
Another thing. Could the 1.28ms be the delay from frame rate processing 59.19Hz to 59.94Hz?
off topic, but once you get into using interframe creation on your TV set, using a PC for upscaling is hell (because it can't keep proper cadences). Also there's no proper video deinterlacing on a PC. There are ok'ish video deinterlacers, but no a single pixel-adaptive deinterlacing engine that can even get close to ABT's engine.plus I upscale DVD's with the PC so the Edge would be kinda redundant
I disagree, I've always got excellent results from PC DVD playback using systems like Nvidia's Purevideo or Cyberlink's TrueTheater HD. I've Motionflow set to minimum and not had any issues (the Edge is in the chain too though probably not doing so much at that point). Surely the raw horsepower of a PC GPU is as good if not better than what's in a video-processor?off topic, but once you get into using interframe creation on your TV set, using a PC for upscaling is hell (because it can't keep proper cadences). Also there's no proper video deinterlacing on a PC. There are ok'ish video deinterlacers, but no a single pixel-adaptive deinterlacing engine that can even get close to ABT's engine.
both technologies are crappy in comparison to what a good TV implementation can do nowadays. The biggest problem and bottleneck is the HDMI connection to the TV which is limited to 1080p60 (which isn't a multiple of 24fps).I've always got excellent results from PC DVD playback using systems like Nvidia's Purevideo or Cyberlink's TrueTheater HD.
a TV can't perform a stable IVTC on a 60Hz signal from a HTPC which is the key to enabling 48 or 72fps on the Sony sets.I've Motionflow set to minimum and not had any issues
not at all and that's basically the reason why there is no proper video deinterlacing on the PC.Surely the raw horsepower of a PC GPU is as good if not better than what's in a video-processor?
DVDs prior to 2001 had been hard-telecined. This means the 3:2 pulldown was applied with interlacing at the time of the film transfer. DVDs after 2001 have been soft-telecined. This means actual 24fps on the disc with a flag of repeated frames, so the player performs the pulldown during playback. All soft-telecined DVDs can easily be IVTC'ed to 24fps. On hard telecines you need a very good processor.I didn't think DVD's were 24fps anyway?
Nice. Do you think your friend will let you lend his MVS again when testing it?Fudoh wrote:sure.
Here's hoping you're right!Konsolkongen wrote:But the Mini works more like the XRGB-3 in B0 mode, but with less lag.
Well in my case, I'm pretty sure it was the box. I even ran composite video through an LM1881, but no dice.fagin wrote:I doubt this will sort out sync instabilities imo.
I've tried polishing several turds in my time, with very little success.
The PCE RGB Sync issues (which is what we were referring to) appears to be RGB MOD related, rather than the processor used. There is also some truth to this for the AES, depending on which RGB revision it uses.grahf wrote:Well in my case, I'm pretty sure it was the box. I even ran composite video through an LM1881, but no dice.fagin wrote:I doubt this will sort out sync instabilities imo.
I've tried polishing several turds in my time, with very little success.
can be done in many different ways. Most of them being wrong. The concept of adding scanlines BETWEEN deinterlacing and scaling unfortunately seems to be beyond most people's imagination. The problem with Framemeister is that both the deinterlacing (or linedoubling for 240p) and the upscaling is done inside the same IC, so it might simply not be possible to add a step in between.Any thoughts?
If it does this, adding scanlines should be a breeze right?Fudoh wrote: - real linedoubling (224 lines have to be output as 448 lines, not as 480 lines).
Sorry you lost me there. Why 270 lines @1080p and what do you mean 960p with borders?Fudoh wrote:so my guess would be that they'll simply add a scanline overlay... (...and 270 lines for 1080p... or they do 240 lines for 960p with borders.)