Frage von robbie:
A very interesting article with different examples of all aspects, ranging from cameras and conversions, for professional productions illuminated.
http://www.film-tv-video.de/newsdetail + M56d4375225e.html? tx_ttnews & [day] = 19 & tx_ttnews [month] = 03 & tx_ttnews [year] = 2009
The final paragraph is, in my view, fully applicable.
"Even though in today's TV environment, the broadcast signals clearly progressive benefits would 720p brings in other aspects and because of the already existing market conditions, with so many disadvantages in that it seems sensible to interlaced disadvantages to accept and to prefer the 1080 to go. The step of interlaced to progressive can be substantially more easily done. "
Antwort von pailes:
Convinced me not. For me, outweigh the benefits of progressive material:
http://www.tv-plattform.de/download/symp08/charts/7Matzel-ZDF_HDTV-Roadmap.pdf
Antwort von deti:
Also I stand fully behind the progressive methods and see no long term future for interlaced video. Finally, all current output devices only material suitable for progressive frames and display are simply cleaner than half - no preference how good the deinterlacer is!
Deti
Antwort von Axel:
Since the introduction of HD video technology, the importance Resolutioneine, the other characteristics of an image was subordinated to appear. A 1080i picture, as the article points out, more than twice as many pixels as 720p Picture (2,073,600 to 921,600). Since every cameraman, like professional amateurs, knew it instinctively felt or found out that this is only for static shots had been synonymous the static shots. That is not merely a matter of taste, but also influenced the design of content, the consumer perception.
1080i has in terms of motion resolution at least as many disadvantages as advantages. If anything, it is better than that of 25p, but clearly worse than that of 50p. There are not moving or prosecution of these subjects through horizontal (!) - Pans (football), the "i" to avoid a cameraman, but a moving
camera. Complement each other, none of the time and spatially staggered rows
in the entire picture, which is already moving at moderate shoulder camera is the case, the picture falls apart (each phase dissolves considerably worse than 720p, the overall impression of the image is muddy) and it can not deinterlacer again kitten. That would still be less worse than this due to the fact Dynamics abandon. Even with traditional film has found it rules, the technical shortcomings of the procedure and to take into account the weakness into a strength to turn the camera moves in a movie are the best, despite the opposite half of the phase "i". A panoramic swivel with any speed it
can, just because it is not jerky, take a look no exaggeration (what about the swing is of course?), The same should be light-heartedly the Resolutionfür mobility sacrifice.
Antwort von soeren_hh:
In the first part of the discussion was speaking Entcodern of the 1080i in 720p can be converted.
Can someone please give examples times for the programs running under Windows?
Thx
Antwort von WideScreen:
Quite independently of what is better, I think it is a "verarsche" by the sender. All screaming for HD material but can not really say what he wants to adopt in the future. Everyone is so in the past ne HDCAM purchased, it may in the conversion to 720p, more or less in the garbage Kloppe. And that affects not only the HDCAM synonymous but many others. (eg yes Can not synonymous Sony HDV 720p50). Only the newer (not HDV) cameras at Sony have the ability 720p.
The prices for raw materials are in the last 15 years have fallen rapidly, and this is coming, that we are now probably the purchase of a camera again moves on ice. For the longer term but will be introduced 1080/50p times (who knows) you can re-start. Some stations in Europe, have losgesagt by 720 mode, and are converted to 1080. So now produces over Europe at 1080i or 720p?
The BBC writes:
3. Video Standards
3.1. The BBC wants to accept high definition programs acquired using either
of the following:
o 1920 x 1080 interlace p.25 frames a second (now called 1080i25) or
o 1920 x 1080 progressive p.25 frames a second (now called 1080p25)
3.2. Cameras that pre-filter to 1440 x 1080 are currently acceptable, but this document does not guarantee this format will always be acceptable for new high definition commissions.
3.3. This document can not be used sa guarantee that any camera using
The 720 line high definition format will always be acceptable for acquisition of high definition programs. It should be noted line 720
cameras will not be accepted for new commissions after the acceptance
Of s.equivalent 1080 line camera. Source: BBC London www.bbc.com
So what now? Find it a pity that the chance of conversion does not use a "clean, well-defined" video world as possible. Instead, it will still be chaotic at times of PAL and NTSC.
However, when I get the idea that ANY consumer TV customers at the signal of 720 to 1080 to inflate in order to display it, goosebumps ...
