My Wii games look worse in HD

Singhson said:
hmmmmmmmmmmm, 1080i (interlaced) 1080p (progressive)
I hear the p's better than the i, is there a visible difference?
The "i" stands for "interlaced" and the "p" for "progressive" (in other words, non-interlaced). Interlaced means that in the first cycle, only every other line of the image frame is sent on the signal, then on the next cycle, the alternate lines are sent. So it takes two cycles to get the full image frame. 480 and 720 line resolutions can also be interlaced or progressive. Standard-def is 480i. The Wii can do 480p, but that's not "high def" since it's still only 480 lines of resolution. 480p requires component cables though and can't be displayed by standard TVs. High-def TVs can show 480p which incorrectly causes people to refer to 480p as "HD" when it's not. There are certain SD devices which can handle a progressive signal, such as some projectors.

A non-interlaced (progressive) signal will look a lot more-stable, especially during fast-motion video sequences. So much so, that many AV enthusiasts consider 720p to be superior to 1080i.

Upscaling requires considerable processing time. Before upscaling can take place, the image frame must be de-interlaced into the frame buffer. An interlaced signal will take twice as long to acquire that full de-interlaced frame. So a progressive signal is better for upscaling.

That said, the type of images sent by the Wii do not lend themselves well to upscaling algorithms. Since many HD TVs do the upscaling themselves, you might find you get better results by turning off the upscaling feature on the TV and instead do plain simple image zooming/magnification. Ironically, the fancier, more-expensive HDTVs are going to the be the ones with built-in upscaling (perhaps enabled by default), while the cheaper HDTVs will only offer zooming.
 
Back
Top