Buy a progressive Scan

There is no reason not to buy a Progressive Scan DVD player. What does progressive do? A non progressive or interlaced DVD player reads the odd scan lines first then even and combines them together as one image. A progressive scan DVD player will read it as display all scan lines as one image. This results in double the picture on a digital tv. Even a non progressive player will look 33% better on a digital tv because DVDs have higher resolution then an analog tv can display. Still a progressive will double that. Go progressive.

Yes, definitely, assuming your television is set up to accept and reproduce progressive scan signals. Most TVs, even newer "digital" TVs, are not. Otherwise, the progressive scan player will produce the same old interlaced image on a regular TV. A lot of newer TVs will also work in line doubling, which is almost as good as progressive scan. Check your owner's manual.

Or better, if you already have a DVD player and TV, wait for high-definition in a couple of years or less. Everyone who wants the best possible picture will want to get into HD, anyway. Why buy something that's going to be obsolete shortly?

John

John your arguement that the fact HD-DVD is coming makes progressive scan useless is rediculous. True HD-DVD will generate 6x the picture of SD-DVD but it is at least three years away from hiting the American market maybe four years. Look at the avaliblility of DVD titles. We still don't have many famous movies. Even after HD-DVD comes out we have to wait a long time after that to get many of your favorite movies on HD-DVD. During that long wait you will be glad you have your SD-DVDs to watch during the wait. Plus you are going to want to watch those SD-DVD in the best quality possible. So you are going to love the added resolution progressive gives then even more then now. Progressive is the way to even if you don't own a digital tv you are going to have to uprade someday. Might as well be prepared.

I suppose it's a matter of how much money you have and how you want to spend it. Spending thousands of dollars today for a progressive scan player and TV combination makes sense if you have the money and don't mind upgrading again in a few years.

I'm not meaning to argue with you; obviously, I love good video. But it's kind of like spending a half a million bucks on a Ferrari F-50 the year before the Ferrari Enzo comes out. If you've got the dough, you buy another car. Otherwise....

John

True but if you always worry about something better coming out you can never buy anything. HD-DVD will not be the final video format. Something will come out someday thats better then. The are already devolping UD-TVs that will have anywhere between 4-10x the resolution of HD-TV for release around 2015. You can bet there will be a UD-DVD format for those TVs too. Something even better then that will be out later. If you don't buy current technology because something better is coming out you can never buy anything. Plus you also seem to HD-DVD is coming soon. It is not it is a long ways off. 2006 at the very very earliest and maybe latter I can't wait that long.

As I keep saying, if you have the money, go for it. Progressive scan produces a great picture.

Just be sure your television is compatible with it. Again, not all TVs can display a progressive-scan picture. For instance, although my two-year old, top-of-the-line Sony XBR400 television incorporates a line-doubling feature much like progressive scan, it will not display a true progressive scan picture, much to my dismay when I bought a Sony progressive-scan DVD player a year or so ago. (I took it back and got a wonderful CD player for it.) The newest XBRs finally incorporate progressive scan, but my bet is that unless your TV is very new and fairly expensive, it won't play what you're hoping it to play, "digital" or not. So you might want to prepare yourself for buying a player/TV combo, which can be more expensive than you think.

John

I think we're in agreement, Jimmy. If a person has enough money to buy a high-definition television, it would probably be in the person's best interests to buy a progressive-scan DVD player to go along with it, even if the person would have to replace the player when HD discs arrived in a few years. It can be a costly proposition, but for the person looking for the best possible picture quality, the combo is hard to beat.

The next question, of course, would be which brands and models to choose. Any suggestions for the readers here?

John

Having a digital combine filter doesn't make it digital. I am refering to HDTV.

Perhaps you could define "digital" TV for our readers, Jimmy. Virtually all TVs made in the last decade have been "digital" in that they can accept both digital and analogue signals. Most "digital" televisions today can be quite inexpensive. Are you perhaps referring to high-definition widescreen televisions in your comments?

John

I understand digital tvs are expensive but you should still buy a progressive scan DVD player because digital tvs will go down and it will be cheaper not to have to upgrade your DVD player too.

Yes it is not high definition but HD-DVD doesn't exist. D-VHS movies are rare. I want to choose what movies I watch and currently SD-DVD is the best way to buy most movies. Plus HD replacements probably won't be out for most movies for a while after HD-DVD is released. Not to mention HD-DVD is 3 years away.

