[mythtv-users] Temporal 2x vs Temporal-Spatial 2x
mythtv-list at dinkum.org.uk
Fri Feb 10 16:30:50 UTC 2012
On 10 Feb 2012, at 13:24, William Powers wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 9:44 PM, Jean-Yves Avenard <jyavenard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Nonsense... Anything over 60 fps output is all you need.
>> 1080i is 30fps, and what comes out from Advanced 2X is 60fps, no more, no less.
> Yes, but but you need that > 60 fps on every type of program and qvdpautest only tests one short clip. My experience has been that I will get a noticeable amount of dropped frames on some material if the qvdpautest result for mixer temporal_spatial is less than ~75 fps or so. That's why I stick with Temporal,2X with my 520 even though qvdpautest says it will do 67 fps. The difference between Advanced,2X and Temporal,2X is subtle, at most. Playback glitches are not.
I've found that qvdpautest frame rate and mythtv frame rate are not really equivalent, definitely need some headroom for glitch free playback.
> Interestingly, with the standard decoder and with vdpauskipchroma set, my 520 will do Advanced,2X reliably. However, since I personally have yet to see a single frame that was clearly better with advanced than with temporal, I have just decided not to obsess about it.
It's all in the defocus that you get when there is slow to medium speed movement in an interlaced picture, temporal is interpolating based purely on the fields, advanced is mixing in frames with fields when the speed of motion allows. Look for "motion blur" that goes in the wrong direction or plane, this is the interlaced look that we have all become accustomed to over the years, Advanced reduces it a little, subtle but worth the extra cash once you've seen the effect, especially on bigger screens but only relevant to sports and other live TV.
Apologies to anyone who now notices the interlace blur but didn't before, it's not really possible to un-notice it...
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
More information about the mythtv-users