|
1080i vs 720p
|
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
2. November 2006 @ 09:46 |
Link to this message
|
OK, what I mean is a 480i DVD will better than a 480i TV signal and a 1080i DVD will look better than a 1080i TV signal.... ALSO...
I'm pretty sure... not to degrade your TV....
THE SXRD does NOT accept a real 1080p signal...unless they just changed it this year. The last I checked the SXRD was last December.
Their HDMI goes up to 1080i.... when you put your DVD player in 1080p it changes to 1080i as soon as it hit's the TV.
The the set internal scaler upconverts it to 1080p.
Go to your manual... at the end you will see the specs...near the last page..... where you see HDMI.... look at the numbers... do you see 1080x1920 or 1080p?
Matter of fact HD DVD disks is 1080i not 1080p.... unless you're talking Bluray?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. November 2006 @ 09:57
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
2. November 2006 @ 10:05 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
THE SXRD does NOT accept a real 1080p signal...unless they just changed it this year.
My 2006 A2000 series SXRD accepts 1080p thru HDMI. The only thing lacking is the HDMI 1.3 upgrade which will probably come in the 2007 models.
Quote:
Matter of fact HD DVD disks is 1080i not 1080p.... unless you're talking Bluray?
BOTH HD-DVD and BluRay discs are encoded in 1080p - look at the back of any HD-DVD disc case if you don't believe me. The first gen Toshiba HD-DVD player limits the output to 1080i but 2nd gen players coming out later this year will have 1080p thru HDMI.
"The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate."
-Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Home Entertainment Feb 19, 2008
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. November 2006 @ 10:12
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
2. November 2006 @ 10:14 |
Link to this message
|
Ok... good enough my man... that's why I wanted to check the updates on the SXRD... Wasn't sure.....
I take your word they are encoded in 1080p... but the player you have is a 1080i max...yes?
I heard the new HD DVD player will be 1080p... but I don't know when it is coming out.
Your set is still upconverting 1080i... sure it looks great!
What I'm waiting for is the Samsung hybrid HD DVD/ Blu Ray combo.. it may come out at the start of the year... it will play both!
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
2. November 2006 @ 10:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
Samsung is deeply rooted in the BluRay camp and I haven't seen any announcements of hybrid players so far - unless you have a link to a news item. I'm planning to audition the Panasonic DMP-BD10 BluRay player once I can get my hands on one.
"The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate."
-Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Home Entertainment Feb 19, 2008
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
2. November 2006 @ 10:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
2. November 2006 @ 11:01 |
Link to this message
|
This denial from Samsung came out a few days after your news item appeared in June of this year:
http://www.engadgethd.com/category/samsung/page/3/
Quote:
Samsung does NOT plan on releasing a HD DVD/Blu-ray combo player
Posted Jun 27th 2006 11:55AM by Matt Burns
The Internet has been buzzing the last few days with 'breaking news' that Samsung is going to release a combination Blu-ray/HD DVD player. (link to our post) Sounds good right? Well, we are sorry to inform you that Samsung has no current plans to release such a device. None, what so ever. We contacted Samsung Electronics America's PR department this morning after this story was on Digg's front page. A rep was very happy to talk to us and indicated that, yes, it is just a rumor. She provided us with this statement from a few days back.
Samsung Electronics is fully committed to the Blu-ray format and currently only has plans to introduce a Blu-ray player to the market.
"The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate."
-Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Home Entertainment Feb 19, 2008
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. November 2006 @ 11:09
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
2. November 2006 @ 11:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well there you have it..Thanx.... I hear the porn industry is going Blu Ray... Some believe that it was the porn industry that made VHS the winner over Beta max... could this topple Blue ray as the winner?
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
2. November 2006 @ 14:51 |
Link to this message
|
I'll stick with the shot in HD DVD's... they do make the upconvert to 720p on my 1024x768 Plasma.....
I'm going to wait it out for a while...a long one
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
3. November 2006 @ 13:12 |
Link to this message
|
Also to nail the coffin on the 720p VS interlaced signals,
I snapped this off my TV with a sony cyber shot in 1.2 ... with the TIVO PAUSED in 720p.... this is cross converted 1080i signal to 720p on the Sony XBR flat LCD.
