Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
On Mon, 04 May 2009 19:30:36 +0200 Nicolas Huillard nico...@huillard.net wrote: With today's pixel-displays, we'd like to avoid all scaling, stretching, etc. done by the panel itself. ie. like Rolf said, always output from the computer at panel resolution, with 1:1 pixel mapping. Video would be scaled, but not the OSD. On my TV video looks better at 1280x720 than at the native resolution of 1360x768 for two reasons: Its picture mode presets are optimised for video in 720p modes and PC/text in 1360x768. Nearly everything I watch is 25fps and the TV only supports 60Hz at 1360x768. OTOH ISTM even 576 line SDTV looks better displayed in a 720p mode than in 576p. -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
I think what is being asked for is that the OSD always displays at the screens full physical extent even if the TV channel being watched is only 4:3 in the centre for example. Andrew On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Joachim Wilke joachim.wi...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/5/4 Nicolas Huillard nico...@huillard.net: Matthias Becker a écrit : Did you get the point? It's somehow difficult to describe this topic for me. With today's pixel-displays, we'd like to avoid all scaling, stretching, etc. done by the panel itself. ie. like Rolf said, always output from the computer at panel resolution, with 1:1 pixel mapping. Video would be scaled, but not the OSD. Who is we, at least my (and most other TV I have seen) rescale 16:9 (anamorphic) material to display it with the right aspect. This results in a wrong display of the OSD. This should be fixed. An ordinary user will not understand, why the OSD looks sometimes normal and sometimes broad (stretched). Best Regards, Joachim. ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr -- Convergent Home Technologies Ltd www.dianemo.co.uk Tel: +44 (0)1245 330101 Fax: +44 (0)1245 263916 Unit 205 Waterhouse Business Centre Cromar Way Chelmsford Essex CM1 2QE UK Watch Dianemo Videos here; http://www.dianemo.co.uk/index.php/your-home/overview-videos/8-your-home/31-dianemo-overview-videos ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
I agree that OSD should be set to the output of the device's resolution. Not the video content it self. Would really love to see that change happen. On 04/05/2009, Nicolas Huillard nico...@huillard.net wrote: Matthias Becker a écrit : and what about anamorphic material? A 16:9 SD broadcast in fact still is 4:3 but is streached by the TV to 16:9 to look ok (no egg-heads). Wouldn't it be correct also to draw the OSD anamorphic so that is not screached by the TV? Did you get the point? It's somehow difficult to describe this topic for me. With today's pixel-displays, we'd like to avoid all scaling, stretching, etc. done by the panel itself. ie. like Rolf said, always output from the computer at panel resolution, with 1:1 pixel mapping. Video would be scaled, but not the OSD. Regards, Matthias 2009/5/4 Rolf Ahrenberg rahre...@cc.hut.fi: On Mon, 4 May 2009, Falk Spitzberg wrote: The OSD should adopt to the size of the video material. If that is scaled to some non TV screen size, the OSD is scaled by the same factor. I still disagree. If you scale down your OSD to video resolution (i.e. 544x576) and afterwards scale up the both video and OSD to output resolution (i.e. 1280x720), the OSD really looks crap due to scaling artefacts. -- NH ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
2009/5/4 Nicolas Huillard nico...@huillard.net: Matthias Becker a écrit : Did you get the point? It's somehow difficult to describe this topic for me. With today's pixel-displays, we'd like to avoid all scaling, stretching, etc. done by the panel itself. ie. like Rolf said, always output from the computer at panel resolution, with 1:1 pixel mapping. Video would be scaled, but not the OSD. Who is we, at least my (and most other TV I have seen) rescale 16:9 (anamorphic) material to display it with the right aspect. This results in a wrong display of the OSD. This should be fixed. An ordinary user will not understand, why the OSD looks sometimes normal and sometimes broad (stretched). Best Regards, Joachim. ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
Rolf Ahrenberg a écrit :
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Tomas Berglund wrote:
Do you mean aspect ratio 2.21:1 ?
+const char *VideoAspectString[] = { 4:3,
+16:9,
+2.21:9
+ };
Besides of that typo, there're plenty of video aspect ratios missing:
1:1, 12:11, 10:11, 16:11, 40:33, 24:11, 20:11, 32:11, 80:33, 18:11,
15:11, 64:33, 160:99, 3:2, 2:1.