Um, Jimmy, I think that John's point is that the upgrades are worth it only if you can afford buying an entire system that has components that take advantage of each other's features. Did you know that HDTV itself has not been finalized? No one can decide if 780 or 1080 is enough. What's the point of progressive scan? Yes, video lines are doubled, but progressive scan isn't true HD ANYWAY, so progressive scan would look best with a non-HD TV set--meaning, something that has about the 500 lines of resolution that current DVD has.

I don't have a lot of money. I am an upper middle class. I don't own an HDTV but I want one. It will be affordable soon though. I own a progressive scan DVD player because I know someday I will own an HDTV. I just preparing myself for the future.

Fujitsu all the way if you have the kind of money that Jimmy has, John. :D

Ah, but that's the problem--HD-DVD isn't finalized, but HDTV broadcasts exist. HDTV broadcasts look better than 500-lines DVD, and no amount of line-doubling via progressive scanning will yield as good of a picture as native HD (either 780 or 1080, take your pick). If you really wanted the best picture, you can buy a D-VHS machine and tape HD broadcasts off the air--yes, believe it or not, tape recorded programs can actually look better than DVD visuals!

There 480-lines TV sets that have built-in line-doubling, and there are HDTVs that have line-doubling, too. The real problem is that no one has agreed on any standards for future development. The fact of the matter is that not even DVD is actually a "digital" format (all those wires that we try to hide are all analog conversions of bitstreams--even Dolby Digital and DTS sound mixes are analog reproductions when played via current home theatre technologies).

I know what you meant by "if we all waited, then no one would buy anything", but home theatre isn't home computing. Wintel machines will have specs dictated by Microsoft and Intel anyway, period. On the other hand, we have to wait for at least twenty major electronics manufacturers to sort out their differences to make heads or tails of HD, HDTV, DTV, HD-DVD, SACD, etc.

I understand that DVDs maximum resolution of 720 x 480 is still low in comparison to High Definition. DVDs will look better on HDTVs even without a progressive scan. Still even a full progressive scan DVD picture is not high definition. 720p broadcasts are 2.7x better 1080i broadcasts are 3x better and 1080p broadcasts are 6x better. Still you can't buy disc movies in that resolution. I want to choose which movies I watch and for that ability I can settle for lower resolution for the time being.

Also about D-VHS true it is superior to DVD picture wise. It has up to 6x the encoded resolution of DVD. Still D-VHS titles are rare, players are expensive, and tapes have some disadvantages. Rewinding, no menus, degration, no extras, and large clucky size. With all that it hard to say whether that hugly better picture is worth it. Im sticking with SD-DVD until HD-DVD comes out. I am not switching back to tape even if it had 12x the resolution.

Hey, KP, allow me to offer my two cents...

It's probably not worth buying a replacement DVD player if the one/ones that you have is/are working fine. Have a little patience and let the media companies duke it out in terms of DVD-A or SACD, DVD-R/DVD-RW/DVD+R/DVD+RW, which next generation home video format (HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD-9, etc.), etc. The dust should be clearing within a year or so...

Hey John, I know I'm a little bit late to the conversation, but I was wondering if you've ever compared your Sony 7700 to a Progressive Scan player? I've read before that even without progressive scan, the 7700 is still a little better than many ENTRY-LEVEL progressive players. Of course, I don't know if that's true, and I doubt it even compares with a high end (or maybe even mid-range) progressive player.

But even though the 7700 has been such a great and high quality player for me over the years, I've often wondered if it would really be worth upgrading to a progressive scan player.

KP

Thanks for the tip, Eddie. I agree with you.

Although I'm happy with my audio setup, I'm still up in the air about everything video. I need a new TV much more than I need a p-scan DVD player.

KP

KP,

I've been very happy with my 7700. But I did try Sony's top-of-the-line progressive player in my system only to discover that my Sony XBR400 television was not capable of reproducing a progressive-scan picture (even though it will reproduce most high-definition numbers). Anyway, I never found out if the progressive-scan player was better.

In any case, the combination of my XBR's line doubling along with the 7700 produces a darned good picture that will suffice nicely until HD arrives.

