I'm using divx4psp to do the conversion and its really great. I downloaded some 720p video from microsoft website and convert it to 720p ps3 mp4 and it looks awesome.

Yes, i have try PS3 Video 9. Its not good as the conversion option is very limted and the video quality is poor.

Try divx4psp which can convert to PS3 too and it has more advance features which you can choose from such as 3 pass advance and you can sellect the video bitrate all the way to 9000 which is superb. I have convert a bunch of HD video from WMV HD Content and they are really nice to show off the PS3 HD video capabilities. Somemore the video content is very nice taken from IMAX documentary.

For those who have 1080P tv the website even has 1080p trailers from IMAX.

You can download it here XVID4PSP

---

Added on April 24, 2007, 11:17 amjust use Xvid4psp to convert all your video and place it in the PS3 HDD or any external HDD and you can enjoy beautiful and smooth video up to 1080P.

Downside is you need to convert it to MP4 but I convert 1 or 2 video everyday...

This post has been edited by lightning69: Apr 24 2007, 11:17 AM

Yes, you can convert to 1080P and some beautiful 1080p video clips can be found in WMD HD sites.

I haven't try convert normal DVD to 720p.

Sorry, its WMV HD which stands for Microsoft Media Movie HD and it has 720p and 1080p trailiers for download

You need to format your drive to fat32 only. Ps3 wil not work with NTFS!!!

go here to download free fat32 format program fat32

btw, what size HDD are u using? What ext HDD case you use?



This post has been edited by lightning69: Apr 25 2007, 10:33 PM

What is the fuss about 1080P? Honestly I don't think anyone can tell the difference between 1080P and 720P on monitor sizes below 50". And if there is any differences between 1080P, it would be so small that you would really have to go so close and examine it pixel by pixel to see it.

So it is really not justifiable to buy a 1080P monitor or Tv just for 1080P due to the steep price of 1080P set. I would rather go for a 720P set with larger screen and still have have some more money to buy a XBOX360. In the end its about playing games and not trying to examine closely to see a little bit of graphic improvement.

Most of the people can't tell the difference. Just see this post XBOX360

You are playing on a PC monitor like 2 feet away. On the tv where you sit 10 feet away, your eyes won't be able to tell the difference.

But the bottom line in that review is that 1080P is no different from 720P or the difference is so minimal. Now I'm not saying that 1080P is useless. What i'm saying is that the double in price between 1080P is not justifiable (at least for now) just for the differential in quality that you will be able to see which is so little that you have to get so close and really examine the 2 screen comparison to tell. When you are actually playing the game I can tell you that you just won't notice any difference at all.

And when I talk about double in price, its not like RM500 difference. At 42 inch 720P set is about RM7k but a 1080P set is about RM15k. The RM7k just for that little difference is just not worth it. Like I mention previosly that I would rather get a bigger set such as 50" LCD and still have plenty of money left for a new home theater set and probably an XBOX360 with some spare change for a few more games. Of course if you have too much money, then by all means go for the 1080P but most of us here live by our paycheck with little to spare.

I am not trying to start a debate here...just my opinion why most of us should not rush out and get 1080P set. And for those of us who have 720p Tv , don't worry too much because you are still able to enjoy as much details as the 1080P friends are.

What that paragraph is saying is that they don't see any difference between 1080P and 720P during their test and what more if you you are only having 720P set, then both HDMI or component will yield the same results.

Of course there is a difference between 1080P and 720P as 1080P has higher resolutions. But at normal viewing distance that differences in resolutions disappear as our eyes can't tell the differences.

Maybe you have super eyesight or the law of physics don't exist in your living room!!! Or maybe you spend so much more money that you would go to the extend to get so near your tv to see the differences just to make you feel better and not guilty for wasting the dollar for nothing!

The difference you see is because your monitor's native resolution is 1080 x1920 or something close to that and any resolution below that would result in inferior image not because 720p is inferior but because your monitor won't display them properly. If you were to compare a 720P Tv with native resolution of 720 x 1280 and a 1080P tv with native resolution 1080 x 1920 at proper viewing distance, then most people would not see much differences at all.

So don't think that even at 24" lcd monitor you can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. The difference you see is due to your lcd monitor not able to render 720p resolution properly because its not its native resolution and thats all.


This post has been edited by lightning69: Apr 29 2007, 05:34 PM

You don't get the point do you and I'm not going in circles. I have told you there is a difference if you were go CAREFULLY examine them, but that differences quickly disappear as you move further away from the screen and eventually you won't be able to tell the difference at all after some distance. And for the price you pay for the small difference is just not worth it now.

Just put it this way...most of us don't NEED 1080p because of the price vs benefit you get, but everyone of us WANT it if we can afford it.

Clarifying Thoughts on High Definition Game Rendering

I was talking to Bruce Dawson, one of our senior software design engineers here, about some questions I had around 1080i and 1080p. Frankly, I was particularly curious about why Sony has continued harping on 1080p as being "TrueHD", especially since the 360 has enabled 1080p output as well (coming soon to homes near you!) I was trying to figure out if I was just missing something, and his emailed answer was particularly clear and helpful to me, and since there's nothing confidential here I thought I'd share it with you.

