first pics of a games on Nintendo Revolution

[laurentius]

Originally posted by Asher

Huh?

1080i is 1080 lines of resolution (1920x1080), the same as 1080p.

The difference is it takes 2 fields to paint a single frame (so 60 fields for 30 frames). 1080p30 takes 1 field to paint a single frame, for 30 frames.

There is no difference at all between the two -- a simple accumulationbuffer in 1080i can just display every-other-frame and display the exact same picture as 1080p30.

What is the problem here? You basicly just confirmed what I said...

1080/2 is 540.

One frame is made by two fields ->

[Asher]

But what you're saying is just, simply retarded.

Yes, each field is 540 lines of data, but why the hell does that matter?

The image resolution is 1920x1080, with 30 frames per second. The exact same as 1080p30.

The image format of [blah]i or [blah]p, where [blah] is the lines of vertical resolution and i means interlaced and p means progressive. Saying "1080i is 540i" is nonsensical, and just downright stupid.

[laurentius]

The 190x1080i image is 2 fields combined so one fields resolution is effectively 540i. Do I have to spell it out for you?

Also 1080i isnt necessary equivalent to 1080p30 wich is what you said in the first place.

Why are we even on this? Revolutions going to be one hell of a machine and thats what matters.

[Asher]

Because you said something incredibly stupid.

And you still don't get it.

540i means the full frame's resolution is 540 split across two interlaced field. What you said makes no sense at all.

And yes, 1080i is exactly identical to 1080p30. Both provide 30 frames per second, 1080i does it with 60 fields and 1080p does it with 30. If you buffer the 1080i fields and display it only 30 times (with the resolved full screen) -- as LCDs do -- then you've got a 1080p30 picture.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by Asher
Because you said something incredibly stupid.

And you still don't get it.

540i means the full frame's resolution is 540 split across two interlaced field. What you said makes no sense at all.

And yes, 1080i is exactly identical to 1080p30. Both provide 30 frames per second, 1080i does it with 60 fields and 1080p does it with 30. If you buffer the 1080i fields and display it only 30 times (with the resolved full screen) -- as LCDs do -- then you've got a 1080p30 picture.

*sigh*

Since my English skills are obviously insufficient to bend this for you clearly enough maybe you'll believe/understand this better.

The Interlacers did the math differently. Since interlacing only transmits alternate lines, they only had to include half of the lines in their calculations. That worked out to 1920x540. This is sometimes called 1080i, the i meaning interlace. Some Progressives think it should have been called 540i.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-TBPekxc1dLNy5DOloPfzVvFIVOWMB0li?p=317

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by laurentius



The 190x1080i image is 2 fields combined so one fields resolution is effectively 540i. Do I have to spell it out for you?

You're a ****ing idiot.

If it's operating at twice the speed of the progressive picture then the resolution and framecount displayed is exactly the same.

[KrazyHorse]

If I send half the picture twice as fast then it's the same as getting the whole picture at single speed.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


You're a ****ing idiot.

And what the **** did you get so worked up about. Is it the Team Canada again!? Will you now get a bj from Asher?

Learn some goddamn manners, kid.

[Asher]

I'm not sure if this analogy would help, but think of it like a 1-bit bus @ 60Hz vs a 2-bit bus @ 30Hz.

Both transmit the same data in the same amount time and are equivalent.

When people talk of 1080p, they are talking about 1080p60. 1080p30 is really just 1080i with a buffer, it is nothing new and has no advantages over 1080i.

[Asher]

Originally posted by laurentius
*sigh*

Since my English skills are obviously insufficient to bend this for you clearly enough maybe you'll believe/understand this better.

The Interlacers did the math differently. Since interlacing only transmits alternate lines, they only had to include half of the lines in their calculations. That worked out to 1920x540. This is sometimes called 1080i, the i meaning interlace. Some Progressives think it should have been called 540i.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-TBPek...VOWMB0li?p=317

That person is an idiot.

The frames in 480i are 640x480 in size.
The frames in 480p are 640x480 in size.
The frames in 720p are 1280x720 in size.
The frames in 1080i are 1920x1080 in size.
The frames in 1080p are 1920x1080 in size.

The fields in 480i are 640x240 in size, sent 60 times per second and resolved to give 30 frames per second over 60 fields.
The fields in 480p are 640x480 in size, sent 30 or 60 times per second.
The fields in 1080i are 1920x540 in size, sent 60 times per second and resolved to give 30 frames per second over 60 fields.
The fields in 1080p30 are 1920x1080 in size, sent 30 times per second.
Both of the above are equivalent methods of reproducing the exact same image.
The fields in 1080p60 are 1920x1080 in size, sent 60 times per second.

I don't understand why this is a difficult concept for you. That blogger was incorrect, because "540i" would imply a resolution of 1920x540 sent interlaced, which is not true. The resolution is 1920x1080, which is why it's 1080i....

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by laurentius


And what the **** did you get so worked up about. Is it the Team Canada again!? Will you now get a bj from Asher?

Learn some goddamn manners, kid.

Learn some goddamn math.