|
1080i vs 720p
|
|
Member
|
30. March 2007 @ 01:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
or Find a shop that has both and compaire yourself, just make sure that use the same input. they normaly only put the top of the range TV on the HD input demo, and the rest on SD tv.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
neoteny
Newbie
|
26. April 2007 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
Don't go by what you see in the store. Higher priced TVs are always adjusted to look better than lower priced TVs. The signals are crap at best and adjusted, too. Unless, you take the time to adjust every TV, you can't make any comparison. Besides unless you had a HDTV already at home, you wouldn't really know what to look for anyway. Go by the numbers, native resolution can't be faked, and everything is converted to this for LCD and Plasma otherwise the TV will really look like crap and possiblLy damage it, too. Most of the HD footage loops used is old and has problems in the footage. Old HD cameras looked really good when things moved slowly but didn't have the response time to deal with alot of action. Watch something new and beware of sales people trying to it is a difference in tv quality playing diffenrent footage. 720p was some crap they made up for LCDs and Plasmas native resolution of 1300 * 768 and tried to call it HDTV. HDTV starts at 1080 lines. Its the lines that matter not the pixels bandwitdth. there is about two million pixels in full frame of 1080 * 1920 and about one million in 720 * 1360 full frame. So, 1080 has twice the resolution and 360 more lines than 720, your eye can't see the interlacing. Nobody broadcast in 720p anyway because it uses the same bandwidth as HDTV with less resolution and lines.
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. April 2007 @ 11:43 |
Link to this message
|
neoteny, I have to respectfully disagree with you on several points.
Quote:
Don't go by what you see in the store. Higher priced TVs are always adjusted to look better than lower priced TVs.
I work at a Best Buy and can confirm that there is no tweaking done to the tvs (by professionals anyway) to make them look better or worse. Most of the tweaking is done by customers to try to make them all look alike. They always fail because every tv (literally) is different.
The only way for a non professional to calibrate a tv is to buy a calibration DVD like Digital Video Essentials (DVE). Its not about what you like its about what the producers/directors intend.
Quote:
Old HD cameras looked really good when things moved slowly but didn't have the response time to deal with alot of action. Watch something new and beware of sales people trying to it is a difference in tv quality playing diffenrent footage.
There are many reasons for different video characteristics. The largest reason is the difference a good video processor can make. Processors in products on a store shelf can range from $10 to $300 or more. Price isn't always a good determination of performance but it is a good place to start.
Quote:
720p was some crap they made up for LCDs and Plasmas native resolution of 1300 * 768 and tried to call it HDTV. HDTV starts at 1080 lines. Its the lines that matter not the pixels bandwitdth.
First your loosing credibility with this statement. High-definition comes in many flavors. It started with Big Rear projection CRTs at the end of the '90ies. They are 1080i sets (1920x1080 interlaced) meaning that they have 540 lines per field (there are two frames in each 1/60 frame, NTSC/ATSC). Then came the push for Progressive scan. All the newer TV technologies are inherently Progressive scan.
LCD, DLP, PDP, and LCoS (including 3-chip LCoS technology: SXRD and H-Dila) are all classified as Fixed Pixel Displays (FPD). They have pixels that are active at all times. The amount of fixed pixels that are always on plus the aspect ratio defines the TV sets Native Resolution.
In most cases the TV sets native resolution is 720p (1280x720p) with has 720 pixels for an entire frame (instead of 540 per field). Put that with Progressive scans ability to handle motion better and you will find that 720p gives people a higher perceived resolution than a 1080i set does.
In the last couple of years there has been a push toward 1080p as it combines the detail of a 1080i set and the speed handling of a 720p set.
With all that said, what you feed your tv and how you feed it will play a larger role in determining what the picture looks like than anything. A 1080p tv with a decent video processor being fed a 1080i signal at low bit-rate will look worse than that same tv being fed the same material at a high bit-rate. That is why Discovery HD Theater's Atlas series looks great but looks even better on HD DVD and Blu-ray!
Quote:
So, 1080 has twice the resolution and 360 more lines than 720, your eye can't see the interlacing. Nobody broadcast in 720p anyway because it uses the same bandwidth as HDTV with less resolution and lines.
