Upconverting DVD article
Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 9:44 am
There is nothing revolutionary in this article from today's NY Times but it’s worth the read.
December 2, 2004
STATE OF THE ART
For DVD's, a New Definition
By WILSON ROTHMAN
THE runaway success of the DVD notwithstanding, its arrival on the electronics scene was poorly timed. Most of the content published by the movie studios is in theater-style wide-screen format. You can watch a movie letterboxed - that is, squished - taking up only about two-thirds of the screen on a 19-inch tube TV, or you can watch it blown up on a giant wide-screen high-definition set.
Sweeter, maybe, but the screen of the HDTV is made up of 720 to 1,080 horizontal lines of resolution, while there are only 480 lines of picture stored on that DVD. Most people don't realize this, but DVD's are far from high-def.
This uncomfortable incongruity between the resolution of DVD's and newer TV's may be one reason that price, rather than quality, is what most people look for in a DVD player. Still, as each generation of player technology has gotten less expensive, a newer technology has emerged to drive up the price of deluxe models.
In the early days, that option was a Dolby Digital surround-sound decoder, which eventually found its way out of players and into audio receivers. The progressive-scan craze hit later, fueled largely by the myth that the feature would improve the quality of a DVD's picture on a standard-definition TV. Now that even the cheapest players in the pack boast progressive scan, a new premium DVD player has emerged, the all-digital HD upconverter, and it can sell for $100 to $200 above average prices.
To avoid compounding any new myths, I want to be blunt. If you don't own or plan to buy an HDTV with a digital-video input, this new type of player isn't worth it. But if you have made the jump to high-def, these new players could be perfect, especially if that new TV didn't cost a bazillion dollars.
What an HD upconverter does sounds promising: it examines the DVD video, digitally enlarging each movie frame to 720 or 1,080 lines of resolution. It then sends the information, still in digital form, to the TV, which displays it as a high-definition signal.
Until upconverters arrived, DVD players turned digital video to analog to send it to the TV (by composite, S-video or component jacks). The high-definition TV would have to change it back to digital data to fit the picture to its screen. Even with costly equipment, something could get lost in the messy conversion. A digital connection between the HD-upconverting DVD player and the TV means that the information on the DVD makes it to the TV in one piece.
It also usually gets there in one wire. Most HDTV's on the market, even ones costing less than $1,000, have an HDMI input. HDMI, or High Definition Multimedia Interface, bundles video data with digital audio data, so you get the highest quality picture and sound at once.
TV's dating back a year or two might have a DVI (digital visual interface) input instead. The two formats are compatible - there are even cables with a DVI connector on one end and an HDMI connector on the other - but DVI is video only, so sound has to travel separately.
I tried out five of the latest players from Denon, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony and Toshiba, using three of the most popular flavors of HDTV: a 26-inch Toshiba direct-view tube set, a 42-inch plasma by Hitachi and a 42-inch Sony Grand Wega, a rear-projection TV that uses three liquid-crystal display chips to produce its picture.
Popping in the high-quality Superbit DVD release of Luc Besson's 1994 masterpiece, "The Professional," and watching just one scene - a meditative moment for the evil Stansfield, played by Gary Oldman, before his crew of dirty cops turns an outer-borough apartment into Swiss cheese - I could see a genuine difference between this breed of player and two earlier ones, a Yamaha and a Sony, which I used as benchmarks.
To see exactly what these upconverters were doing, and to help identify the differences between them, I took the advice of Gary Merson, publisher of the HDTV Insider Newsletter (hdtvinsider.com), and located the latest picture-testing disc from Silicon Optix, as well as a copy of "Star Trek: Insurrection," known in the film business as a bad transfer.
HD sets can make standard television look terrible; by magnifying the picture, they often emphasize the lack of resolution. Smarter upconverters within TV's anticipate problems, smoothing out jagged edges formed when curved objects are drawn with straight lines and exterminating the gnat swarms of noise that tend to swirl in solid colors. They also fill in gaps caused by resizing and correct timing issues that arise when film (shot at 24 frames a second) is converted to digital video (with 30 frames a second).
When you connect an upconverting DVD player to your TV, the TV's processor will take a back seat. Your TV may already be great at displaying DVD's. If so, stick with what you've got; you probably paid a lot of money for it. But odds are, with an upconverter, you'll notice a change for the better.
These players can make meticulously mastered DVD's like the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy look HD-like, said Bob O'Donnell, an analyst at IDC, a market research company. They can also make a film that was hastily dumped to DVD surprisingly watchable, hence "Insurrection."
The Silicon Optix disc (available to consumers early next year at www.hqv.com) was full of two-minute exercises for the DVD player. A spinning white bar became jagged as it neared a horizontal attitude, unless the processor could counteract the problem. A flapping American flag revealed a new set of "jaggies" to overcome. There were tests for detail, tests for noise and tests for the film-to-video conversion.
