Hardware 1:2 or 1:3 pixel duplication (720p/1080p to 4K)?

[orange808]

For 1080p the HDFury Linker is supposed to do a really nice job. Lagfree and clean. That doesn't help you with 720p though. For 720p and lower I currently can't think of any simple (or one-machine-only) solution.

Which is quite funny when they literally all they have to do is the simplest scaling method ever.
Point sampling.
Draw 9 pixels for each 720p pixel.
Draw 4 pixels for each 1080p pixel.
I mean FFS how hard can it be??
You go , Input>Resolution detection>Is point scaling set in menu? if yes>Bypass all processing>Upsample each with point sampling.

Well, the device was originally conceived to be a plug and play add on to fix HDCP incompatibilities and guarantee that older displays could be used with new 4k content. It's more of a downscaler than an upscaler.

Basically, HDFury made the Linker so John Q Paycheck could plug in his new fancy Tivo without buying a new tv.

In the spirit of the Linker's primary purpose, it would need to upscale and downscale between 4k and 720p.

Given the product's mission statement, I understand why 720p isn't there.

Downscaling native 4k content to look great at 720p would be tricky business.

[LDigital]

It sounds like there would be a market for a simple integer scaler solution to double 1080p and triple 720p in a pixel perfect basis. This could be done relatively simply I believe. I'd be in for one. I just lack the knowledge to make it myself

[ZellSF]

I don't believe lack of market interest is the reason we haven't seen a device like this yet.

[Guspaz]

My understanding is that outputting a 4K HDMI signal from a custom scaler is extremely difficult, since the clockrate on 4K60 is only even possible on a small number of very high-end FPGAs. Most (all?) 4K60 scalers out there probably use ASICs.

The FAQ for the HD Fury Splitter 4K UHD/PRO claims that it does 1080p-to-4K with pure pixel doubling (and calls out the "4K Enhancement" switch as changing between that and a smoother scale), but it only works at up to 30Hz. Their Linker product can do 4K60, but I don't see any information about if it supports integer scales. You could try asking them.

[strygo]

I found an iScan Micro on eBay for $74 shipped and decided to give it a shot first since it's confirmed this works down to 720p input, making it seem to be more versatile than the Linker at the moment.

I was directed to this thread due to a similar ask. How did the iScan Micro work for you? Have you found any other solutions? Thanks for your help!

[RGB0b]

I have an extra Micro if you need one. PM me.

[orange808]

I have an extra Micro if you need one. PM me.

Did you ever get it working with the OSSC?

[strygo]

I have an extra Micro if you need one. PM me.

Cool, thanks for the offer. If I can get confirmation that it works, I am very interested.

[ZellSF]

I'm still wondering when we do get devices that can do this if people will actually be happy with them. I think lots of people have just heard integer scaling is better, but don't know how it will actually end up looking.

[BONKERS]

There are 768p TVs that will 1:1 pixel scale 720p resolutions. You just have to test them to find out.

Lots of companies are still making 1080/768p Commercial TVs
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Flat ... 4205668456
usually you can find the manual online and it may mention a 1:1 pixel mode for all resolutions (on a 1080p set) or 720p (on a 768p set).
There may be even some 4k commercial displays that do integer, but you really would have to look at all of them and try to figure it out and potentially make a mistake in a purchase.

If you really *Want* to see how 720p integer scaled content looks at 4k, if you have a PC many GPU vendors now offer integer scaling.(On Nvidia it will scale it to the closest factor and leave empty space).

You can also create test footage by using a simple AVISynth script to integer scale a video and then use a compatible program to encode that scaled video to 4k and play it back to figure out if you actually like how it looks.

FFmpegSource2("path to source here")
PointResize(3840,2160)

I used this to test out something similar with a game. Ideally though you need high bitrate videos so you don't lose too much detail. (2 generations of lossy encoding)
With low res 3D rendered content i'm on the fence about it, because most don't have great image quality.
Content that has *great* image quality though looks quite a bit better once scaled. (Good texture filtering, high quality anti aliasing).

