Hi, what is the popular opinion about 'upscaling resolutions' ?
Is it better to use 1080i , or does 720p give a better result, or
is there no difference !!
Cheers.

Depends entirely on how your tv accepts the input. If 1080i/720p hdtv then you just try either and see how it works. If the tv supports 1080p then in theory sending it 1080p creates the most direct feed. Basically the more conversions the video has to go through the worse.

Try them both and also without upscaling (which may well be best) and see which works the best. If you can't seen any difference then it doesn't matter which of the 3 you use.

Thanks Guys,for your replies. The reason I asked the question
was, that not knowing how the actual process works, (other than, I guess just adding extra lines by interpolating) I wondered if there was a good technical reason which favoured one system.
You are right ,of course 'bobcar' ,what ever you personally think is the best ...is the best.!
Cheers.

Bear in mind, 'upscaling' doesn't make it HD, it simply makes it fit the screen - and the TV already does that anyway.

As suggested, try all the options, and pick which YOU prefer.

A lot of it is down to the quality of the processing chips employed. If you have a cheap DVD player but a top of the range TV then it is more likely the TV has the more expensive upscaling technology. On my Sony TV I find the best PQ results are when I send it a straight 576p feed from my DVD player/recorder. Whereas in another room I have a mid-range Samsung TV but a very decent Denon DVD player so I let the player do the upscaling.

Thanks 'soulboy77' you have touched on something that relates to why I asked the question 'the upscaling process'.
You talk about the quality of the chips in the upscaling process. So how does the 'high quality' processing' show itself in terms of the result? Does it mean that it can upscale to a greater number of lines with less noise, so it could produce a 'good approximation in 1080 p to HD (but of course never matching HD)
Cheers.

It doesn't even 'approximate' HD, it's simply an SD picture scaled to fit the screen.

What better scalers do is introduce less artifacts to the picture, and the less artifacts the better the SD picture is.

The HD information is simply not there, so it will never look like a proper good quality HD signal. HD TV sets are pretty good with HD signal, SD signal is where they differ more, so having a good upscaler in DVD player is nice. But I have a feeling manufacturers are using it as a gimmick and people are expecting miracles from it.

Nigel, re your latest input, just to make sure I understand, are you saying that what 'upscaling' does is fit the resolution of the picture to the'native resolution' of the screen , adding the necessary number of lines by interpolation.
Thanks also for your input 'ivan IV'

Hi , have just found the follwing website that gives a very good explanation of 'upscaling'..... If I had seen this first I would not
have 'posted' my question
cheers


http://hometheater.about.com/od/blur...urayhddvd2.htm

No different from when you zoom a youtube video to full screen, it has to remap 360p or 480p worth of pixels to your screens resolution, that is upscaling, it means very little. At best it can be done with the least additional ugliness possible. Upscaling became a marketing thing, it just isn't that big a deal. and as said, you don't get anything more than what was there before. It is just scaling of an image to a larger number of pixels which is necessary as our modern displays have physical pixels.

Yes, that's essentially all it does - it doesn't increase the resolution in any way, it's still just SD.

As others have said, 'upscaling' has become a marketing term, conning the gullible into thinking it gives them HD - when it does no such thing.

I think it was Toshiba who started advertising an 'upscaling' TV - ALL HDTV's do that