Now your just wrong. Yes 1080p has twice the resolution of 720p (both at 60fps anyway) but 1080i in broadcast and 1080i in a CRT TV are different. Sports broadcasters like Fox sports and ESPN broadcast at 720p because it handles motion better than 1080i does (720p requires less video processing but there is less overall detail). The only (and the majority of) broadcasters, that don't specialize in a lot of high speed sports, broadcast at 1080i/30fps. They do so because they capture there sitcoms, dramas, or whatever at 1080p/24fps to make them more cinematic. To save bandwidth they interlace the 1080p/24 signal into 1080i/30. They are able to broadcast at 1080i/30 because a decent video processor should be able to recognize the movie cadence of 3:2 and have no problems reproducing 1080p/24 Progressive frames from the 1080i/30 signal. Sadly a lot of cheap video processors in TVs don't have the muscle to do 3:2 pull-down correctly (especially with high def programming).
Feel free to ask any applicable question nothing is taboo,
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. April 2007 @ 13:10
|
|
Bo_Hagan
Newbie
|
27. April 2007 @ 06:54 |
Link to this message
|
with your guyses logic i could have a TV with 40x20 pixles at 6000 fps and it would look the best...
"Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing-the result."
Vince Lombardi
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. April 2007 @ 11:21 |
Link to this message
|
What? Who said that? HD_Nut says something like that but no where near that extreme. But is why I disagree with him. You can't see any color gradients at 40x20p@6000fps. :)
Frame Rates do play a role. But you need about 24-30 to simulate motion. a picture displayed at a multiple will look smoother than a frame rate that can not be divided by the original source number.
For example, Movies are shot at 24fps but most tvs are refreshed at 60 fps (NTSC/ATSC). So some projectors and HDTVs can change there display refresh rate to 48 (or 24 times 2) or 72 (or 24 times 3) so that jitter is no an issue.
Similarly 30fps content can be shown at 60Hz and 90Hz for increased realism. There are even a couple of 120Hz displays out there so that 60fps source material can be smoothed out.
The best available resolution right now is 4K@48-60fps (or 2160x4096 at 48/60 frames per second). At 5K-6K your eyes begin to question reality!
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. April 2007 @ 11:35
|
|
adyau
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
18. September 2007 @ 01:56 |
Link to this message
|
so whats the best on ps3 1080 i or 720p as my tv doesnt go up to 1080p thanks ady
1st psp ta082 2.71-1.50-3.03oethis is my 8yr olds
2ndpsp 2.00 .2.71 -1.50-2.00.1.50-303oe,340oe,mine
|
|
morguex
Account closed as per user's own request
|
18. September 2007 @ 12:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
I learned alot reading this post, but I look at this way, whatever looks best to you is perfect for you, The rest is all crap.
720p/1080p/1080i who cares, it's what you like that matters.
Just sit back and enjoy, thats all that matters in the end.
Kinda reminds of these audiophiles who claim they can hear the hi-hat roll off to early @ 14.526 khz on a set of B & W 801's, BULL YOU CAN.
Peace all
If I can't sense time, How can I heal?
Why am I in this precorpse state?
|
|
tleewade
Junior Member
|
19. September 2007 @ 07:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
in regular tv smaller is sharper and brighter. bigger is duller . looks like hd would do the same maybe maybe not.
|
|
Paddawan
Newbie
|
8. October 2007 @ 20:50 |
Link to this message
|
"HD_nut
Member
20. December 2006 @ 17:47 Link to this message
To answer your question, if all signals were in 1080i I would still get the 768p set, because I would have to sit closer to the set to see the benefits of 1080p. I sit at an average distance, about 10 feet, because of the pixel size you should see a better picture with 768 at about 10 feet.
I seen how the Sony XBR cross converts to 768p, it's amazing."
True or False
more picture quality is lost in a cross conversition than in "losing" some pixels because they are to small to see at 10 feet.
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
9. October 2007 @ 03:27 |
Link to this message
|
Not not really, it's what they call wasted resolution...
