Best hardware for 1080p -> 1080i & 720p -> 1080i

[fernan1234]

Does anyone have any recommendations to achieve this?

I have mainly used an Extron DVS 304 to scale both 1080p and 720p to 1080i, the latter being by far the most optimal HD resolution in my setup. I feed it HDMI converted to VGA. Unfortunately, while the 1080i image that the Extron produces through its RGB Scaled mode looks very good, the picture can be too jumpy. In a seemingly random fashion, the picture can range from somewhat stable to very jumpy. Imagine the worst interlace jitter you've ever seen. On my monitor, non-scaled 1080i is completely stable, so this is definitely a result of the scaling. Furthermore, with the scaling it seems difficult for the Extron DVS 304 to properly detect the size and centering of the image (RGB Passthrough mode has none of these issues, of course).

This is why I'm looking for alternatives. I've also tried a couple of HDMI to component converters which looked quite good but had a few issues of their own, but I would be willing to explore that route again upon recommendation. Ideally I would prefer to stick to an RGB output, however.

[orange808]

You could try a DVDO iScan vp50. You might try doing a search on DVDO's and 1080i.

Home theatre guys probably used those for 1080i. I bet there are archived forum discussions about it.

I don't know of any machines that have robust features for 1080i output, but I'm sure they exist. I imagine that stuff is SDI 4:2:2 broadcast gear. The DVDO is 4:2:2, but at least it uses analog RGB and HDMI--and it's low latency.

[Xer Xian]

I have mainly used an Extron DVS 304 to scale both 1080p and 720p to 1080i, the latter being by far the most optimal HD resolution in my setup.

Sorry for being that guy, but how is 1080i the most optimal resolution 'by far' in any setup? Save for maybe Sony HDM's which only supported 480p, 1080i and some other defunct standard.

[fernan1234]

Sorry for being that guy, but how is 1080i the most optimal resolution 'by far' in any setup? Save for maybe Sony HDM's which only supported 480p, 1080i and some other defunct standard.

If you're sorry then just don't be that guy in the first place. I'm using a D-series BVM, which excels at 1080i. Leave it at that and trust that if I'm asking this it's for a good enough reason for me.

Thanks orange808 for the DVDO suggestion. Looks like the VP30 is not suitable for this use case, so it probably has to be the VP50, which unfortunately is expensive. I'd like to try it if someone who owns one and has used it or could test its 1080i output could share their experience here.

[Fudoh]

1080i from the VP50 is great. It's great from most proper home cinema processors. The Extron was just never meant for it.

And you really prefer 1080i over 720p on the BVM? That's rather rare I would think. 32 inches I assume. What's your sitting distance when playing?

[ldeveraux]

If you're sorry then just don't be that guy in the first place. I'm using a D-series BVM, which excels at 1080i. Leave it at that and trust that if I'm asking this it's for a good enough reason for me.

I hope English isn't your first language, because you come off as a complete asshole with that comment!

[fernan1234]

1080i from the VP50 is great. It's great from most proper home cinema processors. The Extron was just never meant for it.

And you really prefer 1080i over 720p on the BVM? That's rather rare I would think. 32 inches I assume. What's your sitting distance when playing?

Thanks for confirming this! I now feel more confident in trying out a VP50 for this purpose. And the BVM is a D24. 720p does look quite nice, but 1080i looks significantly better to me. I am mainly hoping to upscale 720p PS3 games to 1080i, and scale 1080p PS4 and Switch games to 1080i. When I use the Extron's 1080i output, and when the picture is not too shaky, it does look preferable than when those systems output 720p, except for the sizing and centering issues that the Extron's scaling causes. And I usually sit about 3-4 feet from it since it's a small screen.

I hope English isn't your first language, because you come off as a complete asshole with that comment!

I guess my English is good enough then, since I wasn't trying to be nice there. I just don't appreciate questioning the rationale behind the topic's goal so assertively. This is not about the merits of wanting to achieve this, but rather about recommendations for hardware that can do so.

[Xer Xian]

Keep in mind that DVDOs will cut your horizontal chroma resolution by a half.

An ideal solution here would be a scaler with 4:4:4 sampling, low latency and selectable flicker filter's intensity for high-res interlaced outputs. I don't know if such a device exists. Among the ones that I know, some machines from Calibre, such as the LEDView series, come closest to the ideal - but that's only judging from the declared specifications (a couple of forum members here, who owned Calibre VPs, have questioned their veracity). They're quite difficult to find though, and be aware that the only one that's currently listed on eBay appears to not have the selectable flicker filter.