Try to do this with a 1080i tv with a 1080i signal!
photo is cropped & cut
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. November 2006 @ 07:40
|
|
cp1966
Member
|
7. November 2006 @ 22:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 01:49 |
Link to this message
|
Right, proves my point that 720p is better than 1080p... never mind 1080i... that article says
" The pixels in a 1,280-by-720 display are 0.034 inches wide, which is almost exactly what your eye can discern at 10 feet."
So if that is the max at an average distance, why is 720p better... because the eye can perceive 60 framed per second, and 720p is in 60 frames and 1080p is in 24.
"humans can perceive up to 60+ fps".
http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_3.html
720p #1
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 01:50
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. November 2006 @ 02:33 |
Link to this message
|
From your article:
Quote:
Just because your eye can't resolve the additional resolution doesn't mean that you shouldn't get a higher-resolution set; it just means that you don't necessarily have to. From where most people sit, you don't need 1080p in a 37-42 inch TV. It's arguable that you do in a 50-inch set. The key, then, is moving your seating. If you're sitting more than 5x the picture height away from your TV, then you probably don't need 1080p. If you can move closer, you should get the highest resolution display you can, sit close enough that you can't see the pixels, and enjoy your huge screen.
This comment applies to my case given my room size and seating distance. When I upgraded to a 60 inch 1080p display from a 40 inch 720p I saw a huge improvement.
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 10:16 |
Link to this message
|
Could be where your sitting or even the kind of set... I seen a 480p plamsa beat a 1080p LCD RP.
A lot of sets like DLP have sharp images but poor color sauturation.
I have not seen any set display a better 720p signal than the Sony XBR 768p.
At the average distance up to 50 inch sets a top of the line 768 set with a 720p signal is will provide a better signal, 60 fps etc.
Even better 480i upconversion.
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
8. November 2006 @ 10:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by HD_nut:
I seen a 480p plamsa beat a 1080p LCD RP.
They were probably feeding this with a standard def signal. With a high def signal there is no way you can convince me that a 480 line display will beat a 1080p.
"The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate."
-Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Home Entertainment Feb 19, 2008
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 11:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 12:04
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 12:04 |
Link to this message
|
It was a 1080p DLP with a 1080i signal from Discovery HD with that same feed going into the 480p plasma. Shows you the quality of a direct panel monitor compared to a projected or magnified image.
You have to compare apples to apples, like when I compared the 768 Sony LCD flat panel set to the 1080p version. The 480i signal look weak on the 1080p compared to the 768 one and the 720p signals looked better as well on the 768 one.
According to the above article at an average distance (10 feet) with up to a 50 inch display, you're not seeing the full quality of 1080p, because of the size of the pixels, it looks worse than the 768 set at the average distance because of the size of the pixels. Again, you have to compare apples with apples.
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. November 2006 @ 16:20 |
Link to this message
|
I have 2 setups: upstairs media room with a 60 inch 1080p SXRD and a basement theater with a 1080p Sony Pearl and a 110 inch screen. In both cases given my room dimensions and seating distance my 1080p displays BLOW AWAY any similarly sized 720p native rear projector, flat panel or front projector. I'm sure that with additional ISF calibration any advantage of 1080p will be magnified. The ISF will tell you that the most important factors that influence picture quality are (in order):
1. Contrast Ratio
2. Color saturation
3. Color accuracy
4. Resolution
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 16:33
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 16:59 |
Link to this message
|
Don't agree, the SXRD is a rare projection monitor, the Pioneer 768x1366 Plasma Elite is in a different league. There is a reason why the monitor is around 9,000. Anyone who compares a rare projection set to looking at the Panel itself don't know too much about monitors. Not looking to argue with you and I understand a lot of people want to praise their set as the best. But it's a fact that rear projection magnified images are not in the same league as flat panel direct monitors. As you see in the above article they have written at the average distance the 720p set wins out, unless you sit 3 feet away from the monitor. Sorry I didn't write the articles. I had RP sets, never again.
There is contrast ratio and dcr. Anything over 1300 to 1 contrast ratio is irrelavant... there are a lot factors on that around the net. Resolution at this distance is best at 720 or 768 and the temporal resolution is best at 720p/60.
Color satutation is best on a Plasma!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 17:17
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. November 2006 @ 17:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
I still prefer a properly calibrated 50 to 60 inch SXRD to any plasma or LCD flat panel. But for me the best home theater experience would be a high contrast front projector with a 90-100 inch screen.
