On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:06:50 +0200
Niko Mikkilä <n...@phnet.fi> wrote:
> On 2011-01-15 22:36 +0000, Tony Houghton wrote:
> > BTW, speaking of temporal and spatial deinterlacing: AFAICT one
> > means combining fields to provide maximum resolution with half the
> > frame rate of the interlaced fields, and the other maximises the
> > frame rate while discarding resolution; but which is which? And does
> > NVidia's temporal
> > spatial try to give the best of both worlds through some sort of
> > interpolation?
> Temporal = motion adaptive deinterlacing at either half or full field
> rate. Some programs refer to the latter by "2x". "Motion adaptive"
> means that the filter detects interlaced parts of each frame and
> adjusts deinterlacing accordingly. This gives better quality at
> stationary parts.
> Temporal-spatial = Temporal with edge-directed interpolation to smooth
> jagged edges of moving objects.
> Both methods give about the same spatial and temporal resolution but
> temporal-spatial will look nicer.
I still can't translate that explanation into simple mechanics. Is
temporal like weave and spatial like bob or the other way round? Or
something a little more sophisticated, interpolating parts of the
picture belonging to the "wrong" field from previous and/or next frames?
vdr mailing list