[fernan1234]

Keep in mind that DVDOs will cut your horizontal chroma resolution by a half.

An ideal solution here would be a scaler with 4:4:4 sampling, low latency and selectable flicker filter's intensity for high-res interlaced outputs. I don't know if such a device exists. Among the ones that I know, some machines from Calibre, such as the LEDView series, come closest to the ideal - but that's only judging from the declared specifications (a couple of forum members here, who owned Calibre VPs, have questioned their veracity). They're quite difficult to find though, and be aware that the only one that's currently listed on eBay appears to not have the selectable flicker filter.

Of course, the flicker reduction comes at the cost of vertical resolution (since it implies blending the fields together to a certain extent), which coupled with the D24's total horizontal resolving power of about 1300 lines, calls the real advantage of going with 1080i vs. 720p into question even keeping aside motion artifacts inherent in interlaced video but yeah - I'm probably being that guy again, so nevermind that.

No, this is actually really good info. Thank you.

Perhaps going HDMI to component is the simpler and most cost-effective way to go in the end. From what I recall it worked very well going from 720p to 1080i. There was a problem where certain 1080p signals scaled to 1080i had a pink line of pixels flickering across the screen. It's just a matter of finding a good one. From what I learned in testing some units some time ago, price is not a good indicator of quality when it comes to these converters/scalers.

[orange808]

There's plenty of color resolution with 720p input, so I wouldn't worry about it.

An ideal solution to your use case would have multiple processing options and a flicker filter option to precisely "dial in" the interlaced output. (Extron VSC units let you do this for 480i.) The trouble is: 1080i is a broadcast standard and broadcast 1080i video is compressed. So, I doubt there is an affordable machine that would give you complete robust control over the interlaced output that uses full chroma. Furthermore, SDI is the standard for broadcast applications, so you're up against multiple standards that don't work well with a home setup. Finally, plenty of the machines you'll find will want to use a genlock setup for synchronization; you don't want/need all that.

480i scan conversion had a use case for ordinary presentation usage, but 1080i displays never dominated. There was no market to produce a pro gear 1080i machine for anybody outside of broadcast video.

The DVDO is low latency, it has frame lock, and most of your other options are going to use subsampling, anyway.

I do actually know of some very recent machines that might offer everything you want, but do you have $10,000?

[fernan1234]

I do actually know of some very recent machines that might offer everything you want, but do you have $10,000?

That would be nice! Which machines are those? Simply out of curiosity, of course.

If I come across a good deal on a VP50 I might just get it to check out how it performs compared to the Extron DVS.

[orange808]

I do actually know of some very recent machines that might offer everything you want, but do you have $10,000?

That would be nice! Which machines are those? Simply out of curiosity, of course.

If I come across a good deal on a VP50 I might just get it to check out how it performs compared to the Extron DVS.

Check out the Analog Way Vio 4k or the Barco/Folsom ImagePRO 4k. The ImagePRO 4k should be the most powerful of the two machines, but it's even more expensive than the 10 g's you'll need to get the Vio 4k.

I'd expect between 1 1/2 and 2 frames of latency from them. Although, I haven't seen or touched either unit, yet.

Very expensive new pro gear and absolute overkill for us.

[fernan1234]

Well that Vio 4k is "only" 6.7k! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... ormat.html

But yeah, this is stuff for concert venues and such. I don't think it's ever gonna be like Extron gear where eventually we would see them on ebay at 2 or even 3 digit prices.

[Xer Xian]

[...]Of course, the flicker reduction comes at the cost of vertical resolution (since it implies blending the fields together to a certain extent), which coupled with the D24's total horizontal resolving power of about 1300 lines, calls the real advantage of going with 1080i vs. 720p into question even keeping aside motion artifacts inherent in interlaced video but yeah - I'm probably being that guy again, so nevermind that.

No, this is actually really good info. Thank you.

I had cut this part of my post because I thought it was unnecessary after all, but since you quoted it before of the editing, I feel like I need to rectify two errors that I made:

1) the flicker filter might be a simple spatial filter which is field-based, thus not requiring a full frame (ie two fields) buffer. It might be a crude filter that adds vertical blur such as shown here or something more advanced - the technicalities behind these filters (of which here's an introduction) are over my head

2) the D24's total horizontal resolving power certainly exceeds 1300 lines - I mistakenly multiplied 1000 (nr. of TV lines) times 4/3 instead of 16/9, which actually gives 1777. The actual figure will most likely be lower than that due to the loss of detail along the sides (it's pretty bad on a JVC DT-V which is a 4:3, it could be worse on a 16:9 CRT due to the wider angles between beam and outermost phosphors *)

* Edit: difference of the angles is negligible - the D24 is deeper than a DT-V17 almost as much as it is wider

[ldeveraux]

I hope English isn't your first language, because you come off as a complete asshole with that comment!

