|
1080i vs 720p
|
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
4. January 2007 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
That's half of it paddawan,
But even if both were at 60 frames, on set up to 50 inches at a average distance the 768p would look better because of the size of the pixels because the max resolution of the eye is saturated with a 786p resolution with this size set at this distance
"Talk TV, Smart Guy
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.
Now, assuming that you're not going to move your couch but you want a bigger TV, how does this work with a 50-inch set? 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. A 1,920-by-1,080 display has 0.023-inch-wide pixels, smaller than your eye can resolve. A 1,920-by-1,080 display would have to measure more than 70 inches diagonally before you start testing your eyes' limits on the display's resolution (at least at 10 feet). Scan lines are the pixels of the CRT world and, in this case, function similarly. The pixels in some displays are not square, in which case you'll also need to check pixel height. "
http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/
"In a 50-inch plasma display with an array of 1366x768 pixels, the pitch of individual pixels is typically less than 1 mm (about 0.9 mm), which equals 0.039 inches. Do the math, and you'll see that standing 10 feet from a 50-inch plasma means you can barely perceive the HD pixel structure, and that's only if you have 20-20 vision."
http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January/13-...arallaxview.htm
So at 10 feet... if there was a real 1080p/60, the 768p set would still better at 10 feet because of the pixel size.
The resolution of the eye would have got maxed out at 768p,
Because of the pixel size of 1080p, your not even perceiving 768p at 10 feet, you have to get closer to the set because the pixels are smaller.
Now take into consideration the frames rates for what they are 60 0r 24. 720p has great case and that is why I think it's #1!
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. January 2007 @ 02:05
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
4. January 2007 @ 04:42 |
Link to this message
|
What I don't understand is why there is bias toward 720p/768p as opposed to 1080i/p. Yes higher resolution is only better if you plan to sit close to a big screen. That is the basis for HDTV. 768p/60 is fine for watching TV on a medium size screen at normal viewing distances (no one said otherwise) but if you want to have a more theater like feel to your viewing experience then go for 1080p/24 on a 100" screen and sit nice and close!
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. January 2007 @ 04:56
|
Senior Member
|
4. January 2007 @ 07:27 |
Link to this message
|
@HD_Nut Quote:
But even if both were at 60 frames, on set up to 50 inches at a average distance the 768p would look better because of the size of the pixels because the max resolution of the eye is saturated with a 786p resolution with this size set at this distance
Isn't the whole idea of smaller pixels that you don't see them? I mean, you don't want to watch a CRT set so close that you would see the scan lines.
From the Talk smart quote: Quote:
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. A 1,920-by-1,080 display has 0.023-inch-wide pixels, smaller than your eye can resolve.
Why would I want to be able to discern each pixel? Wouldn't I have a smoother, film like experience with more densly packed pixels that I cannot discern the edges of?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. January 2007 @ 07:28
|
|
RPGnGuy
Newbie
|
4. January 2007 @ 07:58 |
Link to this message
|
okay...okay... Progressive scan is always better?
I have a slightly older tv that normally runs in 480i or 480p but can run at 1080i via HDMI. I don't really watch tv; I use it for DVDs and PlayStation (never really noticed much of a difference between 480i and 480p). However, thanks to PS3 I can now play HD games and use the Blu-ray. I understand that 720p will be down-graded to 480p and 1080p will be down-graded to 1080i. My question is will I notice a huge difference between 480p and 1080i...if Progressive scan is always better?
thanks, really enjoyed reading this forum
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
4. January 2007 @ 12:35 |
Link to this message
|
I don't think that is the idea of smaller pixels, if you a a 50 inch 768p set and a 50 inch 1080p set, the pixels on the 1080 set have to be smaller because they are taking up the same 50 inch diagonal space.
diabolos is right,
My comparison was with an average big screen (36-55) at a normal distance.
However with a 100 inch screen, is it not a fact the bigger the more distored? Pixels get stretched, not as sharp.
Yes you will be able to view 1080p at that close distance, but I would be willing to bet a 768p 40 inch LCD will look sharper than a 100 inch 1080p projected image, even if you were watching the 100 inch at a close distance. But that is my opinion. I noticed how much sharper sets are under 60 inches.
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
eman3d
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
4. January 2007 @ 17:31 |
Link to this message
|
Yo HD_Nut you are doing a good job explaining the truth but people will always justify there money spending. You are absolutely right about 720p being better then 1080i. What people do not understand is that when HDTV came out you have different competing companies backing up different resolutions just like you have different companies that support HD DVD and Blu Rey. It's been shown and proven by the experts that 720p is BETTER then 1080i. But when you have big time manufacturers who have equipment already in place for a the production of 1080i you are going to get misled as a paying customer.
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
5. January 2007 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
I'm saying under average conditions it's better than 1080p..
Yes you are right about people being misled.
Even if people don't wish to get into the math and my reasons, they are in the least being misled to believe that 1080p products are real HD and everything else falls short
(FULL 1080p) (TRUE HD) = TRUE BULL S%#T
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
RustyC
Newbie
|
5. January 2007 @ 11:53 |
Link to this message
|
HD_nut,
Why are you comparing a 50" 768p set to a 50" 1080p set as far as viewing distance? Shouldn't you be comparing the 50" 768p set to a 70" 1080p set so that the pixels per inch are the same? I'm not going to move my living room furniture around just to get the best view of the TV. My wife would not be happy if I threw away her coffee table so my chair could be "3 feet away" from a 1080p set just so my eyes could then pick out 1 million more pixels. But I would rather watch a 70" screen than a 50" screen if I could afford it.
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
5. January 2007 @ 17:08 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
(FULL 1080p) (TRUE HD) = TRUE BULL S%#T
Well at least we agree on one thing. I hate marketing it just makes my job harder.
