Re: Toshiba announces Super Upconversion DVD players due out in 2009

Love Hendrix-I completely agree with you. What are they thinking, a player for mid to late 2009 that is a super upscaler? By then that will be the 2009 holiday season and I bet you can get a blu-ray player for UNDER 199. I also think by then blu-ray software prices will be down. Plus, all these new high def tv owners between now and then, spending thousands on a tv, which would you pick, a super upscaler or a real 1080p player for your expensive tv? This really seems to me a dumb thing for Toshiba to do. Regardless of the fact that they make money on everything DVD, the format has seen its day. It's still strong but we are moving past it..every month sales of dvd's are declining (see charts on Home Media Retailing, downward spiral for over18 months now).


And I still say you cannot take a 480 source and make it 1080p it is impossible. The information of detail is not there to begin with. Especially in backgrounds, you can't make gold out of plastic.

Quote:
Toshiba was on track to do this Super Upconversion for awhile. I would bet it was as far back as early fall of last year.

Actually the decision to bring Super Upconversion to HD-DVD players was made in January, after the Warner announcement.

In Feb, HD-DVD was discontinued and the plan was revised to target DVD players instead.

Quote:
I already own a SU DVD player. It is called the A2, and thats what you should have put all your effort into.

No you don't own a Super Upconversion DVD player. The only existing HighDef player capable of Super Upconversion is PS3. But the PS3 firmware chief who promoted Super Upconversion on PS3 was removed from SCEI and shipped to another project.

Quote:
this Toshiba super upscaler idea. There is only so much image you can create from a 480 line picture, period. What a stupid idea.

This is same technique used by NASA and CIA. Toshiba's the first CE to bring this tech to consumer electronics domain.

Quote:
Reggie, why would the reguler SCHMOE buy a SUPER upscaled DVD player

Because the sales of upconversion player is up 5% this year, while the sales of Blu-Ray player is down 40% this year.

Quote:
What I meant, is that they had this on their minds for a while.

Yes, for their and Sharp's HDTV sets.

Quote:
Like I said I already have a Upconverted DVD player in my A2.

Your A2 simply blows up 480p DVD frame upto 1080i.
Super Upconversion creates a native 960p HD frame out of DVD video stream via advanced computation.

Quote:
how will this be better than HD DVD or Blu Ray?

Looks native HD to people who have seen the demo at trade shows.

Quote:
What are they thinking, a player for mid to late 2009 that is a super upscaler? By then that will be the 2009 holiday season and I bet you can get a blu-ray player for UNDER 199.

There are no Chinese Blu-Ray players to bring prices down.

Quote:
And I still say you cannot take a 480 source and make it 1080p it is impossible.

NASA and CIA have been doing just that for decades.

*SUC has not been significantly demonstrated or tested independently
*There is no market information or studies indicating significant customer interest in this 'alternative' to HDM such that it would preclude upgrading to BD.
*With lack of any market studies. For all we know it could lower the resistance to buying Blu-ray with a good upconverter as customers become aware of this option to bridge their old collections.
Note anyone who would split the hairs between SUC and Geneon/Faroudja upscaling is going to split a much thicker hair that is the difference between any kind of upscaling and BD.
*HDTV Manufacturers are behind BD as a way to sell and showcase their HDTVs. After all they have a war to win against SDTVs and EDTVs.
*The movie studios have a strong financial interest in moving beyond DVD and having people rebuy their collections in BD.

Side note. Videophiles/early adopters will scream about issues like excessive edge enhancements and artifacts and how these things will be magnified using SUC which is really more like Super Edge Enhancement.


I saw this on another site and it bought up some very good points.

[Post edited by tony1569 on May 11, 2008]

Deadmeat said -

Quote:
"Super Upconversion creates a native 960p HD frame out of DVD video stream via advanced computation."

NOPE, NOPE, NOPE.

The original signal encoded on a DVD is native 480interlaced - NATIVE! No matter what any software does to the signal beyond this, the original signal cannot morph (or evolve) into a "native 960p HD frame" - that is simply impossible.

While native 480i can be artificially enhanced to a higher resolution (whether 720p, 960p, 1080i/1080p, take your pick), this newly processed image is NOT a "native ___ HD frame" <(fill in your resolution). If you state otherwise, it's deliberately misleading and dishonest.

The original signal starts out a native 480i signal, and stays a native 480i signal, though upconversion can increase (artifically) the RESOLUTION (only!) to any of those I stated above. But the original-encoded image content (480i) cannot morph into "native 960p HD" (high definition) - that's not possible.

Deadmeat, to me your message is changing. It's one thing to claim a forthcoming improved upconversion quality (beyond just resolution), but quite another to NOW claim a native 480i DVD image will somehow become a native 960p HD image. I know I shouldn't be 'feeding the trolls', but I felt it justified just now, as I see your "terminology" is changing.

And please provide any links to support your claims that NASA and the CIA can change an original native standard definition signal (480i, or 240 like VHS, etc), and then morph it into a NATIVE 1080p Hi-Def signal. Nope. The resolution can be improved, but cannot make "HD image quality" out of the native standard-definition (NON-HD) signal that exists in the original source.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 11, 2008]

Hendrix, his reference to NASA has nothing to do with what he's talking about concerning standard DVD. NASA pioneered some great techniques that involved taking several still shots with various filters and detectors and exposures - sometimes dozens of them. They then used supercomputers to produce composites from them. This has nothing to do with "SUC".