I guess my English is good enough then, since I wasn't trying to be nice there. I just don't appreciate questioning the rationale behind the topic's goal so assertively. This is not about the merits of wanting to achieve this, but rather about recommendations for hardware that can do so.

Because people are often incorrect, misguided, or flat out wrong in their assumptions for what they "need." More experienced users would aim to gather more information to prescribe the correct solution. And not for nothing, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar; there's no need to be standoffish when you came here asking for help. Nobody's being paid to offer assistance!

[Xer Xian]

@ldeveraux: I totally agree with what you're saying (and I myself am inexperienced with respect to a lot of people here), but the OP is entitled to direct his thread to his liking - nothing's wrong with that. Let's move on

[fernan1234]

I checked out a cheap Chinese HDMI to YPbPr converter+scaler that I had not tested before (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07NXZ4DMZ/), and with the exception of the loss of color quality (I suppose that mostly due to the color space conversion), it performs quite impressively. It certainly beats the Extron DVS when outputting its scaled 1080i picture. The only thing the Extron has over it is faithful color reproduction. The converter on the other hand produces a stable and crisp 1080i image, taking advantage of what my monitor is capable of. Unfortunately, after seeing proper colors afforded by an HDMI to VGA conversion, I don't think I'll be using it regularly, or even at all. It just looks a bit too dull in comparison. For 28 bucks though, I might as well keep it around--if I knew no other option I would think it's fantastic. I would totally recommend it to anyone who wants a simple and cheap 1080i solution--though it looks like there probably won't be many other crazy people who want this like me. In my case, I think I'll give up on a scaling solution and simply use 720p when 1080i is unavailable.

The scaler also produces a nice 720p scaled image (downscaling 1080p), though again I find it less crisp and clean than the 1080i one. It makes sense that it would look better, as it is a higher resolution (just not presented progressively), which this monitor is more than capable of resolving masterfully. This also makes me think that an ideal scaler should not have a flicker filter that softens the image, as that would affect what is IMO precisely the advantage of this resolution on this monitor.

For a user of this particular monitor (D24, I suppose also D32), I really don't think it would be wrong or misguided to use 1080i instead of 720p whenever available. While I appreciate all input and advice people volunteer here, I wouldn't be interested in anything that's based on prejudice about interlace image in general or on how other monitors handle it. But if anyone who uses one of these monitors could provide reasons for why 1080i should be avoided I would be all ears.

edit: the YPbPr converter does seem to add a flicker filter that softens the picture.

[Fudoh]

It just looks a bit too dull in comparison

have you tried if feeding it full range vs. limited range RGB vs. YCbCr makes a difference?

[fernan1234]

have you tried if feeding it full range vs. limited range RGB vs. YCbCr makes a difference?

I only did a quick test first with MacOS outputting 1080i (I can't figure out how to get Windows 10 to properly output 1080i, while MacOS does it beautifully, as long as the proper EDID is detected), and I don't know how to change the RGB range or color space it outputs. I also tested a Nintendo Switch and PS3, both of which did look a bit better using limited range RGB. Maybe I should check out a Bluray on the PS3, which if I recall correctly are always played using YUV.

The issues with the duller picture may be due to more than just a color space conversion though. Perhaps this cheap little thing will inevitably degrade the black level and contrast. Maybe I could compensate partly via the monitor picture settings. I may play around with it a bit more before stashing it away.

[Fudoh]

Perhaps this cheap little thing will inevitably degrade the black level and contrast.

possibly, but it shouldn't matter and you should always be able to adjust those on the display's side. I wouldn't expect a broadcast level conversion from a $30 box, but I wouldn't expect damage beyond repair either.

[fernan1234]

Yeah. I'm still really impressed with how well these cheap boxes work overall though. If I recall correctly, the Portta branded one may have had better colors, but it also had some other issue that made me return it (maybe slight ringing artifacts?). This one may have those too but I haven't noticed yet.

[Xer Xian]

I've got a dvi to component box that might be a good fit to your needs - it's a simple scaler, with no flicker-filter, that adds about one frame of lag. Very decent scaling (can provide a sample of 480p to 1080p scaling later today). I never use it so I would let it go if you pay for a tracked shipping. It strictly needs to be paired with an hdmi to dvi+audio converter though, since it doesn't accept hdmi signals (OSSC's TX mode had to be set to dvi or the box would not deal with it). PM me if interested.

