TV picture quality

[willemse]

TV picture looks unpleasant on eyes with fast moving scenes where by the entire picture changes fast in contents. TV scenes with little or no change in contents are very acceptable in quality.

Example:
TV scene with soccer match and camera moving fast (= al most total change in picture contents) gives unstable and unpleasant picture
TV scene with tennis game where by only the tennis ball moves fast and the audience is stable and no change (= hardly change in picture contents) in picture shows good
TV scene with interview of persons (= al most no change at all in picture contents) picture shows good.

Replaying above TV files give same same results on the eyes.
Playing other Mpeg files and DVD’s do not seem to have this problem.

Any hints as to what this could be???

PC Configuration:
Windows XP, Sage version 2.2 beta, SP1, Windows media player 10, AMD 2000 processor, FX 5200 Graphics card NDVD codec, PVR 350, (same system with 250 giving same symptoms), 500Mbyte Memory.

[teedublu]

Use a higher/better encode data rate.
The default is normally "Great" (If I recall) which is about 2GB per hour for MPEG-2. You will get motion artifacts at that rate. You need to get up to at least 3GB per hour to get rid of most of that. So it's a trade-off (disk-space versus quality).

TW

[kny3twalker]

use VMR9 rendering
it tends to compensate for motion much better than default aka vme7 and overlay
better decoders
the intervideo decoders that come with the card make me feel sea sick as they do a very poor job of deinterlacing

[willemse]

Originally Posted by teedublu

Use a higher/better encode data rate.
The default is normally "Great" (If I recall) which is about 2GB per hour for MPEG-2. You will get motion artifacts at that rate. You need to get up to at least 3GB per hour to get rid of most of that. So it's a trade-off (disk-space versus quality).

TW

Thanks teebublu

have tried best quality but no improvement

Originally Posted by kny3twalker

use VMR9 rendering
it tends to compensate for motion much better than default aka vme7 and overlay
better decoders
the intervideo decoders that come with the card make me feel sea sick as they do a very poor job of deinterlacing

Tks kny3twalker
VMR 9 rendering is on.
I do not use the intervideo decoders but the NDVD supplied one

No improvement

Hope other suggestion will come in???

[jphhughes]

Your PC configuration shows you are using a 350. I assume you have it configued to do software decoding. I have a 350 configured for hardware Decoding the picture is great As good as direct cable to TV. Is their a reason you don't want to use Hardware decoding?

[g808]

Also, what kind of TV are you outputting the picture to? SD or HDTV? Size?

You may need a better video card. The 5200 is usually fine for smaller SDTVs, but bigger TVs (especially HDTVs) typically need a higher grade card like a 5700, 5900, ATI 9600/9700/9800, nvidia 6600 or 6800 series, ATI X600 or X800 card.

[tealcomp]

Actually, this sounds like a good thread to chime in on; I am seeing the same thing and it really aggravates me I have actually tried the S-VHS out from my 350 but it doesn't look very good and that is because it is a plasma HDTV and from what I have heard and seen for myself, the software decoding is the better bet. But it still has some problems.

[kny3twalker]

yeah software decoding is a better option with all the power that computer has
but you want to connect the pc to the TV via dVI, VGA or component
not svideo or composite
the pvr 350 can only output 480i
this is a limitation of svideo
where as your TV sounds like it can do 1080i and 720p

even then if you are having playback issues
you could do 480p using one of the Hi Def connections above

[jan smit]

I have exactly the same problem as Willemse has.
I use PVR 250 with NVIDIA decoders.
Picture quality is excellent on both monitor and SDTV (via SVHS), unless there is fast camera movement. Then the image becomes very unpleasant, like kny says "it makes one seasick". A tennisgame is no problem, the image can follow fast balls easily and the background is moreless stable, but a soccergame wher the camera moves quickly from one end of the field to the other gives problems. Likewise when in a live studio discussionprogram the camera moves quickly from one guest to another it shows the same problem.
The problem shows not only on the TV, but also on the monitor, so I think it has nothing to do with TV-out. The same problem shows when running WinTV2000, so it is probably (also) a Hauppauge problem.
I just wonder how it is possible that so many people have good quality, even on HDTV.
Don't they watch sportgames? How about quick camera movements in shows like Opra Winfrey?
Is this a PAL problem only?

[nielm]

Problems with horizontal movement usually come from deinterlacing problems (see www.100fps.com) Try different deinterlacing settings ('bob' is usually a good one for a quick and dirty fix: it gives half the resolution at double the frame rate, which may not work well with TV-out) (I don't have nvdvd, so I dont know what the settings are called).

[glbrown]

Been spending a lot of time with Sage lately. Just completed putting everything in a cabinet and I must say it came out quite well.

I think it was stanger who posted this link.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...e-10-2000.html

After my head stopped hurting, I am beginning to understand a maxim with regard to picture quality: 'what is the source?'

I am seeing video behaviors on my lcd display that now seem to make sense because I am beginning to understand the stuff that happens upstream from me.

Some content is good and some is crappy. What amazed me is the wide variety of stuff in between.

The people at hometheaterhifi.com propose an important concept. It's not about how a system performs with perfect content. Most everybody does this pretty well. What is important is how your system deals with crappy content especially from OTA,cable, and sat providers, even off-the-self dvds.

I see occasionaly see jitter now and instead of immediately thinking, what's wrong with Sage, I am saying, where did this content come from? Pretty big revelation.

Changing to bob and weave in overlay made a pretty big general quality improvement for me.

