Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data

Metadata

Publisher: SMPTE — White Plains, NY
Doc Type: Conference Paper
Content Type: Original Research
Volume: 1999, No. 2, pp. 1–8
Abstract: Progressive scan is being favored over interlace by the computer industry and many proponents of video transmission systems because of the artifacts present in interlaced displays. The visibility of interlace artifacts depends on the acquisition method, the display, and viewing conditions. The perceived sharpness of an image is considerably less for an interlace image than for a progressive image. The reasons for these differences will be explained based on visual perception data. The differences in perceived sharpness will be quantified. All of the advantages of progressive scans can be realized with receiver signal processing of a standard interlaced transmission system as long as the originating camera and final display are in progressive format.
Publication Date: 1999-02-01
DOI: 10.5594/M00957
Link: https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957
Author(s): William E. Glenn
Copyright: © 1999 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, Inc.

Bibliographic Reference(s)

1. Ginsburg A.P. , “Visual Information Processing Based on Spatial Filters Constrained by Biological Data,” Air Force Aerospace Medical Research Lab Tech Report 1978 : AMRL-TR-78-129. EXTERNAL
2. DeValois R.L. DeValois K.K. , Spatial Vision , Oxford University Press , 1988 . EXTERNAL
3. Glenn W. E. Marcinka J. W. , “1920 × 1080 Pixel Color Camera with a Progressive Scan Output at 60 FPS,” SMPTE Journal , November 1998 . EXTERNAL
4. Glenn W.E. , “Compatible 1080P Display Using 1080I Transmission,” invited paper presented at SMPTE Technical Conference, Pasadena, CA, October 29, 1998 . EXTERNAL

Source Data (JSON)

Full registry record with provenance metadata. Open directly: /api/doc/10.5594-M00957.json

Reference Tree

Explore all references and references to this document, as a navigable tree.

Open Reference Tree

Reference this Doc

Plain text (ISO 690 compliant)

Preview:

William E. Glenn; Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957

Snippet:

William E. Glenn; Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957

HTML (ISO 690 compliant)

Preview:

William E. Glenn; Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999. Available at https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957

Snippet:

<span class="citation">William E. Glenn; <cite>Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data</cite>, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999. Available at <a href="https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957</a></span>

SMPTE's HTML Pub

Preview:

William E. Glenn; Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999
doi: 10.5594/M00957
url: https://doi.org/10.5594/M00957

Snippet:

<li>
William E. Glenn; <cite id="bib-10-5594-m00957">Interlace and Progressive Scan Comparisons Based on Visual Perception Data</cite>, SMPTE Meetings and Conferences ( February 1999); SMPTE, 1999
<span class="doi">10.5594/M00957</span>
</li>