> Trying to compensate for these edges would
> require extra
> silicon on the chips -> expensive!
>
> NB: does anyone have pointers on the techniques used for this
> de-jagging?
Hmmm, something that flashes into my mind (and I should probably patent it before I post it ;-)
Using full frames gives jaggies, using scaled fields gives lower resolution, but if the second field is scaled and offset, we would actually get a picture that is without jaggies and should appear to be full res!
And it would take virtually no processing power!
Maybe an ASCII graph show what I mean:
original:
field1 field2
1 2
3 4
5 6
---> time
progressive, full frame:
frame1 frame2
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
progressive, scaled fields, convetional:
frame1 frame2
1 2
1 2
3 4
3 4
5 6
5 6
progressive, scaled field, line offset
frame1 frame2
1
1 2
3 2
3 4
5 4
5 6
6
It should become obvious that the lines 1,2,3 are shown at the correct time AND close to the correct position than in sample 2.
Ignore me if I am completely off, or if this is done already anyways
