| Author |
Message |
alyle5864
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 112
Location: Monroe, Wa
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:11 am Post subject: DILA resolution?? |
|
|
Does anyone know what the resolution for "DILA" is? My video processor list "DILA" as one of the scanrate outputs but I haven't a clue what it is.
_________________
I want to be like Curt when I grow up! Got no theater, all projectors broke.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mike calcott
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 307
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have a Taw Rock pro scaler which can output DILA resolutions, DILA standard is listed as 1365 by 1024
_________________
Old dog learning new tricks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alyle5864
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 112
Location: Monroe, Wa
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks
_________________
I want to be like Curt when I grow up! Got no theater, all projectors broke.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kwint Sommer
Joined: 04 Jun 2008
Posts: 31
Location: MIT
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mike calcott wrote: | | I have a Taw Rock pro scaler which can output DILA resolutions, DILA standard is listed as 1365 by 1024 |
I always wondered why PC's do 1280x1024 (5:4) rather than 1365x1024 (4:3). I don't suppose you know?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kwint Sommer wrote: | | mike calcott wrote: | | I have a Taw Rock pro scaler which can output DILA resolutions, DILA standard is listed as 1365 by 1024 |
I always wondered why PC's do 1280x1024 (5:4) rather than 1365x1024 (4:3). I don't suppose you know? |
There is no physical relationship between aspect ratio and resolution. Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. 1280x1024 can be any aspect ratio.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David_Web
Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 418
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While a pixel can be any aspect ratio you want it is generally considered to be square when it comes to PC until it is noted otherwise. Have you tried getting a PC to output non square pixels?
_________________
SNR of people are ridiculously low.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Kwint Sommer wrote: | | mike calcott wrote: | | I have a Taw Rock pro scaler which can output DILA resolutions, DILA standard is listed as 1365 by 1024 |
I always wondered why PC's do 1280x1024 (5:4) rather than 1365x1024 (4:3). I don't suppose you know? |
There is no physical relationship between aspect ratio and resolution. Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. 1280x1024 can be any aspect ratio. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clarence
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 3827
Location: Smith Mtn Lake, VA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. |
"completely" incorrect?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Clarence wrote: | | Person99 wrote: | | Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. |
"completely" incorrect? |
Yes. It is a black and white issue. A 16:9 plasma with a resolution of 1024x1024 is not a 1:1 AR! I can scale all my 16:9 content to 1280x1024 and show in a 16:9 raster with no problem.
But back to original comment, yes, there were 5:4 monitors. Here is one:
http://www.cheapstingybargains.com/50049/viewsonic-q91b-19in-54-5ms-lcd-monitor-retail-185-shipping/
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clarence
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 3827
Location: Smith Mtn Lake, VA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. |
"completely" incorrect?
And to prove your point you give an example of a very typical 1280x1024 5:4 display?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnalogRocks
Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 26706
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TV/Projector: Sony 1252Q, AMPRO 4000G
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lol
_________________
Tech support for nothing
CRT.
HD done right!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| David_Web wrote: | | While a pixel can be any aspect ratio you want it is generally considered to be square when it comes to PC until it is noted otherwise. Have you tried getting a PC to output non square pixels? |
The PC doesn't output "non square" or square pixels. The PC just outputs pixels. It's up to the display to shape them. The PC has zero concept of pixel size or shape.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Clarence wrote: | | Person99 wrote: | | Saying 1280x1024 is a 5:4 AR is completely incorrect. |
"completely" incorrect?
And to prove your point you give an example of a very typical 1280x1024 5:4 display? |
It is "common" for for pixels to be square, but not required. So, you could say that the commonality of this makes it a gray area, I'll give you that, but people so confuse this that I have to try to get them to disassociate them whenever possible. Call the "completely" hyperbole targeted at that goal.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clarence
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 3827
Location: Smith Mtn Lake, VA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | It is a black and white issue. |
| Person99 wrote: | | the commonality of this makes it a gray area |
Pretty soon you'll see it in full-color.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David_Web
Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 418
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not true.
Just about any app or OS is rendered with the assumption of square pixels.
Sure the hardware could not care less if the AR of the pixels it sends out. All up to the content. However doing any hardware 3D rendering or similar always assumes square pixels. It's not easy to get around that without scaling (ether pre or post rendering).
_________________
SNR of people are ridiculously low.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Man, this conversation is going south quickly. Get out now Dave !!!!!!! 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
