Luma discussions

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Luma discussions

boelle


2017-02-20 14:49 GMT+01:00 <[hidden email]>:

> On 2017-02-20, at 13:32, smf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> The "dust" he writes about applies to my understanding only to the "modern plasma TV" he used and which I expect does bad job handling off specs signals.
>
> Old tv's are blurry

Old TVs usually yes. CRTs in general not necessarily. I still use well-kept hi-res studio displays, which give picture far from being blurry.

> and uses anlogue processing.

... which is the key here. No quantisation into few bits of depth resolution, no timing quantisation, trying to put square peg of non-compliant signal into round hole of "expected" timing, etc.

> Plasma TV's have crisper pixels & depending on the TV and how it's setup could have less than 8 bits of colour resolution per channel.

Exactly. That's one part of what I mean when writing that ADCs there may do a job ranging from decent to horrible when given an off-specs output from the 64. I have seen all of those. His plasma apparently fits into the latter category.

> This makes irregularities in the video signal more visible, which is especially worse if the plasma TV has a much larger screen size.

Upscaling the artefacts to big screen plays an important role too, but when using a device that handles the signal gracefully, this is not that much of a problem. Been there, seen that.

Summing up - my initial comment applies to CRTs and well behaving upscalers. The differences we started discussing about might be substantially more pronounced when using a device that doesn't know how to handle the signal but I would like to use such a device in the first place. I would advise the guy to put a decent upscaler between the 64 and his modern plasma TV instead.

--
SD!


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Loading...