"The average 42-inch-diagonal, 1,280-by-720 plasma or LCD display has pixels that are roughly 0.029 inches wide. (Of course, each model has different inter-pixel spacing, but, for now, we'll assume they don't.) If the same size display had a resolution of 1,920 by 1,080, the pixels would be 0.019 inches wide. As you can see, in a 42-inch display at a distance of 10 feet, your eye can't discern the resolution available even with 720p. Even more resolution is "wasted" at 1,920 by 1,080."
http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoff...n//index1.html
"For example, despite the fact that a 37-inch LCD with "only" 1,366x768 pixels has to throw away a good deal of information to display a 1080i football game on CBS, you'd be hard-pressed to see more detail on a similar 37-inch LCD with 1,920x1,080 resolution.
Your eyes would never have seen it, so if you have a good conversion chip, you will see a nice 768p signal.
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
Paddawan
Newbie
|
9. October 2007 @ 05:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just to recap then
LESS picture quality is lost in a cross conversition than in "WASTED" pixels because they are to small to see at 10 feet.
What is your opinon TRUE or FAlse
|
|
Paddawan
Newbie
|
10. October 2007 @ 09:46 |
Link to this message
|
Maybe put another way:
you had 2 42" TVs, one 720P one 1080P and everything else is the same. You have to sit at 10 feet away.
all you have is 1080i and 108024p source coming in.
what TV are you going to choose.
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
10. October 2007 @ 10:54 |
Link to this message
|
Paddawan:
It's obvious from all your posts that you're trying to justify that buying a 720p HDTV is fine for you. Look at it this way:
If you buy a 720p set - there will always be a nagging doubt in your head that "Maybe I should have bought that 1080p model." There is no way you can resolve this.
Here's my suggestion:
Forget about all you've read. Forget about viewing distances, resolution graphs etc.
Just get the 1080p model, sit wherever you like and put your mind at rest.
The extra that you pay for the 1080p model may not give you a better picture but it will give you peace of mind.
|
|
Paddawan
Newbie
|
10. October 2007 @ 11:15 |
Link to this message
|
I am not trying to justify buying a 720P TV.
I am trying to see if HD_nut thinks a 720P set LOOKS better than a 1080P set in the situation I posted.
to me it seems clear that "wasted" resolution is not as bad as scaling the video, even on the best consumer scaler.
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
10. October 2007 @ 13:59 |
Link to this message
|
I'll put it this way then I'll leave this thread be, once you have HD you have HD, in the tests they have concluded it was practically impossible to see the difference.
However, for my own experience, the best looking broadcasts I have seen are on the 720p networks, mainly ABC.
This is because my set is in the progressive 700's.
I have noticed a drop in quality when a 1080i signal is converted to the 768p set. But I have noticed the opposite when I had a 1080 set, the 720p signals didn't look as good as the 1080i ones did.
This has to do with the signal matching the native resolution of the set.
You have to evaluate what you watch. If you watch a lot of ESPN, you may want to go with a 768p set. If you like a lot of ABC and FOX programming you may want to go with 768p as well.
720p networks are
ABC
FOX
ESPN
ESPN 2
I think all the other HD networks are 1080i or mostly 1080i.
I like the 768p sets, I like the progressive signal to be progressive from the start rather than it be mended together from 2 interlaced fields. Such as 1080i on a 1080p set. The 720p signals appear to be much better on 720/768p sets than on the 1080p sets.
1080p sets have over 1 million filler gaps to make up when a 720p signal hits the set. Again, you have to evaluate what you watch most of. 720p signals can go as high a 60 frames per second, were 1080s frame rate is half of that. This is why ESPN went 720p. 60 frames has better motion quality.
There is also and advantage in the up conversion of standard DVD when asking it to go to 1 million (720p) pixels rather than 2 million. The upscale has less of a climb. Because the 768p sets convert the 1080 signals to the max resolution of the eyes in most normal conditions, and because of it's up scaling quality, I like the 768p sets overall feature for feature, although I realize there is some scaling noise in the conversion of 1080i signals. Also I like the 720p signal better than 1080i.
However, my experience with 1080p HD DVD has been fantastic. Since the disks are in 1080p, a progressive format, I set the HD DVD player to 720p. This is to keep it in the progressive zone, rather than interlace it, only to have the sets conversion chip display back to a progressive mode.
