buy spokesman. “Also, there are a lot more upconverting DVD players on the market. The percentage of the mix of upconverter DVD players is growing.”

Best Buy doesn’t release sales numbers of merchandise, but Lucas said the chain has been promoting the players.

“If you look at our floor, there are a lot of options for upconverting DVD players,” Lucas said. “And prices have come down. It’s a pretty good option for people looking to maximize their experience short of jumping onto the next-generation formats. I have one. I think it looks great.”

NPD Group industry analyst Ross Rubin said upconverter sales are growing as part of the natural replacement cycle of people replacing their VCRs or aging DVD players with newer ones.

“It’s something you would have seen regardless,” he said. “Just as more consumers adopt HDTVs and have large DVD libraries, they want to optimize on their TV sets purely as the device replacement cycle,” he said. “Particularly for a segment of the population that has already purchased an HDTV, they’re probably willing to invest $150 for a DVD player as opposed to a $30 player at Target.”

http://www.videobusiness.com/article...&q=DVD+players

bhampton · 03-04-2008, 02:11 PM

Hey,

You know,.. Many display devices have fixed resolutions and everything it converted to the "native" resolution of the set.

I find it sad when someone with a fixed resolution set thinks he's going to get something better from an upconverting player when his DVD's were being upconverted anyway by the set.

Of course,... different video processors have different abilities.

Anyways,... I thought the upconvertion in the HD DVD players was the cats pajamas already anyhow.

-Brian

pendragon · 03-04-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dare

To be honest, I don't see anything in that document either that is particularly impressive. I "rezzed up" images in photoshop for print purposes for years, and this doesn't look any better than anything else I've seen. A particular problem that I see that has always dogged up-rezzed images is rounded corners. I see lots of blunting with smaller details "filling in". There is also an overall softening of the image. It's better than jaggies, which is what upconversion is supposed to address, but it would be no substitute for a real high-res image if one was available.

After using Photoshop for 16 years, I can't figure out how to uprez this:

to:

Personally I wouldn't watch this:

when I could watch this:

To each his/her own.

Quote:

It's always nice to have the multiple frames that are available in film to help, but the cases where that information is available is limited. Unless we're talking about recent Coen Bros. films, you very rarely have long lingering still shots that could be used for this method. And even then, it only gets you so far.

You don't need static shots to make this work. To be effective, the algorithm needs to track individual elements frame-to-frame and estimate the transformation for each before developing the sub-pixel information. While there will be limits to the technique and a spectrum of annoying artifacts, the good news is there is an enormous amount of redundant information in a film. Otherwise compression would never work and a two hour HD movie would take about 1 TB to store at 1080p.

Quote:

The only real benefit of having that much processing power is how fast it can do it. A slower machine should be able to do the same job, just not in real time. So far I have seen no upconversion that compares to the real thing. I would be happier than anyone if they found a way to convert standard DVD to genuine high definition. I have DVDs of the real versions of the original Star Wars movies that I would love to see in high definition, but aren't likely to ever appear on Blu-ray. I would be the happiest person in the world. But alas, it has not been done, and I'm not holding my breath.

None of the commercially available upconversion schemes that I am aware of increase resolution. SR is different in this respect. Given a choice, I too would prefer to watch a Blu-ray or HD DVD over a SRed SD DVD. I would even take HD satellite or cable. But I can do this for only a small fraction of the 8K movies I own on DVD and LD. I'm much more interested in watching great movies than seeing the same, predominantly mediocre, 200-odd films in my HD collection over and over.

PFC5 · 03-04-2008, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomes

I don't think anybody is saying that the final output will be 960P. On LCD's, even if supported this would not be ideal, since it is a fixed pixel display. I think the 960P either indicates that they are able to double the lines by interpreting multiple frames, or even better double the pixel count in BOTH directions, thereby quadrupling the resolution through interpretation. Further process will in any case upscale this to 1080P for final output to a HDTV.

If priced right ($100 or less) it could become mainstream and threaten Blu-Ray, but it is also possible it gets relegated to highend dvdplayers,tv's, projectors and receivers as a special feature to sell the more expensive models over the cheaper ones. (like Denon sells blu-ray players with the REON Chip, Toshiba sold XA2 with it, or Mitsubishi sells Projectors with that same chip). Instead of threatening Blu-Ray it may appeal mainly to the people who also own that format but wants to get the best quality possible in any format. (and to support vast movie collections they may have on older formats)

But you are assuming that the HDTV can accept the 960p signal which is unlikely with current displays, or are you saying that AFTER the super upscaling to 960p that the players will then use conventional upscaling it to 1080p?

