View Single Post
Old 8th January 2010, 11:39   #52  |  Link
knutinh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by MfA View Post
Getting better all the time though. As long as we are going to put ever more computing power and algorithms into something I'd rather have it go into better motion compensated framerate conversion than better deinterlacing. With 240 Hz displays with 2 msec gray-gray I'd guess the display technology is pretty close to where no further improvements in smoothness can be perceived ... assuming good content to actually drive it at 240 Hz (where the computing power and algorithms come in).
Would not mocomp frc also be an example of technology that has worse benefit/cost if done blindly in the display, as opposed to integrated in the lossy codec? Using B-frames (or similar), in-between frames can be described with the added benefit of explicit encoder control. Given that 240fps content is available to the encoder (generally not true), or that the encoder can afford more processing cost than the decoder (generally true for broadcast), even a few bits spent for controlling behaviour could improve things compared to spending no bits.

-k
knutinh is offline   Reply With Quote