BTW the flesh tones on your picture above don't look quite right. It could be your digital camera or maybe your flat panel needs calibration.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 17:14
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 17:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
The bigger picture gets the worse it is., stretching pixels etc.... sorry...
To each it's own though... people like different things.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 17:15
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. November 2006 @ 17:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by HD_nut:
The bigger picture gets the worse it is., stretching pixels etc.... sorry...
To each it's own though... people like different things.
I take it you haven't seen a Sony Ruby or Pearl projector in action.
You're right though - to each his own. The bottom line is what looks best in your room and your setup. For me that's the 60 inch SXRD and the Pearl.
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
8. November 2006 @ 17:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
You have great monitors, and I'm sure they look great. All that matters!
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. November 2006 @ 20:14 |
Link to this message
|
HD_nut, you seem like a great person but I must say I find most of your comments to be... well wrong.
How can you say that a tv is better because it shows the panel? What you say flys against everything custom installers (the real experts) say.
I know everyone has opinions but I'm about facts. And the fact is what you see depends on 3 things: Your room; Your source; Your connections
The most inportant and most over looked is your room.
The main factors are...
Viewing distance (how far away you will be sitting?)
Viewing angle (where is your furniture?)
Lighting condition (is it a basement or living room?)
A plasma looks horrible (glare and color suppression) in a bright room with alot of light which is why LCD would be a better choice for that situation. On the other side LCD would look worse than a Plasma in a darker room because LCDs arn't that good at producing a deep dark black.
Rear-projections are my favorite of the newer display techonolgies. But they suffer from poor viewing angles.
My point is, come up with real facts.
I want to complain about alot of things you said but I will just pic one...
Quote:
Matter of fact HD DVD disks is 1080i not 1080p.... unless you're talking Bluray?
Niether of the first gen players output a prestine 1080p@24 signal. They use the same chip. Those chips convert 1080p24 to 1080i@30 then preform video processing. Then they either send it to the tv set as 720p or 1080i. The Samsung Blu ray player and Toshiba's HD-XA2 add an extra step where a de-interlacer makes the 1080i@30 signal 1080p@60.
Well I might as well address this too...
Quote:
So if that is the max at an average distance, why is 720p better... because the eye can perceive 60 framed per second, and 720p is in 60 frames and 1080p is in 24.
1080p@24 doesn't look worse than 720p@60 (in the case of movies) since the frames represent movies on Film which are shot at 24 fps. The 720@60 signal is actually very jittery and retains little if any cenimatic value in this case.
Good tvs like the pioneer plasmas up there refresh rate to 72Hz and use a 3:3 pull down process instead of a 3:2 process so that the issue of jitter is rendered mute. I can tell you why if you want me too.
I mean no offense,
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. November 2006 @ 20:14
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
9. November 2006 @ 02:02 |
Link to this message
|
When people start comparing 90 inch projected images to a flat panel plasma, I'm not even going to waste my time. Many people are impressed by big numbers,,, size of screeen resolution numbers. On some LCD RP the picture is the size of a stamp and prjected then magnified....call any high end store and ask them what gives you a better picure that or looking at the panel itself. Please!!
Larger resolution numbers don't conver't 480i and p as well as 720p monitors do, and the larger the picture gets the worse it gets.
What isnstallers tell you and what is fact is different. If people are happy it's all that matters.
I agree with LCD and Plasma thing you said, although the LCD seemed to fix the black problem with a real good set, but again comparing these flat screens to any 100 inch or projected image .... not even going to watse my time.
As far as the 1080p/24... agian you just want to talk about movies, I'm really comparing the 1080p/24 signal to the 720p/60 one, not a movie. The 720p/60 signal delivers more fresh pixels per second.
1080p/24 49766400 pixels per second
720p/60 55296000 pixels per second.
720p on 1366x768 62945280 pixels per second
More frames more info... snap 24 picture of something in a second, and let me snap 60... what set of pictures is going to show more information?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. November 2006 @ 02:15
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
DamonDash
Suspended permanently
|
9. November 2006 @ 02:21 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
proves my point that 720p is better than 1080p
BS...Look HD_nut i find most of your info misleading please do a little more research..Me & Diabolos might not agree on alot of stuff but everything he said in his last post was pretty much a fact.I not going to breakdown all that stuff your said because im not wasteing my time on misleading info.
|