John

KP, that's the other thing...we all need to upgrade our 4:3 TVs eventually, so it's really best to wait to see what the real standard for HD will be (780 or 1024). The federal mandate that everything should be broadcast in HD is always being pushed back year after year, so... :p

That's a great point, but my T.V. is an over 13 years old hand-me-down, and I'm getting antsy. It does have an S-Video input (a bold new enhancement for S-VHS VCRs at the time of purchase), but most cable programs are in higher resolution than it can display; for example, I can't read the scrolling bars on the news channels, and I can't see sports updates. It's a real drag.

I'm not interested in HD programming at the moment, but I am interested in making my DVD's look as good as possible. I'm thinking about plunking down for an HD-Ready and DVI capable direct view TV, and pairing it with the Samsung DVD-HD931 DVD player. It has a DVI output and a faroudja chip that up-converts the DVD signal to 480p, 720p, or 1080i (user selectable on the front of the unit). Of course, the source is still DVD, so the source is limited and there's no way it will be HD-DVD quality, but many on the AVSForum have said that the difference in quality using the DVI output at 720p or 1080i is so dramatic that it's sometimes comparable to HBO or Showtime's HD broadcasts (which are apparently somewhat sub-par for HD Broadcasts, as I understand).

The theory is that since there are no digital to analog conversions in the DVD player that would be required for composite, s-video, or component outputs, the output is just the straight digital source from the DVD to the TV. No "enhancements", degradation, or compression from the player's D to A converters, just simply the 1's and 0's of what's on the DVD. And it can be had on the net for around $250.

Does this all sound wrong? I'm kind of a video neophyte. But, it may be worth an audition. I may cart my 7700 down to the dealer and do a side by side comparison on a DVI-Capable TV.

KP, it sounds like you're in the market for a new TV, then, and not necessarily a new DVD player. :)

I would be careful about buying the Samsung DVD player with a DVI output. I think that that player is the first on the market with a DVI output, and it's never really a good idea to buy the first of anything (too many bugs, eventual compatability issues, etc.). Who knows? Maybe DVI will be ruled illegal one day (as has been suggested elsewhere in this Forum).

Again how can a player output 1080i from SD-DVDs. A resolution of 720 x 480 is encoded on the disc. No matter how good the player is the movie is encoded on the disc and whatever resolution is on the disc will be displayed. Can someone explain this to me.

What does it matter, if his TV can't interpret it? Riddle me this, genius.

KP, you spent a lot of time explaining stuff to a guy who wrote, "Digital is better" in response to what I wrote about film offering more resolution than digital video. I appreciate what I learned from your post, but don't be surprised if Jimmy comes back with "Progressive scan is better". LOL. :D

Jimmy,

First off, the whole argument of outputting 1080i from an SD-DVD player doesn't really matter if you do not have a display that is native 720p, 1080i, or even 480p. Otherwise it's the same argument as John mentioned above, you'll just get the same 480i image that's on the DVD.

BUT, if you do have the display equipment and you use the DVI output on new DVI DVD players like the Samsung 931 or the Bravo D1, there is a built in scaler in these players that up-converts the 480i DVD signal to 720p, 1080i, or 480p (your choice from a switch on the front of unit) WHILE STILL IN THE DIGITAL DOMAIN by adding some resolution to the image. Indeed, it cannot increase the resoluton that is on the disc, so it will NEVER look as good as an HD-DVD or D-VHS would. But a good scaler can make a lower resolution image (like a DVD) look better in higher resolutions (like John's line doubler on his tv--it's just a scaler too).

Here's an example of increasing image resolution using computers that may help out: If ever you have a picture inserted in an MS Word document or some other program, and you click it and grab it by the handles and expand it, you are effectively scaling the image to a higher resolution (say from 200x200 to 400x400), just as these HT scalers in TV's or DVD players do to the DVD image. When you do this, MS Word is adding information to the image to make it bigger. HOWEVER, scaling or increasing your image size in MS Word may result in a more blocky image than say if you scaled the image in a dedicated photo program like Photoshop because the two programs add pixels in different ways to get it to the size that you want. Photoshop is tuned for upscaling, and even gives you a choice when upscaling of how you want the new pixels to be added. Therefore the results are often clearer images of the original lower-resolution pictures at higher resolutons from Photoshop than from MS Word. That is how image resolution is increased, and the importance of a good quality scaler or image converter.