Using the disc, I identified two definitive winners, the Denon DVD-1910 ($270; usa.denon.com) and the Panasonic DVD-S97 ($300; panasonic.com). Each of them upconverted video using processors from Faroudja, a respected chip designer. The funny thing was, none of the other players, except at times the Sony DVP-NS975V ($300; www
.sonystyle.com), came close to those two in the tests, but while watching store-bought movies, I found the five players neck and neck in picture quality.
I did some homework and found that the disc's film-to-video test wouldn't work correctly with three of the players because the test disc wasn't made the way movie DVD's are. Fortunately, "Insurrection" solved that problem. An opening scene all covered in hay provided a crowning example of how bad the picture can be without proper film-to-video conversion, and how drastic the fix can look.
Uneven results in some other tests baffled me, so I went looking for jagged edges in my own video life. I found potential jaggies in DVD's of two TV shows, "The Office" and "Aqua Teen Hunger Force." When I played the same scenes over and over on each DVD player, there were, again, no front-runners. In fact, only the Samsung DVD-HD841 ($200; samsungusa.com) and the Toshiba SD-5970 ($180; tacp.toshiba
.com) stood out as jaggie busters, though not enough to win medals.
After many hours of staring at each player, I reached real conclusions. Compared with the rest, the Samsung is weak on detail, and it makes pictures darker and heavier than they should be. The Denon, while delivering beautiful detail and smooth pacing, has an annoying habit of washing out colors. The Denon and the Samsung lose points because they use DVI outputs, so you need to run separate wires for audio.
The other three use HDMI, which means a single cable from player to TV (and, soon enough, one straight line from player to A/V receiver to television). Toshiba's picture was excellent, but it was a poorly built unit. The remote required excessive force. I had to push the open/close button on the player several times before it responded.
It may be easy to tell an Opus One from a JackaRoo, but comparing higher-order Bordeaux requires a more nuanced taste. DVD players are sometimes similarly hard to rank. Consumer Reports recently gave 21 models from $50 to $280 the same score for picture quality (excellent).
I started with five players and ended up with two, the Panasonic and the Sony. Though the Panasonic beat the Sony in the Silicon Optix test, their pictures looked identical in everyday movie watching. Both players are well built, easy to handle and packed with features. They each play high-resolution surround-sound audio discs, though different competing formats: Sony reads Super Audio CD, and Panasonic reads DVD-Audio. They even do the same admirable job of displaying photos burned to a CD (though neither was perfect in that department).
Since I couldn't decide between the two, my advice is to buy the one that's on sale.
David Pogue is on vacation.
December 2, 2004
STATE OF THE ART
For DVD's, a New Definition
By WILSON ROTHMAN
THE runaway success of the DVD notwithstanding, its arrival on the electronics scene was poorly timed. Most of the content published by the movie studios is in theater-style wide-screen format. You can watch a movie letterboxed - that is, squished - taking up only about two-thirds of the screen on a 19-inch tube TV, or you can watch it blown up on a giant wide-screen high-definition set.
Sweeter, maybe, but the screen of the HDTV is made up of 720 to 1,080 horizontal lines of resolution, while there are only 480 lines of picture stored on that DVD. Most people don't realize this, but DVD's are far from high-def.
This uncomfortable incongruity between the resolution of DVD's and newer TV's may be one reason that price, rather than quality, is what most people look for in a DVD player. Still, as each generation of player technology has gotten less expensive, a newer technology has emerged to drive up the price of deluxe models.
In the early days, that option was a Dolby Digital surround-sound decoder, which eventually found its way out of players and into audio receivers. The progressive-scan craze hit later, fueled largely by the myth that the feature would improve the quality of a DVD's picture on a standard-definition TV. Now that even the cheapest players in the pack boast progressive scan, a new premium DVD player has emerged, the all-digital HD upconverter, and it can sell for $100 to $200 above average prices.
To avoid compounding any new myths, I want to be blunt. If you don't own or plan to buy an HDTV with a digital-video input, this new type of player isn't worth it. But if you have made the jump to high-def, these new players could be perfect, especially if that new TV didn't cost a bazillion dollars.
What an HD upconverter does sounds promising: it examines the DVD video, digitally enlarging each movie frame to 720 or 1,080 lines of resolution. It then sends the information, still in digital form, to the TV, which displays it as a high-definition signal.
Until upconverters arrived, DVD players turned digital video to analog to send it to the TV (by composite, S-video or component jacks). The high-definition TV would have to change it back to digital data to fit the picture to its screen. Even with costly equipment, something could get lost in the messy conversion. A digital connection between the HD-upconverting DVD player and the TV means that the information on the DVD makes it to the TV in one piece.
It also usually gets there in one wire. Most HDTV's on the market, even ones costing less than $1,000, have an HDMI input. HDMI, or High Definition Multimedia Interface, bundles video data with digital audio data, so you get the highest quality picture and sound at once.
