High definition video

[dex]

I am an absolute HD newbie.
USA and Japan have had HD TV for good 9 years now, we just got it 10 months ago.
Also DVDs are 720x576 interlaced, PAL TV is 576 interlaced as well.

For many years we've had nothing but interlaced video at 576 lines so from that perspective any way you spin it going to 1080i is double the resolution.

This is one of those surreal moments where we're probably saying the same thing but don't understand each other.
I've also read a whole bunch of articles how 720p is "better" than 1080i, esp for fast motion but here's my point.

This is my point.

If PS3, Xbox360, hd-dvd and bluray are all good for 1080p AND most HD TV channels broadcast in 1080i - why would you get a set that needs to downscale the image when you can get one capable of showing the native resolution.

Seriously, why would anyone do that?

[jemsite]

in an ideal world we'd all have 1080p perfect sets... or better yet 1440p or 2k resolution HD displays... but then reality sets in and you need to choose the best "television" for the room, intended use, etc. and in some cases 720p HDTVs make full sense.

1080p is a great start but not the be-all-end-all. when you realize that you'll calm yourself down a little

HDTV here is 1080i and 720p so if you have a 1080p panel you're upconverting Lost from 1280x720p when watched last night. not everything is cut and dry.

also SD programming upconverted to 720p and 1080p can look horrendous... no hiding the flaws in the broadcasted material.

when you get a 1080p display running (even on a PC) drop me a note and i'll send over some samples 1080i HDTV reencoded transparently to 1080p, 720p. you'll be surprised what you see... glen

[dex]

*breathing in and out calmly*
ZEN



Last thing I want to add - 1080i on a 1080p screen is not upconverting.
1080p means 1920x1080 at 60 frames a sec drawn progressively
1080i means 1920x1080 at 30 frames a sec drawn every other line (which is what colour TV and DVD always was - interlaced)
As we all know the human eye sees anything over 24 frames a second as a continuous motion so 30 frames/sec even if it's interlaced is absolutely fine.
You get half the frame rate with 1080i but the same resolution as 1080p.

Surely by now these 1080p sets have a good processing unit that can delay the 1080i output by say 2 sec and perform a de-interlacing behind the scenes making sure you see a great 1080 image.

I've got a 32" LCD and normal TV on it def does not look as good as on my old 32" wide screen CRT but DVDs do look better and also it takes less space than the old behemoth.
Gaming on it also looks ace (has a DVI-D input and everything is pin sharp).

This is the screen I'm getting

[jemsite]

1080i/60 to 1080p/60 is not transparent, nor do either format match the film source which is 24fps. So now with 1080p you want 1080p/24 support which would be 1080p/48 or 1080p/72 support (incriments of 24fps)

you can get motion jutter and stepping with camera pans on 1080p which requires 3/2 pulldown still (since it's displaying 60Hz). no TV can deinterlace that great, that is why they sell $4k scalers and people have dedicated PCs to do that

Now, i mostly agree with the idea "when in doubt get 1080p" but as nice as that Aquos is, it doesn't even have VGA or DVI support for PC hookup... glen

[dex]

I lied - this is the one I'm getting.

http://www.sharp.co.uk/invt/lc42xd1e

Saw somewhere on a forum that both HDMIs are DVI-D compatible and take a PC but won't know until I get it.

This is all I was wondering - why most people don't go the "when in doubt get 1080p" route and I'm wondering mainly because that's what I'm doing.
I'm also doing it because I've had a 1366x768 32" set for almost a year so the only way to upgrade is to get a bigger screen and higher resolution.

[jemsite]

looking at the specs, the overseas model has VGA input it seems.
Input port 5: PC In (no RGB)

HDMI is only useful (for a PC) if you have a DVI-D digital video output from PC.

[jemsite]

when in doubt isn't always practical, in budget... you totally limit your choices and most people dont care for the next few years.

Originally Posted by dex

I lied - this is the one I'm getting.

http://www.sharp.co.uk/invt/lc42xd1e

Saw somewhere on a forum that both HDMIs are DVI-D compatible and take a PC but won't know until I get it.