For what ever this is worth, I rather watch 720p on 720p/768p set, than watch 720p on a 1080p set.
And I rather view 720p on a 720p/768 set rather than watch 1080i on a 1080p set. But that's me.
Both sets advantages over the another depending on the situation and the signal.
Both are great sets.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. October 2007 @ 14:29
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. October 2007 @ 05:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
good info HD_nut
Antec 1200 Full-Tower Case/Thermaltake 750-Watt PS/ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 Mobo/Western Digital Black WD500 500GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache/NVIDIA GeForce 8800GTX 384-bit GDDR3 PCI Express Video Card/CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 16GB DDR3 /Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge 3.5GHz (3.9GHz Turbo)/CORSAIR Hydro High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler/3-Asus DRW-24B1ST Sata Drives/Samsung 2493HM 24" LCD Monitior 1920x1200 resolution,5ms respone time/OS Windows 10 Pro SP1 64-bit
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. November 2007 @ 13:44
|
|
kevinfan
Newbie
|
10. November 2007 @ 13:27 |
Link to this message
|
I don't really have a bone to pick in this issue, but I'm looking for a TV to buy soon..
All I know is that 1080p is more expensive, but if I go into a store and compare a 1080p and a 720p side by side, the 1080p looks MUCH sharper and more detailed.
I'm planning on getting a 50 inch plasma for my room which is 10x10 ft. So should I go with 1080p or 720p? I am NOT watching tv on it, only movies (DVDs and VHSs).
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
10. November 2007 @ 13:43 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I'm planning on getting a 50 inch plasma for my room which is 10x10 ft. So should I go with 1080p or 720p? I am NOT watching tv on it, only movies (DVDs and VHSs).
I would go with the newest tech which would be the 1080p even though you really can't tell a difference unless you set about 3 feet from the set.
what braands are you looking at? Sony and Samsung are tops
Antec 1200 Full-Tower Case/Thermaltake 750-Watt PS/ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 Mobo/Western Digital Black WD500 500GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache/NVIDIA GeForce 8800GTX 384-bit GDDR3 PCI Express Video Card/CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 16GB DDR3 /Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge 3.5GHz (3.9GHz Turbo)/CORSAIR Hydro High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler/3-Asus DRW-24B1ST Sata Drives/Samsung 2493HM 24" LCD Monitior 1920x1200 resolution,5ms respone time/OS Windows 10 Pro SP1 64-bit
|
|
kevinfan
Newbie
|
10. November 2007 @ 15:31 |
Link to this message
|
I read in another thread that Panasonic is one of the top brands in HDTVs.
I was thinking either Hitachi or Panasonic or maybe something equivalent.
Like I said, I can tell the difference between a 1080p and a 720p side by side if I'm 10 ft away. There's a MAJOR difference in picture clarity.
|
|
Telejesus
Newbie
1 product review
|
11. November 2007 @ 11:41 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by kevinfan:
I read in another thread that Panasonic is one of the top brands in HDTVs.
I was thinking either Hitachi or Panasonic or maybe something equivalent.
Like I said, I can tell the difference between a 1080p and a 720p side by side if I'm 10 ft away. There's a MAJOR difference in picture clarity.
If you are watching DVD's and VHS you don't see any differense between 720p and FullHD TV. Or then the resolution is not the issue. Coz you are watching DVD and thats only 720×480 on NTSC , while a PAL DVD is 720×576 so either way you may see what TV has best upconversion technology. When you watch FullHD material 1920x1080 then the picture quality is whole different thing.
If you are in store and, all (almost all) TV channels broadcast 1080i material and you are watching bigger than 40"-42" TV then you see the difference easily.
But some 720p TV could easily outshine 1080p TV in DVD playback. Its all about what you are watching with your TV.
Telejeesus
http://piirit.sytes.net (yleistä tietoa,ei mainos-sivu)
XBOX MODAAJA/KORJAAJA, myös piirit ja UUDET XBOXIT.
SUOMEN HALVIMMAT HINNAT. |
|
tleewade
Junior Member
|
11. November 2007 @ 13:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
some of us can see good and dont need a large tv set. a lot of dont have room for large sets ' and dont want them if we did .
