[NecrosTerminus]

Well, yes. That’s why I suggested applying line2x to 480p, which would make 960p. My understanding is that the Framemeister has less of a problem scaling 960p to 1080p than it does 480p to 1080p.

I’ll confess to missing something here originally, because I was treating the 480p handling as an either/or situation between the two devices. 960p is such a strange resolution to me that I didn’t even consider that the Framemeister could handle that too. That certainly simplifies what I’m going for! You’re saying that taking the 480p signal through the OSSC’s line2x would bypass the Framemeister’s 480p scaling?

So if I understand the additional research I just did, I get the option on the Framemeister of either scaling 960p to 1080p + 1 frame of lag, or the option of letting the HDMI pass through the Framemeister (HDMI to HDMI) with no additional processing and no lag (pixel perfect) at the cost of horizontal borders. Either option sounds nice, especially with the 4K TV then taking the 960p or 1080p image and doubling it (I think). And then I could run my Analogue systems in 720p for further pixel perfect scaling, if losing the overscan areas ever bothered me in 1080p.

If I’m understanding this correctly, then it sounds like a combo of the OSSC and Framemeister is perfect for what I want, with no need to split the component signal. Thank you so much for clarifying for me, as well as explaining a bit more about why 480i over HDMI might not work.

[NecrosTerminus]

Unfortunately, if this LG FAQ page is representative of LG’s TVs, they do not allow 480i over HDMI.

That’s what I feared. How bizarre that 480i would be allowed through one signal but not another.

It is absolutely possible to do that, but, considering the equipment you’re looking at, it’s really only beneficial to split the signal if you’re using multiple displays (which you’re not) or if you absolutely need the no-lag processing of the OSSC over the 1-frame processing lag of the Framemeister.

If you can deal with the Framemeister’s processing lag, I think the most economical approach would be to use solely the Framemeister. You’ll just need a passive component->D-Terminal adapter.

If you can’t deal with the Framemeister’s 480p processing (Which I understand is not the best, but not as terrible as people have made it out to be), you could chain the OSSC into the Framemeister’s HDMI input, which should let you do line2x on 480p to 960p, passthrough on 480i, 720p, and 1080i on the OSSC, then have the Framemeister do deinterlacing and scaling to 1080p.

I don’t mind the one-frame of lag that much, though doing without is always great. You’re correct that it’s more about the 480p processing. What happens when you take the OSSC’s 480p signal and put it through the Framemeister? Wouldn’t it come out with the same flaws as any other 480p signal, plus added lag?

[Author]

Posts