This is all I was wondering - why most people don't go the "when in doubt get 1080p" route and I'm wondering mainly because that's what I'm doing.
I'm also doing it because I've had a 1366x768 32" set for almost a year so the only way to upgrade is to get a bigger screen and higher resolution.

[dex]

Also one last newbie question.
Reading your answers it just dawned on me - you're saying that these 1080p screens are hardwired to do 60 frames/sec and if you feed them anything but a clearly divisible frame rate the pic quality goes down dramatically?
And in fact goes down even if the frame rate is 30?

If that's what you're saying I just got it and it makes perfect sense.

[jemsite]

the light went on

they're hardwired to 1080p/60. that is all the panel can do and why some can't hookup to PCs and if they do are limtd to 60Hz.

resolution is still 1920x1080p60 but you get 3:2 pulldown judder (look up that term for good reading). jaggies and stutter-stepping on camera pans... less "smooth"... and noticable becaue your TV is larger and higher res (than an old 27" tube tv for example)

my PJ can do 72hz (24x3) as can my HTPC but my HD-DVD player, nor can the PS3 at this time (i don't own one but any bluray player i purchase must output 1080p/24

best quality at this time is really 1080i output to video scaler (to do 3:2 pulldown from 30 > 24) output to 72Hz to totally eliminate 3:2 pulldown (for film sources).... glen

[microdmitry]

>> I've seen DVDs (720x480 anamorphic enhanced) that look better than 1920x1080i HDTV broadcasts.

Are you getting that HDTV from cable? The stuff I get over the air is mind-blowing! You can literally see blades of grass when watching a ball game.

[fettouhi]

Originally Posted by kennydoe

in the last month, i've bought a 42" Plasma and a 61" LCD.

I'm 3 grand in debt, but i am LOVIN' both TVs! i already had a 5.1 home theater system and plugged into the digital audio output of the DVD and cable box, the surround if just astounding.

A couple of times during the super bowl we switched over to see what the "peasants" were watching. YUK!!!

Definitely worth the upgrade. I just wish the TV content was more extensive. Patience, i guess.

One thing i learned from a thread i started last week...make sure your DVD player is set for 16:9 ratio.

~K

Only 3k???

If had bought this here at home that would have set me back at least 15k.

Regards

André

[jemsite]

You can't get YES network OTA, nor FoxSportsNY

But your statement again proves the point garbage in, garbage out. ball games are shot in HD and look great except when they pixelate or they switch to a SD camera for a different shot.

Watch OTA movies HDTV and you'll see a huge difference and drop. Same reason why NFL or baseball games in HD look more impressive than alot of Blu-ray discs.

You guys need a slight perspective. Blades of grass are just one small facet of enjoying a movie or presentation on TV.

ps - i'm on comcast cable and they're known for high bitrates

[bammbamm]

HBO HD and Discover HD are stupendous as well.
I can't wait to see the final 1/2 season of the Sopranos in HD, it should look great. They already have the last series out on HD DVD.

Funny Micro mentioned blades of grass, I noticed that exact thing during the Bears playoff game, everything was so crisp and perfect. You saw the droplets of water on the field when they were playing and you'd see the splash that was normally a blur on my old set.

Glen, what do you think about the upconverting DVD players, are they worth getting, or should I just stick with the compnent outs on my existing unit?

[jemsite]

Sopranos are great in HD... shot wide and with film.

upconverting players require HDMI (unless you find a zenith 318 or other brand that circumvents the "no upconverting over component restriction") for the most part.

if you watch alot of DVDs with a HDTV the upconverting player can actually benefit, as the scaler in your TV is often very limited. the best "upconverting" player for the buck is the Toshiba HD-DVD players ... outperform $1k denon players and do HD discs too at almost 1/3 the price. Makes well mastered DVDs (like Empire Stikes Back for example) look fantastic and hd-like (especially on closeups where resolution is not limiting).

That's one reason why i bought into the HD-DVD with the HD-A1 (sub $400 investment), for DVD playback.

But i wouldnt' rush out and buy a $99 upconverting dvd player unless it was for convenience or hookup issue as the visual upgrade might be moot and the player annoying (no playback resume, slow loading, etc.).... glen

[Rich]

Toshiba SD3109, my girlfriend had one and it had a great picture, so I bought one off e-bay for $15