16:10 is also a common device aspect ratio these days ;-)
Anyway, I'm not very fond of this new interface addition. After a little
playing with xineliboutput plugin in the past, the OSD scaling to video
size is a total mess and hence the HUD mode was developed, where the
OSD resolution is the same as the output resolution and the video is
scaled to that resolution. I'd strongly suggest to implement
cDevice::GetOSDSize(), so the output plugins can correctly set their
OSD resolution with minimal scaling artefacts.
I strongly second that. Add the fact that some (most ?) of the channels
here mess / cheat with aspect ratio / resolution, and I currently (VDR
1.6, SDTV, xineliboutput) have a unextricable aspect/resolution/OSD
problem. I'm not even trying to solve it...
I'd also suggest the maximum OSD size is 1920x1200 instead of 1920x1080,
as this 16:10 resolution is very common in computer land. That's also
the maximum a DVI single link can output.
--
NH
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Nicolas Huillard wrote:
Rolf Ahrenberg a écrit :
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Tomas Berglund wrote:
Do you mean aspect ratio 2.21:1 ?
+const char *VideoAspectString[] = { 4:3,
+16:9,
+2.21:9
+ };
Besides of that typo, there're plenty of video aspect ratios missing:
1:1, 12:11, 10:11, 16:11, 40:33, 24:11, 20:11, 32:11, 80:33, 18:11,
15:11, 64:33, 160:99, 3:2, 2:1.
16:10 is also a common device aspect ratio these days ;-)
Well, those values (taken from H.264 specs) were for the video aspect
ratio and not the output aspect ratio. IIRC, the H.264 contains also so
called extended aspect ratio, that could contain almost anything.
BR,
--
rofa
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
On Mon, 4 May 2009, Falk Spitzberg wrote: The OSD should adopt to the size of the video material. If that is scaled to some non TV screen size, the OSD is scaled by the same factor. I still disagree. If you scale down your OSD to video resolution (i.e. 544x576) and afterwards scale up the both video and OSD to output resolution (i.e. 1280x720), the OSD really looks crap due to scaling artefacts. BR, -- rofa ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
and what about anamorphic material? A 16:9 SD broadcast in fact still is 4:3 but is streached by the TV to 16:9 to look ok (no egg-heads). Wouldn't it be correct also to draw the OSD anamorphic so that is not screached by the TV? Did you get the point? It's somehow difficult to describe this topic for me. Regards, Matthias 2009/5/4 Rolf Ahrenberg rahre...@cc.hut.fi: On Mon, 4 May 2009, Falk Spitzberg wrote: The OSD should adopt to the size of the video material. If that is scaled to some non TV screen size, the OSD is scaled by the same factor. I still disagree. If you scale down your OSD to video resolution (i.e. 544x576) and afterwards scale up the both video and OSD to output resolution (i.e. 1280x720), the OSD really looks crap due to scaling artefacts. BR, -- rofa ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
Am Montag, den 04.05.2009, 14:13 +0200 schrieb Nicolas Huillard:
Rolf Ahrenberg a écrit :
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Tomas Berglund wrote:
Do you mean aspect ratio 2.21:1 ?
+const char *VideoAspectString[] = { 4:3,
+16:9,
+2.21:9
+ };
Besides of that typo, there're plenty of video aspect ratios missing:
1:1, 12:11, 10:11, 16:11, 40:33, 24:11, 20:11, 32:11, 80:33, 18:11,
15:11, 64:33, 160:99, 3:2, 2:1.
16:10 is also a common device aspect ratio these days ;-)
It may be a common aspect ratio for display devices, but not for video
material. Movies and TV shows are mostly produced in 4:3, 16:9 or
2.21:1.
The OSD should adopt to the size of the video material. If that is
scaled to some non TV screen size, the OSD is scaled by the same factor.
Anyway, I'm not very fond of this new interface addition. After a little
playing with xineliboutput plugin in the past, the OSD scaling to video
size is a total mess and hence the HUD mode was developed, where the
OSD resolution is the same as the output resolution and the video is
scaled to that resolution. I'd strongly suggest to implement
cDevice::GetOSDSize(), so the output plugins can correctly set their
OSD resolution with minimal scaling artefacts.
