Should we retired SVCD with DVDR ?

[hp_lovecraft]

Singsing:

I shall answer you with a question: Why VHS looks like crap on a big screen TV?

The same reason that DVD looks like crap when projected onto a movie theater.... its bigger! I assumed we were talking about the same size TVs. (480p vs 1081i).

By the way, last week there was semi-agreement on a standard for HD-DVD. It will be NEC blue-laser, 1080i and have 15GB per layer, use MPEG-4, and have a top speed of ~35MBps. However, it will likely change since SONY is still fighting to have its BLU-RAY format used... (ie licensing rights), and nobody wants another format war.

Following that logic, VCD would look better than SVCD!
All upsampling is doing is "blurring" the existing image more by stretching it out to cover a larger area than before. This looks worse than just showing the raw picture to begin with.

Let me explain-
First, your standard DVD player already upscales 352x240 and 480x480 to 720x480 NTSC using various filters. Nearly all computers also upscale as well, so you probobly have NEVER SEEN an UNscaled 352x240 at full-screen. If you were to turn off all the options in the WMP, you would probobly be disgusted at how bad it looked.
That doesnt mean that VCD looks better then DVD. It just means VCD looks better upscaled to 480, that at its native resolution because the DVD player outputs an ANALOG signal, not a DIGITAL one, and its easier for the DVD player to represent the NTSC video wave with upsampled data.

That said, some players do a better job then others. My cheap Mustek player does a fantastic job upscaling, while my old RCA simply doubled lines, making scan lines and jaggies very visable. The best scalers are $20,000 and up for converting 480P DVD to 1080P, and they do a pretty good job at creating 'sub-pixel resolution'. (Their term, not mine).

Anyway, I've actually slowed my DVD purchases, since some say we may see HD-DVD as soon as next christmas.... well maybe...

nick


If it didn't, it would look TERRIBLE!

[SatStorm]

Well, it looks like you have many desicions to make there in US!
In Europe, things are a little bit more clear: The DVB situation gonna stay as is for more that 15 years, and that means no HDTV here and only PAL mpeg 2 based transmissions.
So, DVD -as it is today- gonna stay for long - long time! The bad European economy helps a lot for this!

[energy80s]

Very true. I think that the reason America has went with HDTV is that native NTSC is terrible quality. It was the first colour broadcasting system and suffers from a lot of flaws, not least the one where the colour varies with the voltage! There is a definate benefit to using better quality for NTSC, but PAL and SECAM use a much better way of transmitting the picture (overlaying a colour image on top of a black and white one, and using higher resolution) in the first place.

[SingSing]

VHS is worse off because it lack of vertical resolution, 100 + lines only.

VHS interlace artifact is less irritating than DVD, because they are not as obvious ( analog artifact vs digital artifact ).

I think the prolification of large screen TV, make the short coming of media very obvious. We have to get a DVD player with HDTV ( 1040i ) resolution. The industry is working on next gen ( blue laser ) players.
So they can make us buy the same movie again on a different format.

I own fleetwoodmac's rumor cassette tape, LP, direct cut LP, CD, and SACD if they dare to put one out.

[arealgijoe]

I have SACD. It's a waste of money so far. I have old analog 1/4" tape recordings that sound better. I was impressed in the store but when I bought one and listened on my system with a good set of floor speakers, not impressed.

IMO the Sony SACD is more about copy protection than quality. I make my own dts 5.1 channel aduio CDs that will play on most players that have a digital output and use the Dolby-AC3/dts decoder in my Sony A/V reciever.

JD

[adam]

All I know is that when I walk into best buy or circuit city they have the same, latest dvd playing on all tv's. Looking at all the HDTV and the non-HDTV's there is absolutely no question, the HDTV looks better. DVD could be better, sure. But that doesnt mean that it can't benefit from a high quality playback device. With the current DVD standard, a good progressive scan dvd player and an HDTV is the ideal setup.

I can fully sypathize with people in other parts of the world who may not have the same options as I do in the US. Here I can get a progressive scan dvd player for as low as $50. But that is an economical problem, not necessarily a technological problem. When I can afford it, I will definitely get an HDTV and I will not think twice about how my current dvds will look on it, I know it will be better.

[SatStorm]

I believe is also technological, in the term that there is no interest yet for Europe to go HDTV.
For example, today all DVD movies are still produced interlaced and the progressive PAL DVD standalones are only a few, even if they appear in the market about a year ago. And they only play progressive the only very - very few progressive PAL DVDs that exist. Most of them are collectable superbit realeses and they have in the cover the "progressive scan compatible" add, like being something really special!

