GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| reply to Supafly
Re: XBox
Interlacing simply takes half of the vertical resolution and places it into a field, instead of a frame. The other hald of the vertical resolution is contained in a second field. The two fields are combined into a frame. The frame plays at the same rate as a progressive frame, BUT each of the two fields within the frame must share their allotted frame-time.
The act of interlacing video is not difficult nor process-intensive, but the reverse is also true: to deinterlace and interlaced frame it is very process-intensive in order to not lose information, or cause deinterlacing anomalies (artifacts).
A lot of manufacturers cheap their way out of deinterlacing by simply throwing away one of the fields in each frame thereby leaving a progressive frame of half the resolution. They then simply line-double this and call it the progressive original resolution. Those people should be shot, IMO.
As video codecs get more and more efficient at compressing video, the task of deinterlacing get's even more difficult. Why? Because, you can only scale a progressive frame, which means deinterlacing comes first. The next part is that deinterlacing must be done in the uncompressed world, and not while compressed in a cozy MPEG-2/4 codec.
The Microsoft Xbox 360 cannot do 1080P, but then again neither can any of the currently available HD DVD players either even though their movies are mastered-to-the disk as 1080P. But the 360 is worse as its mother doesn't believe in anything beyond 720P at this time. |
