native resolution ( disable upscaling ) option

  Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Post Reply
alfredo Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 34
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #31
Nice work adam.h.! Smile

That's a long wished feature for the video processors owners like me.

Will it be added to the July snapshot (aka Frodo_alpha3)?
find quote
Jezz_X Offline
Team-XBMC Skinner
Posts: 5,289
Joined: Jun 2006
Reputation: 57
Location: Earth
Post: #32
(2012-06-24 00:14)alfredo Wrote:  Nice work adam.h.! Smile

That's a long wished feature for the video processors owners like me.

Will it be added to the July snapshot (aka Frodo_alpha3)?
I think its a pretty safe bet to say NO stuff doesn't just "go in" unless its had its code reviewed to make sure its up to standards and not just a quick hack (not saying this is) and doesn't impact anything else and is also compatible across all 5 operating systems that we run on

But then I'm no coder
find quote
Stu-e Offline
Member
Posts: 89
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 1
Post: #33
Adam
Any thoughts on supporting interlaced native resolutions like 576i and 480i? These would require awkward pixel doubling (horizontal only) due to the clock pixel lower limit of HDMI.
find quote
Memphiz Offline
Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 10,644
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 112
Location: germany
Post: #34
Thats way out of scope of the complexity the current approach has. (meaning what you suggests is a complete different thing which would need deep core changes...)

AppleTV2/iPhone/iPod: HowTo find debug logs and everything else which the devs like so much: click here
HowTo setup NFS for XBMC: Wiki NFS
HowTo configure avahi (zeroconf): Wiki Avahi
READ THE IOS FAQ!: iOS FAQ
find quote
adam.h. Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 1
Post: #35
(2012-06-25 14:31)Stu-e Wrote:  Any thoughts on supporting interlaced native resolutions like 576i and 480i?
well, I think that if we have setup like here:

[HTPC(xbmc)] ==== [Receiver(hw enhance)] ==== [TV Set]

then xbmc does not need to care about interlaced resolutions, it uses the lowest resolution which fits to the source resolution and which is supported between HTPC and Receiver, then the chip at the Receiver is doing any required conversion (480i, 1080p etc). In other words it will work with any resolution supported by the Receiver.
find quote
Stu-e Offline
Member
Posts: 89
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 1
Post: #36
Forgive me I don't have a receiver so I might be missing something here. Are you saying that your receiver will detect interlaced video delivered over a progressive frame stream? No television I know of can do that. Normally XBMC will weave together interlaced field pairs into a progressive frame, each frame then repeated.
I have never heard of such a feature, but it's a good one if it really exists.
What does 1080i video (with proper 50Hz 'fluid' motion content, not 2:2 telecined frame content) look like after going through your receiver (with XBMC deinterlacing off)? Do you get correct field sync every time?
find quote
adam.h. Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 1
Post: #37
(2012-06-25 16:04)Stu-e Wrote:  Are you saying that your receiver will detect interlaced video delivered over a progressive frame stream?
no, I'm saying that you can setup the Receiver to output interlaced video if you need this and if the particular Receiver supports it. Anyway, I'm not using interlaced mode and it looks like what you are asking for is currently out of the xbmc scope.
find quote
jmordoj Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #38
Awesome discussion!!!

For the past 3 years, I have been using a WDTV Live and when I decided to take the leap and buy a D525/ION2 HTPC (Zotac ID41) I was taken aback with the change in the image quality of my SD (and 480p) videos playing on XBMC.

I was wondering, if the “Native Resolution” route is so complicated (Because of the menus and OSD), how about trying to implement a better upscaling similar to the techniques that receivers or TV have (Maybe using different algorithms)?

I hope this discussion leads somewhere; I think this is the last thing missing in a perfect solution for viewing media.

Thanks for all the work; I do appreciate the labor of love being done by the people who work on XBMC

Jack
find quote
FernetMenta Offline
Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 3,036
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 60
Location: Munich
Post: #39
I have thought we have good upscaling techniques and would like to know against what methods you compare the receiver. I can't judge because I have none but what I get out of XBMC is much better than the upscaling/de-interlacing my tv set does (which is in the rage of €1000).
find quote
joethefox Offline
Team-XBMC Member
Posts: 1,276
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 22
Post: #40
same here. XBMC deinterlacer + scaler is far better than the internal panasonic 30VT55'' for my eyes (nvidia vdpau)
(This post was last modified: 2012-06-25 20:17 by joethefox.)
find quote
adam.h. Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 1
Post: #41
(2012-06-25 19:58)FernetMenta Wrote:  I have thought we have good upscaling techniques and would like to know against what methods you compare the receiver
No special methods - I was testing it over some average bad SD source with 720x304 resolution. When the receiver is set to pass through mode (so it is xbmc which is upscaling from 720x304 to 1920x1080) then on some parts of the scene I can see loss of edge clarity and some tone "fuzziness". When I set the receiver to upscale to 1920x1080 and make xbmc to generate 720x576 output out of 720x304 source (so it is the receiver which is upscaling from 720x576 to 1920x1080), then the picture is clearer, the artifacts barely visible. Of course there is no magic, it is not HD resolution at the end, but looks much, much better. I'm using receiver with Qdeo chip which is doing all that work ( http://www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/qdeo/ ).
(This post was last modified: 2012-06-26 00:05 by adam.h..)
find quote
FernetMenta Offline
Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 3,036
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 60
Location: Munich
Post: #42
I would rather see that we fix and optimize the existing features before we implement new ones.

- How do XBMC's advanced upscaling methods like spline or lanczos compare to the receiver.
- Add noise reduction filters
- crop distorted pixels at the borders (in particular needed for de-interlacing)
find quote
adam.h. Offline
Junior Member
Posts: 21
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 1
Post: #43
(2012-06-26 10:02)FernetMenta Wrote:  I would rather see that we fix and optimize the existing features before we implement new ones.
and what will be the argument against using hardware video processors like Qdeo, Farujia, Sigma etc? do you think XBMC can compete with these processors? Big Grin
find quote
FernetMenta Offline
Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 3,036
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 60
Location: Munich
Post: #44
Yes, I do think that in general PC graphics does outperform those processors you named. It is actually designed to meet much higher requirements e.g. gaming and in the area of HTPCs we are dealing with by-products which in most cases are not maxed out.

If it turns out that XBMC can't compete I do support those features. E.g. some video card vendors don't provide proper de-interlacing methods on Linux. It makes sense to provide a method to hand this task off to a receiver or tv.
find quote
bossanova808 Offline
Donor
Posts: 2,182
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation: 32
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Post: #45
TV scaling is almost invariably crap (even on relatively expensive TVs), but processor scaling is often very good and measurably better looking that anything I have seen come out of any XBMC (Amd/nvidia, win or linux).

Even humble popcorn and WD machines have *way* better SD quality than XBMC, for whatever reason...it almsot put me off XBMC initially...

My XBMC stuff:
find quote
Post Reply