-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
Babylon 5 and HD...
- Thread starter darth_librarian
- Start date
Jade Jaguar
Regular
Because with 480p you have twice as much information.
I'm sorry, I didn't word my question as clearly as I should have.
I meant to ask, why would the 480p CGI retain more info than the one natively rendered in 480i. If you mean 480p60, then after transferring it to a 480i60 format, it is going to look exactly the same as natively rendered 480i CGI with field rendering enabled. Only with half of the information discarded.
If it was rendered in 480p30, it would look exactly the same as non field rendered 480i60 CGI.
I'm afraid I can't find anywhere if the B5 CGI was initially done with field rendering, but maybe b4bob knows.
Lightwave can render 30fps with either field rendering on or off. "Off" would essentially mean 30p, and "on" would mean 60i. Something rendered with no field rendering (that is to say progressively) would look slightly different that something rendered with field rendering on (interlaced).
There is very slight motion possible between fields if the image is originally created in an interlaced format, in this case rendered in 60i. This is what I mean by the "video like motion look." If the CG frames had been rendered in 30p, there would have been no motion between fields possible. When finally transferred and then broadcast via NTSC at 60i, even though each rendered frame would be displayed via alternating fields, they would still be displaying one frame. This what I mean. If rendered at 30p, motion would have been possible between frames, but not between fields. If rendered at 60i, motion would have been possible between frames AND fields. This motion between fields is the "video-like motion look" I'm referring to.
There is very slight motion possible between fields if the image is originally created in an interlaced format, in this case rendered in 60i. This is what I mean by the "video like motion look." If the CG frames had been rendered in 30p, there would have been no motion between fields possible. When finally transferred and then broadcast via NTSC at 60i, even though each rendered frame would be displayed via alternating fields, they would still be displaying one frame. This what I mean. If rendered at 30p, motion would have been possible between frames, but not between fields. If rendered at 60i, motion would have been possible between frames AND fields. This motion between fields is the "video-like motion look" I'm referring to.
But I got what you were saying by post "#369795 - 09/10/06 06:00 PM".Joseph DeMartino
Moderator
Well, it's a Family Guy "gag" based on actual moronic phone calls that Stern fans constantly make to other radio shows, where they pretend to want to talk about whatever topic is being discussed to get past the call-screener, and then say pretty much what Family Guy depicts them as saying. Larry King Live has been caught by these jackasses a couple of times. Physicists are still puzzled that the stupidity of Stern fans added to the inanity and vacuity of Larry King didn't produce a mega blackhole of suck so bad that the entire universe collapesd into it. Guess we got lucky. If King ever gets one of those calls while hosting, say, Paris Hilton, we've all had it for sure.
Regards,
Joe
Jade Jaguar
Regular
It happened a few years back, and we've all been living in an alternate universe ever since. I can't remember who he was hosting at the time, the event was too disorienting.