TV's dating back a year or two might have a DVI (digital visual interface) input instead. The two formats are compatible - there are even cables with a DVI connector on one end and an HDMI connector on the other - but DVI is video only, so sound has to travel separately.
I tried out five of the latest players from Denon, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony and Toshiba, using three of the most popular flavors of HDTV: a 26-inch Toshiba direct-view tube set, a 42-inch plasma by Hitachi and a 42-inch Sony Grand Wega, a rear-projection TV that uses three liquid-crystal display chips to produce its picture.
Popping in the high-quality Superbit DVD release of Luc Besson's 1994 masterpiece, "The Professional," and watching just one scene - a meditative moment for the evil Stansfield, played by Gary Oldman, before his crew of dirty cops turns an outer-borough apartment into Swiss cheese - I could see a genuine difference between this breed of player and two earlier ones, a Yamaha and a Sony, which I used as benchmarks.
To see exactly what these upconverters were doing, and to help identify the differences between them, I took the advice of Gary Merson, publisher of the HDTV Insider Newsletter (hdtvinsider.com), and located the latest picture-testing disc from Silicon Optix, as well as a copy of "Star Trek: Insurrection," known in the film business as a bad transfer.
HD sets can make standard television look terrible; by magnifying the picture, they often emphasize the lack of resolution. Smarter upconverters within TV's anticipate problems, smoothing out jagged edges formed when curved objects are drawn with straight lines and exterminating the gnat swarms of noise that tend to swirl in solid colors. They also fill in gaps caused by resizing and correct timing issues that arise when film (shot at 24 frames a second) is converted to digital video (with 30 frames a second).
When you connect an upconverting DVD player to your TV, the TV's processor will take a back seat. Your TV may already be great at displaying DVD's. If so, stick with what you've got; you probably paid a lot of money for it. But odds are, with an upconverter, you'll notice a change for the better.
These players can make meticulously mastered DVD's like the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy look HD-like, said Bob O'Donnell, an analyst at IDC, a market research company. They can also make a film that was hastily dumped to DVD surprisingly watchable, hence "Insurrection."
The Silicon Optix disc (available to consumers early next year at www.hqv.com) was full of two-minute exercises for the DVD player. A spinning white bar became jagged as it neared a horizontal attitude, unless the processor could counteract the problem. A flapping American flag revealed a new set of "jaggies" to overcome. There were tests for detail, tests for noise and tests for the film-to-video conversion.
Using the disc, I identified two definitive winners, the Denon DVD-1910 ($270; usa.denon.com) and the Panasonic DVD-S97 ($300; panasonic.com). Each of them upconverted video using processors from Faroudja, a respected chip designer. The funny thing was, none of the other players, except at times the Sony DVP-NS975V ($300; www
.sonystyle.com), came close to those two in the tests, but while watching store-bought movies, I found the five players neck and neck in picture quality.
I did some homework and found that the disc's film-to-video test wouldn't work correctly with three of the players because the test disc wasn't made the way movie DVD's are. Fortunately, "Insurrection" solved that problem. An opening scene all covered in hay provided a crowning example of how bad the picture can be without proper film-to-video conversion, and how drastic the fix can look.
Uneven results in some other tests baffled me, so I went looking for jagged edges in my own video life. I found potential jaggies in DVD's of two TV shows, "The Office" and "Aqua Teen Hunger Force." When I played the same scenes over and over on each DVD player, there were, again, no front-runners. In fact, only the Samsung DVD-HD841 ($200; samsungusa.com) and the Toshiba SD-5970 ($180; tacp.toshiba
.com) stood out as jaggie busters, though not enough to win medals.
After many hours of staring at each player, I reached real conclusions. Compared with the rest, the Samsung is weak on detail, and it makes pictures darker and heavier than they should be. The Denon, while delivering beautiful detail and smooth pacing, has an annoying habit of washing out colors. The Denon and the Samsung lose points because they use DVI outputs, so you need to run separate wires for audio.
The other three use HDMI, which means a single cable from player to TV (and, soon enough, one straight line from player to A/V receiver to television). Toshiba's picture was excellent, but it was a poorly built unit. The remote required excessive force. I had to push the open/close button on the player several times before it responded.
It may be easy to tell an Opus One from a JackaRoo, but comparing higher-order Bordeaux requires a more nuanced taste. DVD players are sometimes similarly hard to rank. Consumer Reports recently gave 21 models from $50 to $280 the same score for picture quality (excellent).
I started with five players and ended up with two, the Panasonic and the Sony. Though the Panasonic beat the Sony in the Silicon Optix test, their pictures looked identical in everyday movie watching. Both players are well built, easy to handle and packed with features. They each play high-resolution surround-sound audio discs, though different competing formats: Sony reads Super Audio CD, and Panasonic reads DVD-Audio. They even do the same admirable job of displaying photos burned to a CD (though neither was perfect in that department).
Since I couldn't decide between the two, my advice is to buy the one that's on sale.
David Pogue is on vacation.
...ya... I guess so....