Perhaps people should come together to create a respository of high bitrate 60FPS 4k videos of integer scaled 540p/720p/1080p (16x/9x/4x scaling respectively)to 4k so they can really see what it looks like.
I can try to perhaps create an example or two if people are interested.

[lalilulelo]

My Sony X800H 4K TV has an option that lets you turn off all of the 4K upscaling "enhancement" stuff. It still uses a filter, but it's just a simple linear filter - it's not trying to "reconstruct" a 4K image out of a lower-resolution source. The result is that 1080p and even 720p content look great on this TV. I don't think integer scaling of 720p content would look good on this TV; the pixels would look big and blocky. The way it is currently, the pixels are slightly smoothed, but you can still see the same level of detail - and overall it looks very good.

By the way, I could take some pictures if anyone is interested in seeing what my TV looks like with 720p/1080p content.

[maxtherabbit]

If someone knows with certainty that they prefer "big and blocky" when going from 240p to 1080p, it would be reasonable to assume that they would also prefer the same when going from 1080p to 2160p. There's nothing magically different about one more power of 2 that's going to change someone's preferences.

[ZellSF]

I'm still wondering when we do get devices that can do this if people will actually be happy with them. I think lots of people have just heard integer scaling is better, but don't know how it will actually end up looking.

I've yet to hear a convincing argument as to why an exact integer scale that preserves each logical pixel isn't superior to bilinear or other interpolation algorithms in terms of accuracy to the source signal.

Look at a CRT or 1080p display? The space between pixels isn't supposed to be more of the same pixels. That's not accurate.

Not saying any other scaling method is accurate either, but integer scaling isn't inherently superior.

If someone knows with certainty that they prefer "big and blocky" when going from 240p to 1080p, it would be reasonable to assume that they would also prefer the same when going from 1080p to 2160p. There's nothing magically different about one more power of 2 that's going to change someone's preferences.

I'm pretty sure I've read about people here that prefer different integer scale factors when going from 240p to 1080p (for soft/sharpness reasons, not scanlines before you say that). I don't see why that would be different for 1080p to 2160p.

More importantly, people might want integer scaling for 720p/1080p content, not 240p content upscaled. And the sort of content that is is usually pretty different and people might not prefer the same scaling algorithms for it.

[ZellSF]

Look at a CRT or 1080p display? The space between pixels isn't supposed to be more of the same pixels. That's not accurate.

And that's why I said accurate to the source signal, not the display that signal was either mastered or typically represented on during its time.

So accuracy to a meaningless technical aspect (and even that's debatable), rather than how the artist presented it? That seems like a pointless thing to aim for.

That's not to say it's everyone's cup of tea, but it feels like the cautioning and wariness about integer scaling when it comes to anything that's not a 240p side scroller has less to do with the scaling method itself, and more to do with the faults of the source content.

No, I'm cautioning people about it because a lot of people are being misled to believe integer scaling is inherently superior and will always look better, and they'll trust this without seeing for themselves.

If you have the options for integer scaling content you should always check if it looks better for the content, rather than assume it's better. Definitely find some way to test before wasting money on hardware.

[lalilulelo]

Accuracy is less important than how it looks to you personally, which is just a matter of taste. There’s no right or wrong answer to that. Also, as far as why filtering might result in something closer to what the artist intended, and specifically why it might be different for higher resolutions like 720p and 1080p: that content generally is more similar visually/graphically to film or video content (compared to 240p content, for example). Many games intentionally have a very cinematic look. Film or video content is not intended to be viewed as blocky pixels. It’s still a matter of taste, but I think most people would prefer a cinematic look for HD games rather than a pixelated look.

As far as why filtering specifically might be better, I think it does a better job of approximating the way the content looks to your eye - which is not necessarily the same as how it’s technically rendered. Human visual perception isn’t totally accurate, and any type of scaling is only an approximation of the source, anyway. I think this is different for HD content compared to 240p content, because the way you perceive it is different.

[lalilulelo]

Accuracy is not less important than personal taste when it comes to the work of others. I want to see what they want me to see, otherwise we might as well go changing story elements we don't like (which, you can, but then it's no longer their work).

