Posted on July 22, 2011 at 12:00 by Kevin Chung in Technology
This is the fifth and last installment in a series of blogposts in which we discuss a new concept/method to preserve the visual quality of video. The series consists of the following topics: Interlacing versus Progressive, Format war, Telecine, NTSC vs PAL and Television manufacturers. The central motto: “simplicity is brilliance”. As said, this week part 5: Television manufacturers.
Previous posts in this series:
Part 5: Television manufacturers
Nowadays modern TVs do much more than just decoding the input signal and showing you the pictures in sequence on its screens surface: e.g. integration of internet related services and image enhancement filters.
There are a few aspects that need more attention. As I described in part 1 of this series, progressive is the way to go and so ultimately TVs will not need a built-in deinterlacer anymore. Of course this only applies when people and the industry will hardly use the old interlaced video anymore.
Color and contrast
I think TV manufactures should pull away from their 3D buzz and instead focus on improving the color accuracy of the screens. Oftentimes, reviewers calibrate TV sets to make sure it is as close as possible to the reference. But calibration cannot fix everything.
So why are TV manufacturers not delivering TVs that are properly calibrated? If videos are properly produced and mastered all that is left is for the TV to give you a realistic representation of that digitally compressed video stream.
Instead, manufacturers now try beating each other in colors or contrast enhancement, often leading to over-enhancement. Most consumers don’t know TVs have special showroom preset which are used in stores. These presets are aimed at showing the reddest red, the brightest colors. As a result, all TV screens are virtually screaming to be looked at. In reality, the cinema preset of a TV offers a much better way for comparing and testing.
However, it’s business after all and consumers like to be fooled. Everything they experience as bigger or larger are perceived as being better.
Upscaling and motion interpolation
You might be fooled into thinking I’m against all kinds of post processing in the video playback chain. I agree that most of it is not necessary if video is produced and mastered accordingly. However, there are a few types of post processing that are still useful, such as upscaling and motion interpolation.
Upscaling is sometimes mandatory since we still have SD content which is not available in HD, or masters are gone. Upscaling your source should be avoided at all costs. It’s better to let the TV do it in real time, not wasting bitrate in encoding upscaled video.
Sometimes motion interpolation is needed to compensate for video frame rate and incompatible multiples of refresh rate of the TV itself, e.g. if you have 30 fps footage playing on a 100 or 200 Hz screen.
But the most important thing is getting the basics of the TV right: a faithful color representation. Then start thinking about adding additional features.
Simplicity is brilliance!