And doesn't anyone think that if the CIA or NASA invented such technology, why would they exclusively give it away to single a Japanese company, and not let American broadcasters have it? Giving away magic for any price would no doubt be a national security issue.

There is a technology that exists that can also take several frames shot by different cameras from varying angles and zooms, and produce a single frame composite that contains more resolution than any single frame. However, this takes a lot of processing power... not to mention some human direction. Plus again, different purposely shot angles and carefully aligned zoom shots with STILLS.

Another technology that I have first hand experience with is called HDR, or "high dynamic range". It involves taking 3 or more bracketed exposures of a still frame, then producing a composite to get much more shadow detail along with darker darks and lighter lights. Anyone familair with Photoshop CS3's new support for this function will know what I'm talking about. However, all frames involved are shot differently (at different exposures).

Obviously 1 million frames of the same crap = one frame of crap. And don't forget, video involves moving picture elements as well (doh!). Unfortunately, SUC as implemented will be super edge-enchancement with super DNR. And everyone here knows how much I love DNR!

I don't mind a little chroma noise reduction, but making a beach full of pebbles look like melted plastic is NOT high definition folks.

[Post edited by Skyhawk on May 11, 2008]

I 4 one am not TROLLING, I am just giving you my opinion about Toshiba. Yes many of you are WAY more schooled than me on the electronic front. However I do not care wether the SUC upconverts 480, 720, 1080 or YMCA. It is still a step in the backwards direction from HD DVD. And if upconverted sales were up 5%, then maybe Toshiba should have put their effort to the SUC and not HD DVD. Toshiba kept feeding all of us, that HD DVD was the better of the two, and that in the end HD DVD would be on top. Yes it was new technology and we knew what we were getting into. But the bottom line, to develop SUC so soon after the tossed in the towel, yea thats what makes me bitter.

And I was not saying that my A2 was a SUC, I was just saying that the A2 was a good machine that could upconvert my standard DVD's. It does not matter, SUC will never reach the sights or sounds of HD period.

Thanks Skyhawk, who said -

Quote:
"Obviously 1 million frames of the same crap = one frame of crap. ( -Jimi) And don't forget, video involves moving picture elements as well (doh!). Unfortunately, SUC as implemented will be super edge-enchancement with super DNR. And everyone here knows how much I love DNR!"

Oh NO! "super edge-enhancement" / "super DNR" <this stuff will change the image to a greater (negative) extreme!

SUC is DOA "dead on arrival" as for my life. Many here know how much I DETEST EE, having commented (like Skyhawk) time and again how severely it affects the content image, and very rarely has EE been done without it being noticeable (with negative quality IMO).

A bad example of EE ruining a film on SD-DVD can be seen in the Oscar-winning film COLD MOUNTAIN. You can turn down the sharpness control of BOTH your player and TV to their lowest settings, and STILL you will see just how bad the use of EE is to the image. I purchased the 2-disc SpEd set last year (under $10, sale), and had to re-sell it, as I would not watch such a bad-quality disc again - (I do however love and enjoy the CD soundtrack!) - will assume that Disney will re-master it for Blu-ray without the crappy EE overuse.

Another reviewer on Amazon comments about the DVD - This DVD has one of the worst transfers I have ever seen. A "transfer" is how the picture looks from film to DVD. There are tons of problems with the look of the film, with compression artifacts and such. It looks as bad as a streaming hi-bitrate movie, and while those look OK, it doesnt look well on a DVD. Not at all. Definitely not recommended.

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 11, 2008]

This reminds me of then I first got into DVD as an early adopter. Suddenly, they had that 4-head HIFI VCR thingy out for much, much cheaper than a DVD player. I suppose that's what all upconversion players are today - a sort of bridge technology for some.

Well the technology looks impressive. 9 frames fused to create 960p via computation. Think about it Sony put it stock into the Cell chip and you guys are knocking your PS3's? Oh, well better sell those Toshiba Cell chips inside, wouldn't wanting to be using dead technology now...?

By the way if you want a cheap Funai Blu-Ray that's your closest shot to $199 for the holdiay season. If you want a real Blu-Ray machine, build your own PC, or buy a Panasonic...

Now that my friends was a troll post.........

ReaggieP... Deadmeat is saying that with SUC tech, a SD-DVD's native 480i will change into "native 960p HD" - but how can DVD's standard definition quality morph into HIGH DEFINITION? Not possible. Resolution upconversion improvement is one thing, but changing SD into "native HD" is something completely different, as I understand it.

And you keep being critical of Funai, even though the machine has not yet been released or reviewed. And as I posted here before, Panasonic is indeed INVOLVED in the BD quality of the Funai player - "The optical head for the unit will be provided by Sony and the core system will be the Matsushita / Panasonic UniPhier chipset."

_____________
-JIMI McLovin (the Voodoo Child)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on May 11, 2008]