Again, you're thinking of images as something purely technical, which they're not. They're created by humans for humans, not mindless machines. People who make games, videos, etc. are generally much more concerned about your overall impression of the game/video than the exact technical specifications of your setup.

Also, what would make you think that integer scaling is what the developers would actually intend for you to use, considering the vast majority of gamers don't even have that as an option? Another example: the PS5 is a brand new system that outputs 4K and also plays HD content, and that content is scaled to 4K using (probably linear) filtering. In that case, Sony themselves produced some of the games that are being scaled in this way. If that's not what the "developers intended", then that would imply that the developers are going against what the developers intended.

[lalilulelo]

In response to your edit, I never said integer scaling is what the developer/author intended, I don't think that's part of the equation or on topic at this point. It's simply just a less altered expansion of the source.

But... you did say that, or at least implied it:

Accuracy is not less important than personal taste when it comes to the work of others. I want to see what they want me to see, otherwise we might as well go changing story elements we don't like (which, you can, but then it's no longer their work).

You were saying that personal taste doesn't matter because what the creators want is more important. Now you're saying that doesn't matter either. In that case, what does matter? What is a game, even, if there's no one to create it or play it? This seems like a riddle or a paradox, which I don't think is what you have in mind.

[lalilulelo]

Creative intent matters a lot, more than what Joe Public thinks look good on his new TV. Scaling methods rarely come into that because we can't objectively say what is and isn't right for said piece of content, only how accurately one can expand the source signal which can be quantified. That's about as blunt as I can put it.

To put it bluntly, "accuracy" as you just described it is essentially meaningless and a waste of time to even discuss. This is a hyper-technicality, and correct me if I'm wrong - other people who are watching/posting in this thread - the discussion is not about the technical inner workings of scalers, but about what the end result will actually look like.

[ZellSF]

Two screens of the same size and characteristics, running at source resolution and an integer scale will look almost identical.

I can't tell if you're arguing pointless semantics again here (a theoretical screen that doesn't exist) or you're just that misinformed:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/new-mo ... t-17696595
There's gap between pixels when running at native resolution. Integer scaling removes those gaps, inducing (perceived) aliasing. A problem bilinear scaling can solve, but at a cost of sharpness.

There's no definitive answer to what looks best, or what looks like the artist intended.

[ZellSF]

That difference has already been pointed out. At a normal viewing distance, or at a high enough resolution where you can't make out each individual pixel, that effect is reduced and looks closer to a native display.

I can see the aliasing just fine at a normal viewing distance, with high resolution source images (1080p).

[lalilulelo]

No, because it's fully reflected in the end result.

But you already said that personal taste doesn't matter, which is part of the end result. Personal taste is ultimately the end point of any form of artistic media. If it doesn't appeal to you, then none of the technical stuff matters at all. You already agreed that you can't objectively say which scaling algorithm is better. That leaves only personal taste as being the most important factor. You can't argue that this alleged "technical superiority" is "fully reflected" in the end result if the end result is that a person doesn't like it, because they have different taste than you.

It's 'you can make it look about as good at an appropriate screen size' vs. 'it'll never look as good'.

I disagree. On my 4K TV, which is about the same size as my previous 1080p TV, using linear filtering for 1080p content looks just as good as far as level of detail and sharpness compared to the 1080p TV. In fact, the image looks better overall just because the colors and brightness are better. I was actually concerned, before I got this TV, that HD material wouldn't look as good as it did on my 1080p TV; but as soon as I got it I could immediately tell that it really does, and the colors and brightness make it better. So, from my perspective, I didn't lose anything at all going from the 1080p TV to a 4K TV. This is just my impression, but remember: my impression is no more or less correct than yours.

Like many people on this forum, I have extremely high standards when it comes to picture quality. This is why I specifically chose a TV that lets you disable all of the 4K AI upscaling "enhancement" stuff, which most 4K TVs won't let you disable. Linear filtering looks way, way better than that in my opinion, and it looks so good that I don't see how you could even improve on it at all. The other benefit this has is that it eliminates the need for an external scaler, since the TV can handle any resolution internally.