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. November 2007 @ 13:55 |
Link to this message
|
the HD picture on my Sony SXRD 60" is pretty amazing . I'm using a rooftop antenna for the HD signal but the normal cable signal doesn't look so good
Antec 1200 Full-Tower Case/Thermaltake 750-Watt PS/ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 Mobo/Western Digital Black WD500 500GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache/NVIDIA GeForce 8800GTX 384-bit GDDR3 PCI Express Video Card/CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 16GB DDR3 /Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge 3.5GHz (3.9GHz Turbo)/CORSAIR Hydro High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler/3-Asus DRW-24B1ST Sata Drives/Samsung 2493HM 24" LCD Monitior 1920x1200 resolution,5ms respone time/OS Windows 10 Pro SP1 64-bit
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
11. November 2007 @ 16:06 |
Link to this message
|
If you watch 720p on a 1080p set yes you will see the difference, however try this....
Get a 768p 50 inch set... set a HD DVD player to 720p.....
next to it get a the same brand 50 inch set in a 1080p model... get the same HD DVD movie and set the player in 1080p.
Stand back 10 feet and tell me if you see any difference.
Have a good day.
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
12. November 2007 @ 09:53 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by HD_nut:
If you watch 720p on a 1080p set yes you will see the difference, however try this....
Get a 768p 50 inch set... set a HD DVD player to 720p.....
next to it get a the same brand 50 inch set in a 1080p model... get the same HD DVD movie and set the player in 1080p.
Stand back 10 feet and tell me if you see any difference.
Have a good day.
I did this comparison last night.
My friend has a Panasonic TH-50PX75U 768p plasma and a Toshiba A35 HD DVD player.
We tested 1080i and 720p outputs from the player and the better choice for him and me is still the 1080i. The 720p output from the machine just wasn't good enough - likely because the 1080 to 720 scaling was introducing unwanted artifacts - I don't really know. We watched several discs including Sahara, Transformers, and Corpse Bride.
However, when we went back to my place and hooked up the A35 and connected it to my Pioneer Kuro 1080p there was no contest. The 1080p output from the machine on a 1080p display was clearly superior. My friend was so impressed that he's planning on getting his own 1080p Kuro.
The reason for this is easy to explain. We were using the 1080p/24fps output from the A35. This signal is transmitted unchanged without any video processing from the disc to the display. The Kuro then applies 3:3 timing and displays the picture at 75Hz or 75fps. Film based material is displayed judder-free and very smoothly especially on slow pans - note the slow pan across the room during the opening credits of Sahara.
Right now you can get the best high def picture from film based sources (HDDVD or BluRay) if you have a machine like the A35 or the PS3 that transmits the 1080p/24 material to an HDTV that accepts 1080p/24 signal and displays it at 3:3 75Hz or 5:5 at 120Hz.
You can't do this on a 720p or 768p display.
Panasonic PT-AE3000 1080p Projector//Carada 110" Criterion High Contrast Grey 16:9 Screen//Oppo BDP-83SE//Toshiba HD-XA2
Classe SSP800 Processor//Classe CA-5200 5 Channel Amplifier//Classe CA-2200 2 Channel Amplifier
Bowers & Wilkins 802D L-R/HTM 1D Center/SCMS Surrounds/JL Audio Fathom f113 x 2
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. November 2007 @ 09:57
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
12. November 2007 @ 10:51 |
Link to this message
|
Good points, error5.
> I've always been under the impression that the HD players were not very good at outputting 720p. I don't know about the current 3rd gen players but from my A1 and XA2 I've always used 1080i or 1080p. Everyone I know who owns an HD DVD player has preferred 1080i or 1080p regardless of display resolution.
> I agree with your point about 1080p/24fps. It's important to point out that for HD DVD or BluRay, film-based material is encoded in the disc as 1080p/24fps. The less video processing applied to the data the better. So essentially the best scenario for film-based material at this time is:
1080p/24fps source
1080p/24fps transmission
1080p/24fps input on display
1080p display with 3:3 timing at 72Hz or 4:4 timing at 96Hz or even 5:5 timing at 120Hz.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. November 2007 @ 10:54
|