[SuperSpongo]

[...]
2) the D24's total horizontal resolving power certainly exceeds 1300 lines - I mistakenly multiplied 1000 (nr. of TV lines) times 4/3 instead of 16/9, which actually gives 1777. [...]

* Edit: difference of the angles is negligible - the D24 is deeper than a DT-V17 almost as much as it is wider

Not to derail this thread, but could you go into detail a little on your calculation here? I was always of the impression that TV lines (similar to a concept in photography) are a measurement of how many alternations of light and dark vertical lines can be displayed without getting blurry. The D24 and D32 are specified with 1000TV lines in 16:9 and 4:3 mode. Why did you multiply it by the aspect ratio quotient?

[Xer Xian]

The D24 and D32 are specified with 1000TV lines in 16:9 and 4:3 mode. Why did you multiply it by the aspect ratio quotient?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_lines

A resolution of 400 TVL means that 200 distinct dark vertical lines and 200 distinct white vertical lines can be counted over a horizontal span equal to the height of the picture. For example, on 4 by 3 inches (10.2 cm × 7.6 cm) monitor with 400 TVL, 200 vertical dark lines can be counted over 3 inches (7.6 cm) width on monitor (Note that the 3 inches (7.6 cm) of monitor height is used rather than the 4 inches (10 cm) of whole monitor width).

As I said above though, multiplying the TV lines number by the AR doesn't necessarily give the true horizontal resolving power of a CRT. Still, I don't think it will be far from it. Also while you're gaming, your gaze tends to be fixed on the center of the screen anyway, so on a D24 1080i has a clear edge over 720p as far as hor.res goes.

[fernan1234]

Looking at some fine detail (like small font) on the HDMI to Component converter I talked about earlier, it appears that it does use a flicker filter for the 1080i output. The duller picture I was seeing before is also probably due to this. When the DVS works well it does better. I'll be sending it back. I'll give Xer Xian's converter a spin. I expect it to perform better than this one since it seems to have more configuration options.

[SuperSpongo]

Thanks for your input!

Yeah, after posting, I also saw the explanation on Wikipedia, but it seems a little strange to me. Why would the TV lines mainly refer to top to bottom? A widely advertised feature of the D24 is that it has 1000 TV lines in 4:3 mode as well as 16:9. This is due to the fact that on other monitors, the TV line count is significantly less in 16:9 as the electron beam is spread more. However, the vertical resolution does not change between 16:9 and 4:3, so why would that matter?
It makes much more sense to determine the TV lines on the longer side. This would also be consistent with the fact that the CRT does not care about the horizontal resolution (see Super Resolutions on CRT Emudriver for example).

[Fudoh]

A widely advertised feature of the D24 is that it has 1000 TV lines in 4:3 mode as well as 16:9. This is due to the fact that on other monitors, the TV line count is significantly less in 16:9 as the electron beam is spread more.

No, that's simply due to the fact that it's a widescreen tube, so the height of the picture is identical in 4:3 and 16:9 modes, ergo the inner square area used to measure the TVL specs is identical for 4:3 and 16:9 use. And TVL are counted horizontally, not vertically.

4:3 tubes which add letterboxing for 16:9 (e.g. the 20" BVMs) on the other hand have a higher TVL count in 4:3 mode (more height, larger inner square area in 4:3).

[SuperSpongo]

Ah okay, I think I'm starting to get it. Your example makes sense to me Fudoh, although you also talk about a square (which is consistent with my understanding as well). But that's why I asked for a clarification of Xer Xians statement in the first place: I thought ther was no need to multiply 1000 TV lines with 1.33 in 4:3 or 1.77 in 16:9 mode. But: if the TV line spec refers to a square, then naturally, the aspect ratio is a factor and 1000 TV lines on a 16:10 monitor would result in 1600 TV lines total in fullscreen but slightly less when displaying 16:9 content (similar to the 4:3 tube situation).

I think I got it now. Thanks guys!

[Fudoh]

then naturally, the aspect ratio is a factor and 1000 TV lines on a 16:10 monitor would result in 1600 TV lines total in fullscreen

yes, but there's a reason why only the inner square area is used. Because only there you get the guaranteed TVL/inch rating. Tubes are more blurry on the edges of the tube. Xer Xian was refering to that as well.

[SuperSpongo]

Indeed!
Well, you learn something new every day, sometimes even about your own equipment