Will horrible video standards ever change?

This forum is for video and audio help and discussion.

Postby klinky » Thu Nov 14, 2002 7:15 pm

Wait! I thought I had the idea there... nevermind....
User avatar
klinky
 
Joined: 23 Jul 2001
Location: Cookie College...

Postby ErMaC » Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:12 am

Klinky:

If you have a 30fps progressive stream... it looks like it's 30fps. It doesn't look super-smooth like normal video shot with a camera does.
If you have 60 fields a second, you're shooting 60 different frames and just halving the resolution, so the untrained eye thinks it's seeing 60fps, but it's not quite.

So the difference is:
30fps is really only 30fps - you see 30 different pictures per second
60fields per second looks like 60fps, but it really isn't - instead it takes approximately the same bitrate as the 30fps one.

So the advantage to the interlaced one is that to the untrained eye it looks like there are twice as many frames, when in reality there's only half frames there. They both would take up the same amount of space (uncompressed).
User avatar
ErMaC
The Man who puts the "E" in READFAG
 
Joined: 24 Feb 2001
Location: Irvine, CA

Postby klinky » Fri Nov 15, 2002 4:22 am

ErMaC wrote:...the 19.8MBit/sec allocated for an HDTV station is too little for 1920x1080 progressive scan in video framerates...



That is probably what got me confused. VIDEO=60times per second.

So technically they WANT to keep the 60refreshes per second, but there is not enough bandwidth for 60whole frames, only enough for 60fields. Which looks fine when played back on a TV that works well with interlacing.

So with HDTV we're still stuck with fields :cry: Atleast on certain broadcasts.


~klinky
User avatar
klinky
 
Joined: 23 Jul 2001
Location: Cookie College...

Postby CaTaClYsM » Fri Nov 15, 2002 5:19 am

is there anything that plays at 60 FPS that is actualy playing 60 FPS. what aobut video games on a computer?
So in other words, one part of the community is waging war on another part of the community because they take their community seriously enough to want to do so. Then they tell the powerless side to get over the loss cause it's just an online community. I'm glad people make so much sense." -- Tab
User avatar
CaTaClYsM
 
Joined: 26 Jul 2002

Postby RadicalEd0 » Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:26 pm

all video game systems I know of playback at true 60fps, although since TV is still interlaced, it dosent look any better than 60 fields per sec.
Anyway 60fps is a standard framerate (along with 30fps and 24, there may be others) for 720p and may very well be used in broadcast.
NMEAMV: PENIS
NMEAMV: IN
NMEAMV: YO
NMEAMV: MIXED
NMEAMV: DRINK
User avatar
RadicalEd0
 
Joined: 24 Jun 2002

Postby kthulhu » Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:02 am

RadicalEd0 wrote:all video game systems I know of playback at true 60fps, although since TV is still interlaced, it dosent look any better than 60


That depends on how well programmed the game is, and how fast the hardware is, of course.
I'm out...
User avatar
kthulhu
 
Joined: 30 May 2002
Location: At the pony stable, brushing the pretty ponies

Postby RadicalEd0 » Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:06 am

yeah but they all output at 60fps, whether the game is banjo kazooie and is slowing down immensley for no reason or not.
But banjo kazooie owned anyway so.. :/
NMEAMV: PENIS
NMEAMV: IN
NMEAMV: YO
NMEAMV: MIXED
NMEAMV: DRINK
User avatar
RadicalEd0
 
Joined: 24 Jun 2002

Postby Mechaman » Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:24 pm

"FPS" in games is not the same thing as how fast the screen is refreshing. It's generally an ongoing average of the time marks within each pair of render calls--it's up to the programmer to meter it, and as such it's only a rough estimate of how well the rendering system is performing(and if the programmers were boozing it up on the job, like the PC port of GTA3).

Think of it more as a latency counter; a higher number means that the action will be more smooth, but it's still restricted by the ~60Hz refresh rate of your TV or CRT. Console programmers have an easier time since they already know what hardware the game will be running on, but they are not guaranteed to be locked at 60 fps internally. In fact, some of the older PSX games offered the ability to drop special effects in the background to improve frame rate; Toshinden 2 anyone?

Anybody claiming that "You don't need to go over 30fps because the human eye cant see it!!!1" will be shot.
User avatar
Mechaman
 
Joined: 26 Jan 2001
Location: Greater Pacific Northwest

Postby RadicalEd0 » Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:29 pm

well actually.. most anime is animated at around 8 - 12 fps average (frames are doubled and tripled to get 24fps) and we still percieve it as motion. Probably wouldnt work with live action footage though.
NMEAMV: PENIS
NMEAMV: IN
NMEAMV: YO
NMEAMV: MIXED
NMEAMV: DRINK
User avatar
RadicalEd0
 
Joined: 24 Jun 2002

Postby Mechaman » Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:32 pm

:roll:
The "30 fps" comment refers to Slashdot/Kuro5hin/insert-your-favorite-geek-chic-site-here, where the peanut gallery pops up those questions every time a new video card comes out.
User avatar
Mechaman
 
Joined: 26 Jan 2001
Location: Greater Pacific Northwest

Postby RadicalEd0 » Sat Nov 16, 2002 2:47 pm

oh, my bad 8)
NMEAMV: PENIS
NMEAMV: IN
NMEAMV: YO
NMEAMV: MIXED
NMEAMV: DRINK
User avatar
RadicalEd0
 
Joined: 24 Jun 2002

Postby klinky » Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:10 pm

RadicalEd0 wrote:well actually.. most anime is animated at around 8 - 12 fps average (frames are doubled and tripled to get 24fps) and we still percieve it as motion. Probably wouldnt work with live action footage though.



Well I perceive it as choppy motion :p

Also I believe the less realistic something is the easier it is for our brains to estimate motion or be "tricked".


~klinky
User avatar
klinky
 
Joined: 23 Jul 2001
Location: Cookie College...

Previous

Return to Video & Audio Help

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests