|
We're getting very technical here, maybe a kind mod can move this thread to the Tech board for discussion.
For me, HD is a description of an attainable visual quality level. SD is the visual quality level we've been used to for ages - what's been airing in the past, on TV, and on DVD. HD goes significantly beyond that.
What we have in this case is a 720x480 airing of a show which has clearly been mastered in HD resolution. This is fairly rare still and results in a quality which goes WAY BEYOND what we're used to for "normal" SD releases. Why? Because of the amount of detail retained. "Normal" SD releases offer much less of this detail, they are technically _also_ aired in 720x480, but they are also _captured_ in this format, adding all scanning errors, encoding artifacts and other forms of visual degradation to the result. HD-origin releases are then _downscaled_ to 720x480, this results in a totally different visual experience, because the problems from the SD capture are generally superseded by _downsize_ of a superior-quality original.
Technically, you're right of course - you can't "reinvent" the quality lost in the downsize. But you can keep things perfectly in check in a slight upscale (line thickness, clean gradients etc) to rescue most of the visual experience. If you have a SD-captured, SD-aired source, you can't. Here, "upscales" multiply all errors you had from the SD-capture, the picture looks blurry, and sharpening it back up doesn't yield much effect.
In practical terms, what matters more for the video encoder is not the AIRING resolution, but rather the CAPTURE resolution. And in return, the raw providers choose their resolutions exactly on the visual impression, NOT on the airing resolution.
So, if you decree that a "genuine" HD in your definition is only HD-mastered, HD-aired - fine, then this release is not. But you're doing the fans a great disservice, because even you will have to admit that the visual experience is _fundamentally_ different.
|