On most technology exibitions in europe the last year, you gonna see the same scene all the time: Plasma widescreens or huge CRT ones (last 6 months with technologies pixel plus like), playing DVDs like Shrek, Monsters INC etc (Cartoons in general) and old movies like the 5th element, Gladiator and Matrix! All of them are linked with component cables ( in Europe we use SCART so far, which offers RGB).
You never gonna see a typical SCART (RGB) connected, 4:3 DVB transmission from a good source (etc: German TV channels), which are always interlace and full CCIR - 601. Those channels are the best you can get in Europe and they do look like crap on PAL prototype HDTVs. They know that on those exibitions, so they simply don't show the true to costumers...

There is no interest for 16:9 screens also: Most europeans buy 4:3 CRT screens of huge dimensions (32'' or 36"), or videoprojectors, and they watch the widescreen picture letterboxed (looks like a 28'' screen). In generall, there are no 16:9 TV transmissions, except UK BBC channels and some culture like transmissions, produced from national stations worldwide! So, if you don't like ballet, opera, theater and historical documanteries for things like "the 9th century history of Uganda", "the art of Afganistan", etc, there are no 16:9 TV transmissions. Even the movie channels, transmitts letterboxed...
Don't mention the DVDs. Babylon 5 just released on DVD and the PAL version is soft (NTSC to Pal convertion) and full of scratches. For fun I simply watch them on a PAL prototype HDTV and they looked like VHS on a plasma screen. Distortion, scratches, interlace artifacts! The horror! I concerne those DVDs typical (mainstream) Pal ones.
I don't see the situtation change in Europe for the next 10 - 15 years. It is mpeg 2 @ DVB and DVD as today all the way.
It a partly economical (European buy equipment once in 6 - 10 years) and partly technological (no HDTV interest, PAL just do the work fine for today...)
Maybe, just Maybe, when HDTV became maintstream in US and Blu Ray gonna turn HDTV and maintream, some hybrid solutions gonna appear in Europe, for the devices, not the transmissions. But only few are going to spent for HDTV equipment just for watching Blu Rays in the first place. Soon or later that gonna boost the interest, but not before 10 years...

That's why I suggest to Europeans continue make there SVCDs and CVDs, with no concernes for the quality. For many many years to come, the quality is "O.K."

For my US friends from the other side, I suggest better turn DVD from today, 'cause CVD/SVCD are not enough for the HDTV reality it's comes on you!

[adam]

Well finally us ntsc users can say that we are better than pal at something. Our format is so bad we have no choice but to upgrade, whearas you are stuck with well done, yet increasingly outdated technology. I can really see your point better now, but this is still just a matter of demographics.

A properly made DVD played on a properly made dvd player played on a properly made HDTV is gonna look very high quality, and better than on a non-HDTV, at least in my opinion. Unfortunately for you, this combination is hard to come by but it still exists, and is even readibly available in some countries.

Right now, HDTV is more condusive to ntsc material and pal regions/manufacturers have a lot of catching up to do because the HDTV hardware is lacking in these regions. My point is just that the limiation here is not the DVD standard itself, again in my opinion. I feel that a higher quality playback device will only help DVD, not hurt it. Of course the playback is only going to be as good as the hardware its played on, but I do feel that with current DVD standards, HDTV is an upgrade not a downgrade.

[SatStorm]

Yes, you 're right, HDTV is an upgrade! The "problem" is that is capable to show all the problems of the NTSC/PAL past! Soon or later, some filter solutions gonna appear to eliminate this. Let's hope that gonna show before 2010!

[energy80s]

As has been already posted, there is no interest in HDTV in Europe from either broadcasters, retailers, viewers or equipment manufacturers. Likewise there is very little progressive scan equipment available - apart from video projectors which are mainly used for PC displays and not TV. Widescreen is only being promoted in the UK. I don't think there is any great interest in it anywhere else in Europe. The BBC is currently trying to switch its programme aquisition over to w/s but this is taking years. We have 8 Betcam SX cameras here in BBC Belfast and although they are all 16:9 format, they are perminantly switched to 4:3 for recording. This is then arc'd (aspect ratio converted) to 14:9 for terrestrial broadcast and 16:9 for satellite/DTT transmission! Programmes are made in both 4:3 and 16:9, although cameramen are told to frame the 16:9 with safe areas on both sides of the picture for 4:3 viewers! The whole thing is crazy.