The really interesting statistic that popped for me is how much less time a game console has to render a 1920x1080 scene versus a 1280x720 scene. (Remember this is on the same console, whichever one you like. This is not a comparison of different console's rendering capabilities to each other.) Simply put, for a 1080i/p game the console has 55% less time per pixel to render any special effects, anti-aliasing, illumination, etc. than for a 720p game. Yes, even Resistance has fallen off the bandwagon and admitted they can't hit 1080i/p as previously claimed. (It also helps explain why Gran Turismo HD is so underwhelming.)

Anyway, Bruce's text is below. Hope it helps clarify a few things for you!

Many developers, gamers, and journalists are confused by 1080p. They think that 1080p is somehow more challenging for game developers than 1080i, and they forget that 1080 (i or p) requires significant tradeoffs compared to 720p. Some facts to remember:

* 2.25x: that's how many more pixels there are in 1920x1080 compared to 1280x720
* 55.5%: that's how much less time you have to spend on each pixel when rendering 1920x1080 compared to 1280x720-the point being that at higher resolutions you have more pixels, but they necessarily can't look as good
* 1.0x: that's how much harder it is for a game engine to render a game in 1080p as compared to 1080i-the number of pixels is identical so the cost is identical
There is no such thing as a 1080p frame buffer. The frame buffer is 1080 pixels tall (and presumably 1920 wide) regardless of whether it is ultimately sent to the TV as an interlaced or as a progressive signal.
* 1280x720 with 4x AA will generally look better than 1920x1080 with no anti-aliasing (there are more total samples).

A few elaborations:

Any game could be made to run at 1920x1080. However, it is a tradeoff. It means that you can show more detail (although you need larger textures and models to really get this benefit) but it means that you have much less time to run complex pixel shaders. Most games can't justify running at higher than 1280x720-it would actually make them look worse because of the compromises they will have to make in other areas.

1080p is a higher bandwidth connection from the frame buffer to the TV than 1080i. However the frame buffer itself is identical. 1080p will look better than 1080i-interlaced flicker is not a good thing-but it makes precisely zero difference to the game developer. Just as most Xbox 1 games let users choose 480i or 480p, because it was no extra work, 1080p versus 1080i is no extra work. It's just different settings on the display chip.

Inevitably somebody will ask about field rendering. Since interlaced formats display the even lines on one refresh pass and then the odd lines on the next refresh pass, can't games just render half of the lines each time? Probably not, and even if you could you wouldn't want to. You probably can't do field rendering because it requires that you maintain a rock solid 60 fps. If you ever miss a frame it will look horrible, as the odd lines are displayed in place of the even, or vice-versa. This is a significant challenge when rendering extremely complex worlds with over 1 million pixels per field (2 million pixels per frame) and is probably not worth it. And, even if you can, you shouldn't. The biggest problem with interlaced is flicker, and field rendering makes it worse, because it disables the 'flicker fixer' hardware that intelligently blends adjacent lines. Field rendering has been done in the past, but it was always a compromise solution.

It doesn't prove anything as Microsoft is simply trying to prove the can do what sony can do and there is no games for that XBOX360 currently that run at 1080P and even if it does one day deosn't mean that it is technically superior than the 720p games.

Till the day 1080p display becomes more affordable, 720p is will be the more viable option.

---

Added on April 29, 2007, 9:53 pmbenefits is only part of the equation but don't forget the cost. Just look at the Wii which is so much inferior in processing power and don't even support HD but reign supreme now.

I'm happy with my 32" 720p display which I pay RM2500 only and gets the job done perfectly. Maybe i might use the extra money i have to buy a Wii and a 360 eventually and really enjoy more games than having a slight grahpical edge that 1080p Tv has to offer now. That is what I call true BENIFITS.

This post has been edited by lightning69: Apr 29 2007, 09:53 PM

Anyone try NBA homecourt yet? looks like a great game. Is there a demo available for Homecourt?

This post has been edited by lightning69: Apr 30 2007, 12:00 AM

How is it? Graphic excellent?

anyone can tell me where I can get a USB converter for PS2 dualshock to be use on PS3?

This very nice....you know how much is it?

---

Added on May 3, 2007, 5:14 pmThis very nice....you know how much is it?

---

Added on May 3, 2007, 5:15 pmThis very nice....you know how much is it?

This post has been edited by lightning69: May 3 2007, 05:15 PM

I'm using a HD CRT TV too. I bought mine from China and the brand is Skyworth. Its got a Toshiba HD CRT tube that supports 420p, 720p, 1080i and the picture quality is beautiful. I also bought a DVD player that can upscale to 720p and 1080i and its cool.

---

Added on May 5, 2007, 8:39 amI think better get XBOX360 lah. I have a little regret getting the PS3 because no pasar malam games and most game also available on the XBOX360. Somemore XBOX360 cheaper. Just my opinion.

This post has been edited by lightning69: May 5 2007, 08:39 AM

I just bought a compact canon camera TX1 that can shoot video in 720P and it cost only RM1750. Now I can shoot video of my girl and my wife in 720p glory and convert it to MP4 to playback on my PS3.