Interlaced Video on a Progressive Display

[foogledricks]

I find this an interesting and frustrating subject. I have a 480i MiniDV camcorder, a progressive scan DVD player, and an HDTV that converts everything to progressive (except 1080i). This means that my 480i camcorder footage, which is shot at 60 fields per second, will be converted to show on my TV. And that conversion, is far from ideal. Tell me if I am techincally correct in how I describe the process:

 

In order to display an interlaced 60 fields per second (actually, 59.94 fields to be exact), my TV/DVD player will either throw away one of the fields and double the other (halfing the resolution), or will deinterlace the footage, resulting in a 30 (29.97) frames that don't belong together as a frame (combing and tearing). Either way, my video will not look its best, except on a proper interlaced 480i television.

 

I really hope that 1080p becomes the standard that people can agree on, so that this whole interlaced versus progressive thing goes away.

[Beer Monkey]

I think the 60 field-per-second stuff generally looks best in 960i, but only the Sony (non-chip) HD sets have that mode.

[Baiter]

The specifics of the converion will depend on your tv. I have a toshiba that upconverts 480i to 540p. :wtf:

I think you're jumping to conclusions that the upconversion to progressive will make the image worse, from getting so used to the progressive display on my tv I've grown to dislike watching an interlaced screen. Very large displays use line doublers to "create" lines and improve quality, sure it's artificial, but to the naked eye it can be an improvement over the original recording.

[Jason One]

-