Am I watching DVDs on my PC in HD?

[ibex333]

I know that in order to wiew DVDs in HD on my TV I need a component video cable.
To watch some TV channels in HD on my TV I have to have an HD cable box, and an HD TV.

But when I watch DVDs on my PC.... Am I watching them in HD? I'm guessing no, since they dont look any better than they look on my TV that I'm viewing in analog signal. (I dont have an HD box)

I have a mid-range PC, with a ViewSonic VP171b LCD Monitor. Is there something that I need to "do" to my PC in order to be able to watch DVDs in HD quality?

 

[Mr Pepper]

DvD runs at 480p, which is not a HDTV resolution (720p or better is considered HD). The only way to view DvD in HD is to use an upscaling DvD player which just "blows up" the 480p content to nativly fill an HD resolution. Sorta like using a magnifying glass... so to speak

To truely view DvD in HD you need to get a HD-DvD or BR player and media.

 

[waxking1]

There are some reports of the Xbox HD DVD player being used directly to the PC. Currently because of lack of drivers they are only playing at 540p. Since this is a driver issue it is quite likely that soon you will be able to watch DVDs in 1920 x 1080 resolution if you have an HDCP compliant graphics card and the monitor to support the resolution.

 

[Ricochet]

If you're watching T2 Extreme Edition on Media Player 9 or above, yes. Almost all DVDs, however, are not HD.

 

[ibex333]

Ok... apparently I dont know what DVD is.... Sorry guys. I did not form my question correctly, and I got wrong answers.

I'll try to rephrase my question.

for example: when I view DVDs on my TV without the component video cable, they dont look much better than VHS. But people told me that if I wil get that cable, my picture quality will improve greatly. So I'm assuming that will be "true HD picture quality". (yes my TV is HD capable)


So I was thinking if there's the same sort of a "fix" in the case of my computer. Mabe I need some kind of a cable....


Mabe I got it all mixed up and I still dont know what Im talking about? Mabe DVD picture quality has nothing to do with HD?

 

[Noema]

DVDs will look better in a computer monitor because they are shown in a progressive resolution: all the pixels are shown at once, as opposed to a regular TV (420i) , in which the display is interlaced: only half of the lines are shown at any one time.

However. like said already: regular (non HD) DVDs have a resolution of 720x480. That's very low by today's standards. So the image has to be stretched to fit in, say, a 1280x1024 or similar resolution, which is typical for a 17" or 19" desktop monitor nowadays.

Some newer DVD players can upscale the output signal of the DVD so that it matches the number of pixels on the display; this will produce a better image quality, but not nearly as good as genuine HD content like Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, which run at a native resolution of 1920x1080 (1080p). Upscaling is an approximation of HD, but it's not true HD.

 

[ibex333]

@Noema:

From what you are saying, I can conclude that the bigger my TV/Monitor is, the worse that is for viewing DVDs... I have a very big projection TV. So, the amount of "stretching" must be quite signifficant to fit such a large screen, therefore reducing the overall image quality?

Meh... I suppose I am still clueless... What I'm going to do now, is google all these terms and do some research, since I feel like a caveman.

 

[Noema]

Originally posted by: ibex333
@Noema:

From what you are saying, I can conclude that the bigger my TV/Monitor is, the worse that is for viewing DVDs... I have a very big projection TV. So, the amount of "stretching" must be quite signifficant to fit such a large screen, therefore reducing the overall image quality?

Meh... I suppose I am still clueless... What I'm going to do now, is google all these terms and do some research, since I feel like a caveman.

Well, you also have to factor in viewing distance.

DVDs look god-awful on my 17" Viewsonic LCD if I watch them while sitting on my desk just a couple of inches away. Incredibly pixelated, and the banding with certain colors is very noticeable. I can only imagine it getting worse on a bigger monitor.

But since I usually watch them from my bed, which is almost 2 meters away, it looks considerably better than watching the same DVD on a regular TV from the same distance.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

S-video is pretty crappy and component should get you a better picture on your TV (I'm not sure if you're asking that as part of your question). I did some testing on this and on a small (36") screen, I didn't notice that much of a difference vs. component. The difference was certainly there, but it wasn't night and day. Colors looked better, but that was the major change I noticed.