The latter is the only way it would likely work with existing displays out there as 960p is not a recognized HD signal by AACS HDTV standards.

Lee Stewart · 03-04-2008, 02:44 PM

Here is some more info on SR from CES 2008 which includes split screen pictures:

http://www.audioholics.com/education...ideo-processor

From the Toshiba PR for CES 2008:

Quote:

Super-resolution
Image super-resolution creates high definition (HD) video from standard definition (SD) video, for instance video library recorded so far, by enhancing pixel resolution.

http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2008_01/pr0701.htm

So what does "enhancing pixel resolution" actually mean? How does it differ than current upconversion?

Dare · 03-04-2008, 02:45 PM

Pendragon,

Like I said before, I will be really, really happy if this works as advertised on real world material. I love supernatural miracles as much as the next guy. But I have read way too many white papers with seemingly miraculous results that have only produced mush when it came to real world applications.

I'm not arguing that picture quality will not be improved. It will be. Every little bit helps. But, like you, when I have the choice, nothing can beat the real thing, including this. If we are being asked to believe that standard DVDs can be upscaled to higher than HD resolution and look the same as a transfers originated at higher resolutions than HD, well... pardon me if I wait to see it before I believe it.

Lee Stewart · 03-04-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dare

Pendragon,

Like I said before, I will be really, really happy if this works as advertised on real world material. I love supernatural miracles as much as the next guy. But I have read way too many white papers with seemingly miraculous results that have only produced mush when it came to real world applications.

I'm not arguing that picture quality will not be improved. It will be. Every little bit helps. But, like you, when I have the choice, nothing can beat the real thing, including this. If we are being asked to believe that standard DVDs can be upscaled to higher than HD resolution and look the same as a transfers originated at higher resolutions than HD, well... pardon me if I wait to see it before I believe it.

Ah . . didn't you raise the bar a bit too high?

Quote:

If we are being asked to believe that standard DVDs can be upscaled to higher than HD resolution

Who said anything about "higher than"? We are discussing "equal to."

03-04-2008, 01:08 PM	#154
ssjLancer High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 1,968	Lets wait until we see what an actual dvd release looks like with sr and not a demo or super high res photos. Alot of people are getting ahead of themselves here. And if this player is around $150-200 its doomed, who is gonna buy a dvd player for that much? if its hard for j6p to notice the difference between upscaled dvd and BD, why would they spend the cash if the difference between 2 upscaling methods is even smaller? Last edited by ssjLancer; 03-04-2008 at 01:16 PM.

03-04-2008, 02:45 PM	#164
Dare I moon you. Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Phoenix, Arizona Posts: 4,523	Pendragon, Like I said before, I will be really, really happy if this works as advertised on real world material. I love supernatural miracles as much as the next guy. But I have read way too many white papers with seemingly miraculous results that have only produced mush when it came to real world applications. I'm not arguing that picture quality will not be improved. It will be. Every little bit helps. But, like you, when I have the choice, nothing can beat the real thing, including this. If we are being asked to believe that standard DVDs can be upscaled to higher than HD resolution and look the same as a transfers originated at higher resolutions than HD, well... pardon me if I wait to see it before I believe it. __________________ LG GGC-H20L Super Multi Blue Blu-ray & HD DVD ROM Drive 58 Lost count

Similar Threads to Super Resolution Coming To DVD Players (960P)
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Toshiba's XDE DVD players won't hurt Blu-ray Disc	Bravestime	High Definition Media	260	05-12-2009 08:21 AM
The Godfather hits Blu ray September 23	iDarren	High Definition Media	76	10-06-2008 08:14 PM
Does the Audio quality matter on the "Super Upconverting" 960p DVD player?	Vortex3D	High Definition Media	65	04-08-2008 10:01 AM

03-04-2008, 12:31 PM	#151
bhampton Red at Heart Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 902	Quote "You want to be an elitist and only watch HD?" That sounds good to me. -Brian

03-04-2008, 02:11 PM	#160
bhampton Red at Heart Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 902	Hey, You know,.. Many display devices have fixed resolutions and everything it converted to the "native" resolution of the set. I find it sad when someone with a fixed resolution set thinks he's going to get something better from an upconverting player when his DVD's were being upconverted anyway by the set. Of course,... different video processors have different abilities. Anyways,... I thought the upconvertion in the HD DVD players was the cats pajamas already anyhow. -Brian