Super Resolution (sort of up-coversion)

[626fan82]

The problem with blu ray is that your favorite old movie may not be available in blu ray.

And what about that old 1988 TV special that you taped on VHS . And copy to DVD because it never was released again?

[josiahsuarez]

"super resolution" techniques take some visual cues from surrounding frames to enhance the detail in an individual frame. the quality improvement is nice, although it's nothing compared to the difference between 480p video and native 720p or 1080p video. basically if you had three screens setup showing 1) native 720p video 2) 480p "SR" upconverted to 720p and 3) vanilla 480p video the difference in quality would be apparent between them, with the native 720p video being obviously the best

[jelleoelle]

Don't get too excited. The demonstrations are absolute best case scenarios, where the unsharp videos have even been produced for the specific purpose.

Superresolution is great, but not yet anything to get too excited about.

[ljbanner]

its like the tecno that nasa use on there telescopes to sharpen blurry images its great

[ljbanner]

this is a nail in bluray forehead hd at no extra cost for dvds

[cleydevrsantos]

Blue ray is dead. Now super upscaling will win the game.

[QuarismaboY]

i agree squozen

[jmc15john]

Wow, This looks awesome, hopefully it catches on, I can use it one day.

[squozen]

Or you could buy a blu-ray player and have true high definition right now. :)

[bozaz]

Freakin' idiot.. did you miss the point of working with all existing DVDs.

You go ahead and buy Blu-Ray discs at $40 a pop and $700 standalone players that still don't have BD Live working live and we'll buy these cheap ones that work with all DVDs in 2009.

[squozen]

Thanks for the abuse. Blu-ray is true high-def that exists now and is a known quantity. This doesn't exist, might suck, and might cost as much as a blu-ray player by the time it comes out. Who knows?

All I was saying was that blu-ray exists now. Who knows, you might be hit by a bus before this player arrives.

And if it's fantastic I'll buy one to complement my true high-def player.

*If*.

[zlapper]

What if the original copy of the video is not HD? you can enhance the quality of your home videos, for example.

Not to mention the improvement you can get if applied to an ancient source of video.

[squozen]

You can't create detail if it didn't exist in the first place. If you could, TV studios would be using cheap camcorders and upconverting instead of buying expensive HD cameras.

The axiom 'garbage in, garbage out' exists for a reason. Once you see true high definition on a large screen (60" or higher), you'll understand why I'm not interested in upscaling.

BTW, I have an upscaler, and DVDs still look much worse than high-def on my (bigger than 60") screen.

[zlapper]

Obviously, the quality can not be compared to true HD, but the point of the algorithm is to improve every single frame by taking data from adjacent frames, you are not "creating" detail.

[squozen]

Of course you are. If the resolution is too low to see detail in frame 6, why will there magically be more detail in frames 5 and 7?

Also, most DVD transfers just plain look bad. There are too many compression artefacts and edge enhancement that looks terrible on a large screen, and these algorithms do nothing to fix these problems - they're unfixable.