[nielm]

Thats a much better link than my 100fps link

Now all we need is a nice link that explains the nasty quality of TV-out of video cards and why going from interlaced source (broadcast TV signal) to interlaced display (TV screen) we need to do de-interlacing at all (1: because TV-out is imaging the windows desktop, which is progressive, so the video needs to be de-interlaced to be put onto the desktop, 2: because the desktop may not be 480/576 pixels high, so needs to be scaled and 3: because very few (none?) video cards scanline-match the lines on the windows desktop to the lines of the TV out)

[mc2wheels]

I do not have an HDTV. I have a Sony SDTV, and I too get some weirdness with fast motion. I use a lowly nVidia FX 5200, with the latest nVidia codec. I use the following settings:

1) in Sage, I use VMR9, with "bob and weave" de-interlacing, and 3D acceleration on.

2) With nVidia codec (not the VPP), I set it to use hardware acceleration, smart de-interlacing (with the bottom left pull down on the tray app), and median filtering (the right pull down).

3) my screen resolution is set to 800 x 600

This gets those fast images to be passible. Things are still a little fuzzy, but not bad. The quality is better without hardware acceleration, but my CPU usage goes up because I have underclocked/undervolted my machine to reduce heat. I still get some weird effects, especially in dark tones, when the move quickly, but I am now able to watch basketball without going nuts.

My wife got me a Chaintech 6600 GT AGP for Christmas (I am not supposed to know -- but I saw the confirmation email before she deleted it), so hopefully, my picture quality will go way up. I can't wait to use the nVidia VPP with hardware support acceleration.

[jphhughes]

glbrown and Nielm thanks for this explanation. As a novice I am finally starting to get the picture

Also based on what you have said it seems to imply that if you have a SD TV and want a good picture then something like the 350 card make a great deal of sense, as long as you now the 350's limitations (no DVD playback etc).

Thanks again good discussion.

[teedublu]

FX5200 is bad for hardware assisted decode.
It's just a 200MHZ GPU afterall!
For me I got much worse motion artifacts when enabling hardware assisted decode (that was a while back using the registry hack to enable DXVA with the std Haup decoder).

Before running out and replacing the FX5200: As long as you're using a SDTV, there isn't a good reason to upgrade the graphics board. -- In otherwords, don't spend bucks to off-load some work from the CPU. The only reason to move up in video card (for a HTPC) would be for HDTV.

Using the S-Video out I get good results with:
720x480 resolution (same res as the recording), No VMR9, Overlay with color keying, 3D enabled, Default deinterlace.

TW

[nielm]

Originally Posted by jphhughes

Also based on what you have said it seems to imply that if you have a SD TV and want a good picture then something like the 350

I get acceptable picture (no deinterlacing artifacts, no juddering/combing/stuttering on horizontal pans) with TV-out on my PAL SDTV running 800x600, Overlay, Bob+Weave deinterlace, PowerDVD XP4.0 with hardware accelleration enabled... My GPU is very low powered (I actually use a Via EPIA mini-itx motherboard)

teedublu: hardware assist mpeg2 decoding does not require a very high powered GPU... hardware assisted de-interlacing with complex algorithms does

[BryanJ]

Originally Posted by teedublu

FX5200 is bad for hardware assisted decode.
Using the S-Video out I get good results with:
720x480 resolution (same res as the recording), No VMR9, Overlay with color keying, 3D enabled, Default deinterlace.
TW

teedublu-
With the FX5200, how are you setting the resolution to 720x480? I am only seeing 640x480 & 800x600. I've got my FX5200 connected to a SDTV with SVideo. Thanks, BryanJ

[mc2wheels]

but I still get a pretty good picture with DXVA. Not a huge difference, but for most people who have a 5200, they should probably let the cpu do the work instead (provided they have a faster bus).

I use VMR9 because I like the menus better. I guess the new beta has overlay transparency menus, but I don't want to use betas. I'll switch when it is released.

As to upgrading the gpu, the wife did that for me. I can't say that I will be upset about it. The 6600 GT supports hardware acceleration of the VPP codec, and has hardware support for mp4. And it has HDTV support for when/if I upgrade the TV.

Anyway, for me the fx5200 is pretty good. After lots of experimentaion, the settings I listed were the best for sports (basketball, football, etc.). The median filtering made a huge difference for motion.

I did use powerstrip at one point to create a tv resolution, but I found that sage displays didn't work to well with that, and windows menus were worse. Most things in XP (control panel, etc.) require 800x600. This does force downscaling, but not much.

[willemse]

Guys

Tks for all your responses with website links and sharing your settings. Highly appreciated.

Have already started to read the information on the weblinks and learning more and more.

FYI: I am using the Hauppauge 350 and FX 5200, which is, connected trough Svideo to standard JVC TV 28 inch. In the Netherlands HDTV is still not up and running.

I also will experiment with the by each of you suggested settings

Question I have:

1- is the Deinterlacing done in the Hauppauge before encoding and writing video to disk???

2- if not can some one gets me in the picture on how the overall process works with the Hauppauge card installed??
This in order to get picture of the overall process and what I am adjusting or setting parameters for!!

Tks a lot for all your responses and hope this thread will lead eventually to a solution for my problem!! All help is appreciated.

[g808]

I used to suffer from the same symptoms when watching fast motion like sports. Once I switched to overlay from VMR9 things improved. Then I started to record my shows off a digital cable box instead of analog and that made a huge improvement. I couldn't believe the quality difference!

I never tried it earlier since I could hardly tell the difference between analog vs. digital when viewing from the signal source directly to my TV. However, captured content is noticeably better with digital. This makes complete sense, but I never thought to try it since, as I said, viewing directly from the signal source looked about the same.