Search options (Page 2 of 6)

I wonder if you mean "artefacts" with "pixelation" or "drop in image quality".

Stuff like this? (couldnt find any "real movie" example at the moment)

INteresting to know, once I need a new one.
I found another thing about 120Hz @HDMI.

And I finaly found OFFICIAL info on it. At the place I should have looked up 1.... the manuals ... 

The manual of the Laptop says about the HDMI port: HDMI 1.4 -  60Hz/120Hz output @1080p
The manual of the Projector says: HMDI: HDMI 1.3 - 60Hz input for 1080p and 120Hz Input for 720p

So, HDMI @ 120Hz does exist for real (and I dont need to buy a new cable).
Still leaves the question why Wikipedia claims ALL versions of HDMI are 60Hz only and in almost every forum everyone claims 120Hz is technically impossible with HDMI and suggest people to use VGA or DVI for 120Hz.

Well, the projector doesnt use usual 3D as TVs do use. It uses Nvidia 3D technique, that requieres a Hardware in the PC and a quiet heavy and expensive (100 Euros) 3D Glasses.
Its not designed to watch 3D movies but to play real time 3D games with it. (through its usable with stereoscopic player+SVP) It only works with screens of minimum 100Hz.

I got that when buying a ASUS Gaming Laptop in 3D Edition, including 120Hz Display for the Nvidia 3D stuff. I buyed the projector because it said its Nvidia 3D compatible (wich are only few projectors)

the manual explains it like that:
The Graphic card renderes 2 frames (and it consumes 2 times as much hardware power to do that), one for each eye. It then switches those 2 frames 120 times per second and synchronises the shutter glasses with Infrared that comes out of the Laptops display top lid. (thats why I need to have the laptop below the wall I project on (of course with switched off display), I know pretty lame...)

The specs of the projector allow 120Hz at 720p and 60Hz at 1080Hz. (3D capable only at 720 because it needs 120hz for the 3D)

I usualy watch stuff at 720p to have 120Hz (and use SVP at "to screen refreshrate" wich is then 120Hz)....
Until yesterday, I was sure that 120Hz at 720p would be possible even for HDMI. After googling around yesterday I am not so sure anymore. (I more than once read HDMI is artificial (not by technical ability!) limited to 60Hz per channel (or something)

VGA is analog, it should have no "real" limitations at all (except for signal noise, red or blue color lines at the edges of things, flimmering and stuff like that, that do not exist in a digital transported image)
People used VGA to connect their old PC to 125hz CRT Displays in the stone ages allready. 

HDMI is digital and has a limited bandwich. So called "high speed HMDI" has bandwich enough for 4K movies @ 60Hz (wich in THEORY would mean fast enough for 1080p@ 240Hz. But indeed some sources I read yesterday claim that the HDMI standard is artificial limited to 60Hz, wich is possible to override with a hack or something. At least something I dont want to do...)

Meh...
I think I will try play around with the VGA a little more and compare it to the HDMI image, once I get back home...
And if I can see a diference in motion fluidity (wich I actually DO see on my laptop display), then.... f..off digital, welcome back analog.
But of course with a better shielded VGA cable.

EDIT:
Ok, now I read more into how that 3D stuff is working.

A 3D blue ray player does indeed send superframes through the cable (one image with both frames that is split at the destination). Like I guessed.
That projector that I own is NOT able to do that (it wont show 3D movies from 3D blue rays). It only suports computer 3D of NVidia wich works completely different.
That 3D does actually work that one frame for the left eye is send to the beamer and then another frame for the right eye is send throuh the beamer....

That sounds very very bad. Because that means, if HDMI is limited to 60FPS, a 3D movie could only play at 30FPS with that method. It would need VGA to be at 60FPS (because with this method it really needs to be fed with 120Hz)

But then I dont understand how I watched 3D movies, using HDMI, steroescopic player and SVP and had the usual smooth motion effect. (I also compared the smoothness with that splitscreen)

*readreadread* yeah it says, 3D signal must be fed with 720p120. Send as a sequence (1 frame left, 1 frame right etc) It uses a HDMI reciever chip that onyl accepts that 3D format. But... wft... wouldnt that mean it has a HDMI reciever chip that is capable of revieving 120 frames per second?

Bah, Why are things to confusing and no one ever tells someone whats going on. 

I wonder how 3D monitors work then.
I use a 3D Projector with a HDMI cable (buyed one, when I did not know about the limitations. The projector however could be aswell connected by a usual monitor cable.)
Its a 120Hz projector because it runs 3D material. 60FPS for each image. Capable of NVidia 3D "NVision", for 3D Gaming.