So what does that mean with DVI DVD players such as the Samsung 931 or the Bravo D1? Well, it's more desirable to have equipment re-sample the image as few times as possible to get to the image size/quality you want (too many cooks...). So here's what happens if you have a progressive scan DVD player using component outputs and a digital tv that is native 480p, 720p or 1080i:

* DVD player de-interlaces (scales) the 480i image to 480p
* Player converts the digital image to analog (RGB, component)
* The TV takes the Analog signal and converts it to digital
* The TV scales the image to it's native resolution
* TV displays image.

Well, if you use DVI and a player like the 931 (which requires an HDCP compliant DVI display) or the Bravo (which will work on non-HDCP DVI connections) than you bypass a couple of those steps:

* The player scales the 480i image to 1080i, 720p, or 480p, whichever is the native resolution of your display (based on what selection you made on the player).
* The signal (while still digital) is sent through the DVI connection in its native resolution.
* TV displays image. No more conversion is needed.

I have never seen this in action, so I can't report on how much difference all this makes in the real world. But from what's been reported by several people on other boards, even 480p looks better using DVI than even high quality component progressive players like the Panny RP91. And it's also reported that using 720p or 1080i output on the player makes an eye-popping difference. The Samsung uses a Faroudja scaler which supposedly is outstanding.

One quick note, only buy one of those players if you plan on using DVI! Apparently all the engineering went to the DVI, and the D to A converters and component output sucks. Buy another player if using component output.

You're probably not still reading. Wake up. I'm done. Anyway, none of this matters to me, because I have a crappy t.v., and I agree with Eddie that that's my primary concern right now.

KP

Amazon.com has a article on how this player works. I was very intrested I find how in increases picture. It explained everything. It increases picture with three methods.

DVI Inputs - The first true digital inputs. Composite, S-video, and component are all analog. Being digital makes them the best. When switched on 480p the player will go through Digital to analog conversion then go out trough the DVI inputs resulting in slightly better picture. Being switched to 720p or 1080i will activate the two chips.

DNIe Chips - This chip reproduces the image digitaly. That makes sure there is no digital to analog conversion and the image stays digital from the disc to the DVI inputs. Resulting in the cleanest picture possible.

FLI2310 Chip - Since the original source of a DVD title is usually a movie made from film reels, it produces 24 frames per second and requires a conversion to a 60-field video signal of 30 frames (NTSC) per second when viewing a DVD title on TV. In order to compensate 6 frames, a 3:2 pulldown process is required. Pulldown is most closely related to de-interlacing. De-interlacing is a conversion to progressive scan video which enhances resolution for better picture quality. It is required for a progressive scan display device. With the built-in FLI2310 chip inside the DVD-HD931, the disruptions that may occur during the de-interlacing process are reduced by motion-adaptive, cross-color supressor, and content adaptive features. This ensures even more impressive crisp and vivid imaging. Motion adaptive technologies produce the finest progressive output available. They detect the amount of motion and use an appropriate mix of spatial and temporal processing with the highest resolution for still areas that have no motion artifacts in moving areas.

All three things combined result in better picture then a normal progressive scan.

Amazon.com, champion of the Segue. A reliable tech source if I've ever heard one. Amazon would shill Betamax players, if they thought they could sell some.

I have a Panasonic PT-43LC14 TV(HD Ready) and a Toshiba RD-XS32SU (Progressive Scan) DVD Player connected via component cables. But the result I get when watching a DVD is, 480i or 480p if in progressive mode. Although my TV has DVI input, my DVD player doesn't have a DVI output. Does that mean 480p is the best I could get, or there is a way to obtain 720p that I couldn't figure out?

Jimmy 435 wrote: 06-27-2003

"Plus you also seem to HD-DVD is coming soon. It is not it is a long ways off. 2006 at the very very earliest and maybe latter I can't wait that long."

You could have... It's 2006 (very very early) and HD-DVDs are out as well as HD DVD Players. What's more, there is Blu-Ray. And Players compatible with both are coming soon (very very early). We have about 10 years to go until UD TVs AND UD DVDs AND UD DVD Players will be out so now is your chance to switch for everybody. It may well be worth it. ;)