2009/8/22 Thomas Hilber <v...@toh.cx>:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 08:31:43AM +1000, Torgeir Veimo wrote:
>> In my experience, you just have to do deinterlacing in vdpau with
>> interlaced content, even when displaying on an interlaced display. If
>> you try to output interlaced material directly, you get ghosting since
>> the weaved frames are copied to the progressive surface, and the
>> output resolution might be different than the weave pattern.
> the main reason why nvidia chooses to deinterlace always even if you use an
> interlaced video timing is not the scaling problem you mention. This could
> be eventually solved (albeit not perfectly) by scaling both fields
> independently.
> The main reason is: even with VDPAU there still exists no synchronization
> between stream and video timing.

I accept that they prefer "always" deinterlacing because they didn't
implement proper field parity in their architecture / api /
implementation. But I still think they screwed up. The matrox mga
450/550 cards do field parity pretty well, with a simple api, and in
98% of cases with predictable results and with manageable clock drift
workarounds. Too bad they offer no mpeg2 or h.264 acceleration.


vdr mailing list

Reply via email to