I strongly second that. Add the fact that some (most ?) of the channels
here mess / cheat with aspect ratio / resolution, and I currently (VDR
1.6, SDTV, xineliboutput) have a unextricable aspect/resolution/OSD
problem. I'm not even trying to solve it...
I'd also suggest the maximum OSD size is 1920x1200 instead of 1920x1080,
as this 16:10 resolution is very common in computer land. That's also
the maximum a DVI single link can output.
--
Falk
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
On 04.05.2009 08:00, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Tomas Berglund wrote:
Do you mean aspect ratio 2.21:1 ?
+const char *VideoAspectString[] = { 4:3,
+16:9,
+2.21:9
+ };
Besides of that typo, there're plenty of video aspect ratios missing:
1:1, 12:11, 10:11, 16:11, 40:33, 24:11, 20:11, 32:11, 80:33, 18:11,
15:11, 64:33, 160:99, 3:2, 2:1.
Anyway, I'm not very fond of this new interface addition. After a little
playing with xineliboutput plugin in the past, the OSD scaling to video
size is a total mess and hence the HUD mode was developed, where the
OSD resolution is the same as the output resolution and the video is
scaled to that resolution. I'd strongly suggest to implement
cDevice::GetOSDSize(), so the output plugins can correctly set their
OSD resolution with minimal scaling artefacts.
Of course, you could misuse the current GetVideoSize always to result an
output (OSD) resolution, but that would break i.e. all skin plugins that
will certaily make use of this new method.
Looks like the name of this function wasn't very well chosen, sorry.
It's probably best to go for a
cDevice:GetOsdSize(int Width, int Height, double Aspect);
through which the output device can tell VDR which size the OSD
shall have, and Aspect being a double value allows the device to
give VDR a hint whether the OSD shall be stretched (default
is 1.0, and it's not mandatory that the OSD actually uses this hint).
The existing GetVideoSize() could still be left in there, returning
the actual video size of the displayed matierial, which might be
displayed by some plugin.
Klaus
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
Matthias Becker a écrit : and what about anamorphic material? A 16:9 SD broadcast in fact still is 4:3 but is streached by the TV to 16:9 to look ok (no egg-heads). Wouldn't it be correct also to draw the OSD anamorphic so that is not screached by the TV? Did you get the point? It's somehow difficult to describe this topic for me. With today's pixel-displays, we'd like to avoid all scaling, stretching, etc. done by the panel itself. ie. like Rolf said, always output from the computer at panel resolution, with 1:1 pixel mapping. Video would be scaled, but not the OSD. Regards, Matthias 2009/5/4 Rolf Ahrenberg rahre...@cc.hut.fi: On Mon, 4 May 2009, Falk Spitzberg wrote: The OSD should adopt to the size of the video material. If that is scaled to some non TV screen size, the OSD is scaled by the same factor. I still disagree. If you scale down your OSD to video resolution (i.e. 544x576) and afterwards scale up the both video and OSD to output resolution (i.e. 1280x720), the OSD really looks crap due to scaling artefacts. -- NH ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
Re: [vdr] VDR-1.7.7 Video aspect ratios
I keep seeing mention of people using computer monitors and that VDR should be designed to accommodate their aspect ratios. I'd like to point out that plenty of users don't use VDR with a computer monitor at all. Like many others, I have an hdtv (60 in my case) and would love to have an osd that 1920x1080 always, regardless of the content I'm watching. Why? Because my tv can handle it so why not? My main VDR box is in my living room, tucked away behind my tv with no keyboard, no mouse, no monitor, no anything. I do have a test box connected to a 19 monitor but certainly our primary VDR use is on a real tv so that's where our main concern/interests are. I'm not sure what the best way to deal with this situation is but I strongly urge patience and proper design so nothing is force while looking ok for some people but like crap for others. Not everyone uses computer monitors for their output device, and not everyone uses a tv (of whatever size/aspect ratio). Surely there's a sane reasonable solution that works for *. Maybe some user settings are required so people can tweak the osd to look good with their specific display type? Best regards, Derek ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxtv.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
