2012-06-28, 00:30
Actually I would have good topic for debating, if you need one 
See here for some example source (I tried to properly scale all dimensions). So the source is 720x304, xbmc finds the best fit resolution as 720x576 (grey one) and the TV screen is 1920x1080 (blue one). Case A) shows all these original dimensions:
Now, when xbmc was set to default VIEW_MODE_NORMAL the final picture on the TV was very narrow - something like case B) above. When the patch forced VIEW_MODE_WIDE_ZOOM, the picture was much better - something like C) above.
Maybe this is related to the way how AVR is processing the picture, or maybe there is more obvious explanation for somebody who knows xbmc better? Because it seems that when the original dimension 720x576 (grey box on A) is upscaled by AVR to 1920x1080, we should already land in something like C), without any special upscaling on xbmc side? So the need for upscaling was something obvious for me at the beginning, but it is less and less obvious when I'm thinking about it more and more...
See here for some example source (I tried to properly scale all dimensions). So the source is 720x304, xbmc finds the best fit resolution as 720x576 (grey one) and the TV screen is 1920x1080 (blue one). Case A) shows all these original dimensions:
Now, when xbmc was set to default VIEW_MODE_NORMAL the final picture on the TV was very narrow - something like case B) above. When the patch forced VIEW_MODE_WIDE_ZOOM, the picture was much better - something like C) above.
Maybe this is related to the way how AVR is processing the picture, or maybe there is more obvious explanation for somebody who knows xbmc better? Because it seems that when the original dimension 720x576 (grey box on A) is upscaled by AVR to 1920x1080, we should already land in something like C), without any special upscaling on xbmc side? So the need for upscaling was something obvious for me at the beginning, but it is less and less obvious when I'm thinking about it more and more...