Bigger screen size doesn't necessarily mean worse picture quality. I like how DVDs look a lot more on my current screen compared to some of my smaller sets I've used.

DVDs are a 480i source, so you can't really get HD quality out of them no matter what you do.

If you want to improve how things look for your computer, you might want to check out ffdshow.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=719041

You should be able to scale to a good resolution for your monitor which could improve things.

 

[Slammy1]

Scaling is key in HD, especially taking a 720x480 source and displaying it at higher resolution. A standard definition (SD) TV runs at 640x480 (4:3), so you actually are still scaling but taking a higher definition source to a lower definition display. but taking the same source and displaying it at 1920x1080 means you have a display with 6x the pixels of a DVD source. You have to make assumptions about what the missing pixels are about, which can create artifacting like macroblocking. That concept is the basis of upconverting. Just as important as the algorithm to add the extra pixels is filtering the results to eliminate this artifacting, which is noise reduction. The consequence is that upconverting settings will vary between different setups, the use of a PC has an advantage of having lots of settings to play with. Newer DVD players are basically dumbed down PCs (a PC appliance, if you will). Newer video cards will do a very good job of scaling, but filtering is still an art. There's a lot of mathematics and artistry in getting proper display of an SD source to an HD display.

 

[gsellis]

OK, as YOyoYOhowsDAjello said, Standard Definition DVDs are 480i. Contrary to what some have said, they will NOT show better on a computer monitor (of course, your TV could suck and the computer could be better too). A standard or HDTV set has a different scanning rate than your monitor. A TV will smooth the video through persistance of vision on the image while a computer monitor can cause the pixels to be displayed in either better quality than intended or expanded to a size that forces aliasing. When I finish developing a DVD, I take it to a real monitor with a real settop to proof it. If I watch it on the computer screen, it is too sharp and shows both the interlacing and aliasing if I make the viewer larger (which maximizes the Bayer effects). 24p is even worse.

Yes, you can view HD on red laser DVD, but chances are you do not have one. Microsoft has been pushing WMV-HD on DVD for a couple of years. As mentioned above, T2 was already released that way. I have "Step Into Liquid" and "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" in 720p at home. HD-DVD format will work on red laser discs and play in HD-DVD players. I am just starting to work on authoring, so I have not tried red disc HD-DVD in my player yet. I suspect without any proof that it will work in WMP11 on Vista. Nothing special about the format as it is XML and scripts that control menus and playback.

 

[Slammy1]

gsellis, film is progressive but television programs are interlaced.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Slammy1
gsellis, film is progressive but television programs are interlaced.

Film is progressive as be def, each frame is a frame. Television is mostly broadcast as interlaced, but there is 480p and 720p which is progressive. Film on TV is interlaced unless the broadcast is progressive. DVD, HTPC, HD-DVD/Blu-Ray can be i or p and up/down-verted to the other.

 

[Peter]

DVD isn't being mastered in HD, it's 720x480 for NTSC or 720x576 for PAL, at 60 or 50 Hz interlaced. End of story, basically. Some players can interpolate that to 480p or 576p format when connected through Component or HDMI interface, but that's all there is to it.

 

[Slammy1]

This might clear up some confusion:
http://nickyguides.digital-digest.com/interlace.htm

"it is important to remember this rule when bringing the worlds of computer and video together: the quality of an image will never be better than the quality of the original source material."

Which is, of course, why you don't have HD with regular DVDs. You can display them on an HD set with good interpolation, but it's still not HD. I think that's the point muddling the thread now (that and not all DVDs are mastered interlaced, only television programs and a few made for DVD titles).

 

[gsellis]

Actually, lets really clear up the confusion. DVD is a media. The media does not give a flip what is on it. The Books define what can go on it and that can even include data. The DVD-ROM set top players are what play what is on the media. Most set tops play the format Peter outlined, BUT, that is not true for all. Some settops will play Divx and WMV files. Normally, those are restricted by the playback, aka the TV to interlaced NTSC, PAL, or SECAM. Newer TV sets can play progressive SD sizes or HD sizes or interlaced of those.

What Nick's guide is saying in the quote is that up-res'ind will not magically make it better. In fact, it will make it worse and only the best converters make it "less" worse.

Wait until I frame, B frame comes into it (runs away)