I’m not sure how meaningful (if at all) the comparison was since it’s flawed from the beginning.
A natively 1920x1080 picture down-converted to 1280x720 compared with a native 1280x720 picture is almost pointless since a lot of the data for the 1080 content would have been lost while the 720 content never would have had them to begin with.
Another way of thinking about it is to take an HD program, down convert it to 480p and compare it with a 480p DVD… you’ll be hard pressed to see much of a difference between the two although there would definitely be a difference if compared without the down sampling of the HD program.
“Getting too close completely blurred what we saw to the point of incomprehension, but again, this shows a whole heap of potential that's fascinating to us.â€
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I’m not sure how meaningful (if at all) the comparison was since it’s flawed from the beginning.
A natively 1920x1080 picture down-converted to 1280x720 compared with a native 1280x720 picture is almost pointless since a lot of the data for the 1080 content would have been lost while the 720 content never would have had them to begin with.
Another way of thinking about it is to take an HD program, down convert it to 480p and compare it with a 480p DVD… you’ll be hard pressed to see much of a difference between the two although there would definitely be a difference if compared without the down sampling of the HD program.