Quote:
Originally Posted by MfA
No, it's not representative of the frequency response because in and of themselves you can't determine how fast the fall off (ie. how blurry vs ringy it is) is from a single data point.
|
If a decimation/interpolation pass has a passband that is within +0dB/-3dB from DC to frequency Fc, then I would claim that that single datapoint says a lot about the system.
Ringing is first and foremost an issue in high-order filtering including negative coefficients, I think. Do you see much ringing in 2-3tap decimation/interpolation filters?
A system with flat and wide passband should be relatively unblurry. The degree of blurryness should be relatively well predicted from the "single datapoint" of passbandwidth?
Quote:
|
there is the zinger from Faroudja (yes, that one) ... “I am amazed that anybody would consider launching new services based on interlace. I have spent all of my life working on conversion from interlace to progressive. Now that I have sold my successful company, I can tell you the truth: interlace to progressive does not work!”.
|
Hilarious. Like I said in my first post in this thread (before venturing off into nit-picking):
Quote:
Originally Posted by knutinh
I tend to see interlacing as an analog 2:1 perceptually motivated compression method. I dont really see its purpose in this digital era, except for legacy purposes. If you want to trade motion/resolution/bandwidth, then use a lossy digital codec that does it intelligently..
-k
|