Pal 1440?

Steven White · June 1st, 2005, 11:54 AM

Bah. This is just semantics now. The order and the methods ARE important. Ultimately, if you carry "scaling = compression" to it's logical conclusion, you can state that scaled SD video = HD... which networks actually do.

-Steve

Graeme Nattress · June 1st, 2005, 12:06 PM

Steven, you're spot on right!

I guess what I'm getting at is that if you feed 1080i60 1920x1080 4:2:2 into a DVCproHD tape deck, and then play it back out over SDI, what you get is 1920x1080 4:2:2, but it looks worse as it's been compressed. It's only internally that the tape has the HD video as a non-square pixel resolution, but if you didn't know what was going onside the deck, you'd only ever see square pixel HD video.

As for broadcasters scaling SD to HD and calling it HD, yet, it happens :-(

Graeme

June 1st, 2005, 12:06 PM	#17
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	Steven, you're spot on right! I guess what I'm getting at is that if you feed 1080i60 1920x1080 4:2:2 into a DVCproHD tape deck, and then play it back out over SDI, what you get is 1920x1080 4:2:2, but it looks worse as it's been compressed. It's only internally that the tape has the HD video as a non-square pixel resolution, but if you didn't know what was going onside the deck, you'd only ever see square pixel HD video. As for broadcasters scaling SD to HD and calling it HD, yet, it happens :-( Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

June 1st, 2005, 11:54 AM	#16
Steven White Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 547	Bah. This is just semantics now. The order and the methods ARE important. Ultimately, if you carry "scaling = compression" to it's logical conclusion, you can state that scaled SD video = HD... which networks actually do. -Steve