Ced
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
6. January 2007 @ 03:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Rusty,
If you like the 70 inch sets go for it, as far as my personal taste, I went from 53 to 50 to 42 to 40.
I'm very fussy with my picture and I noticed how much better the picture was as I went down in size. I noticed it when I had the same model set in the den... a 50... and the same model in the bedroom... 42 version
But again, that's me. I now have the Sony 40 inch LCD 768p XBR
& the Panasonic 37 inch 768p plasma, and I wouldn't trade them for any other set, as I had almost everything out there.
Everyones taste is different.
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
RustyC
Newbie
|
6. January 2007 @ 08:55 |
Link to this message
|
But should I feed a 70" 1080p set a 720p or 1080i signal from my cablebox? From your posts I'm guessing 720p would be better because it would actually send more pixels to the display than the 1080i signal, correct?
|
|
HD_nut
Member
|
6. January 2007 @ 10:18 |
Link to this message
|
If the signal is 720p like ABC... I would keep the box in the 720p
If it's a 1080i signal like CBS I would keep it in 1080i because 1080p sets are made to weave together the 2 540 fields of 1080i progressively to make 1080p.
720p/60
The fastest and best resolution format!
|
|
gdodd12
Junior Member
|
21. January 2007 @ 06:59 |
Link to this message
|
So what if a tv can't do 1080i? There is a new aquos 37" LCD that is out. Model LC37D43U. Will this still look good on HD channels that broadcast in 1080i? How does it handle those signals if the tv isn't 1080i compatable?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. January 2007 @ 07:04
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
21. January 2007 @ 09:32 |
Link to this message
|
gdodd12 , the set doesn't have to be 1080i or 1080p . your going to get your best viewable picture at 720p at 60fps sitting a distance of 10 to 12 feet from the set. only way you will benefit from 1080i or 1080p HD is setting 4 feet away from the set.
Quote:
How does it handle those signals if the tv isn't 1080i compatable?
the set will convert the signal to 720p
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. January 2007 @ 09:33
|
|
gdodd12
Junior Member
|
21. January 2007 @ 09:40 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
gdodd12 , the set doesn't have to be 1080i or 1080p . your going to get your best viewable picture at 720p at 60fps sitting a distance of 10 to 12 feet from the set. only way you will benefit from 1080i or 1080p HD is setting 4 feet away from the set.
[quote]How does it handle those signals if the tv isn't 1080i compatable?
the set will convert the signal to 720p[/quote]Will there be any kind of quality loss when its converting the 1080i signals from the stations that broadcast in that, to the 720p that the tv uses? Or is it seemless?
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
21. January 2007 @ 09:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
there will be NO quality lose that the naked eye can see
|
|
gdodd12
Junior Member
|
21. January 2007 @ 10:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by aabbccdd:
there will be NO quality lose that the naked eye can see
Ok.
I sit about 8.5 to 9 feet away. Should I still be good at that distance with that TV?
Thanks for the help.
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
21. January 2007 @ 11:12 |
Link to this message
|
yes at that distance you will be fine with the 720p
don't get to hung up on the 1080i 1080p its more of a marketing ploy to get us to buy newer stuff
|
|
gdodd12
Junior Member
|
21. January 2007 @ 16:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by aabbccdd:
yes at that distance you will be fine with the 720p
don't get to hung up on the 1080i 1080p its more of a marketing ploy to get us to buy newer stuff
Gotcha.
Thanks.
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
21. January 2007 @ 16:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
21. January 2007 @ 17:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by aabbccdd:
don't get to hung up on the 1080i 1080p its more of a marketing ploy to get us to buy newer stuff
So are you getting rid of your 1080p SXRD then?
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
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
21. January 2007 @ 17:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
NO
but this guy doesn't have an SXRD
|
|
gdodd12
Junior Member
|
22. January 2007 @ 04:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ok, I have another question.
If a TV is 1200:1 contrast ratio and 6000:1 dynamic contrast ratio, is that good? I assume dynamic refers to something changing, but I am not quite sure which is more applicable to everyday use; contrast ratio or dynamic contrast ratio.
|
|
diabolos
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. January 2007 @ 10:16 |
Link to this message
|
There are a lot of contrast ratio measurements. The main types are Static Contrast Ratio and Dynamic Contrast Ratio. Of the two the Static Contrast Ratio is closer to a real-world measurement. Then there is also the Contrast Ratio of a display in a given room (light condition).
Read this for more information...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_ra...of_measurement\
Quote:
I assume dynamic refers to something changing, but I am not quite sure which is more applicable to everyday use; contrast ratio or dynamic contrast ratio.
Dynamic Contrast Ratio refers to a displays lightest gray and darkest gray when the entire screen (every pixels) is switched on (maximum; white) then off (maximum; black).
Static Contrast Ratio refers to a displays lightest gray and darkest gray when the screen is showing both maximum white and maximum black at any moment in time (most often at the same time).
Room Contrast Ratio refers to a displays lightest gray and darkest gray when the light in the room is combating the light from the display. It is a measure of how much light reaches your eye and how it affects the look (Contrast Ratio) of the display picture.
Quote:
don't get to hung up on the 1080i 1080p its more of a marketing ploy to get us to buy newer stuff
It is a marketing ploy but with proper education it is easy to see through. Marketers want everybody to buy the latest and greatest. The easiest way to do that is to make the customer feel that there equipment is some how inferior to the new stuff. Not to say that 1080p is a passing fad but it isn't always appropriate and is mis-advertised, something that this thread has covered extensively already.
Ced
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. January 2007 @ 13:49
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
22. January 2007 @ 21:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
thanks Ced for clearing that up !!!
|