HOw is that possible?
Does it only use 30FPS per eye and interpolate it to 60FPS per eye (120FPS total) in the projector) or how does that work? I cant imagine that.... in gaming?

I usualy also watch 2D material with the 120Hz setting. But at 720p. If I use 1080p it claims a max of 60 FPS is possible for 1080p.

When I read various forums, people claim 720p would be possible @120Hz, but not 1080p because HDMI is limited by "pixels per second" and 1080p@120hz is too much pixels per second but 720p@120Hz is below the pixels per second maximum.

Other forums again claimed that yes... HDMI would be limited by "Pixels per Second" and may be able to do 120Hz but only if you hack some stuff? 

Whatever... If it would be truth that HDMI can only trasnport 60FPS, then I possibly need to trash that cable and get me a 3m long monitor cable instead.

I agree that this is the best one can do, if one is allergic against artefacts but still wants the stuff to be smooth. All source frames apear in the final video (because its an integer multiplication) and 50% of the frames are "real" (artefact free) frames. (24 to 60 means only 12 of the original frames are used in the final result, thats 20% real frames versus 80% rendered frames)

The next best thing one can do is, to make sure one multiplies framerates by integer numbers----> 2x, 3x, 4x or 5x

24FPS to 60FPS (Wich is what most people get when turning movie to refreshrate) is actually a bad idea. 24 is best turned into 48, 72, 96 or 120 FPS.

For 25FPS (PAL) sources thats: 50, 75, 100 or 125

30FPS sources: turn best into: 60, 90 and 120 FPS.

Hm.
OK, but.... how would I even able to setup c)?
There is no 5x option to chose from. Only a "to screen refresh rate" wich IS a 5x if the source is 24 (that most of my sources do use) but a few are in 25.

@rainking:

Sure about more artefacts at 120FPS than at 60? With identical settings?
Or something else lowered to gain enough power to reach 120?

Maybe its the case, I almost always watch at 120 FPS (3D capable Notebook. Thats why it has a 120Hz Display) and my beamer is also set to 120Hz.
My only 60FPS experience are some videos that I converted to 60FPS to play them on my smartphone (because 24FPS is almost unbearable to my eyes meanwhile)

You are right about the smoothness definately. If you are used to 120FPS, you see a difference to 60FPS, specially in stuff like Camera pans or something like that.

But by pure theory, I cant imagine why there should be more artefacts.
Because in 60FPS aswell as 120FPS it should be (worst case, we assume ALL interpolated frames beeing artefact pested):

None artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
None artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
artefact frame
None artefact frame
and so on.....

just twice as fast in 120FPS, but the same pattern. 80% frames with artefacts in em and 20% without (worst case scenario)

With setting: "Double source frame rate 2x" it would be different:
None artefact frame
artefact frame
None artefact frame
artefact frame
and so on

Hm.
Until now I thought that it may play a role if the new number of frames is a perfect uh... whats the word... of the original frame rate?

I thought 60 FPS = 2.5xOriginal Framerate
120 FPS = 5x original Framerate

And I thought until now that 2x, 3x, 4x or 5x orihinal frame rate has a higher amount of "original frames" in it than 2.5x or 3.5x or 4.5x and by this had less visible artefacts?
(thats what I thought makes the difference between 48FPS (2x) and 60FPS (2,5x) when it comes to artefacts.)

So, thats NOT the case? Its geneally: More FPS = more artefacts, no matter if its a round multiplication of frames or not?

I need to add, that with my smartphone, everything was playing fine for 7 or so month, before the problem showed up. And that I am sure it was that special update for the app. (And there are dozents of posts "video stops, sound continius to play, since last update!" at the app store.

I also used SVP tube before, without problems. BUt I cant tell when it showed up, because I used to save youtube videos I like, local or convert them to 60FPS to play them on the smartphone. And so I did not use SVP Tube all to often (but that for quiet some time....maybe a year by now. And I have not had that problem in the past.

Seen that minutes ago.
Restart of SVP Tube fixed it for me.

But I still have a "bug" that the video stops after a few minutes while the sound plays on.
Nobody else having that issue with SVP Tube?

I have that same issue with my Note 3 Smartphone since the last update of the Android Youtube app. (technically at the same moment when I recognised the SVP tube problem)
I do know that other users complained about the problem at the playstore. So its not me alone that has it.

Playing a youtube video in firefox browser works fine with PC and Smarthone.

Hm.
I have problems too. Dont know since when exactly, because I dont use Youtube that often.
For me, Vids break after like 1 or 2 minutes, sound continues.

So its similiar to Cookieboyelis problem but much earlier (inside 1 or 2 Minutes in a 10 Minutes Video....)