Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
larry42

1080p tvs... coming soon ?

Recommended Posts

Unless you plan on viewing a little 37” from less then 1.5 meters the extra resolution will be a waste.

The cheap 1080p displays will also have crap “Bob” deinterlacers, and only deliver 540p from 1080i video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless you plan on viewing a little 37” from less then 1.5 meters the extra resolution will be a waste.

~

point of note, anything under 70-100" is "little" for owen :blink:

and I actually own a 37" and as much as owen doesn't believe it I actually do notice and appreciate very much its 1024 lines for true 1080 and thats at viewing distances upto 3m.

The extra resolution will not be a waste believe me. Just go out and check out even now a sharp 37" with their true 1080 material and see how good it can look at what would be typical viewing distance for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually own a 36" TV and KNOW how small it is dude.

The picture is smaller vertically then an old 68cm TV.

The viewing experience with a 50”-60’ display is VERY different.

What makes you believe you can see 1080 or even 1024 lines resolution from more then 1.5 meters on a 37” display alebonau?

All available scientific studies on human visual acuity say that a normal human can’t.

I have done my own tests using a TFT PC monitor with 1600x1200 resolution and resolution test patterns to see what resolutions I could resolve and at what distances, and my results confirmed almost exactly what the scientific studies of human vision found.

A good calculator can be found here:

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/vie...calculator.html

1080HD video will always look better then normal SD on ANY display, even a 480 line Plasma, simply because it is a much better quality source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually own a 36" TV and KNOW how small it is dude.

The picture is smaller vertically then an old 68cm TV.

The viewing experience with a 50”-60’ display is VERY different.

What makes you believe you can see 1080 or even 1024 lines resolution from more then 1.5 meters on a 37” display alebonau?

All available scientific studies on human visual acuity say that a normal human can’t.

I have done my own tests using a TFT PC monitor with 1600x1200 resolution and resolution test patterns to see what resolutions I could resolve and at what distances, and my results confirmed almost exactly what the scientific studies of human vision found.

A good calculator can be found here:

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/vie...calculator.html

1080HD video will always look better then normal SD on ANY display, even a 480 line Plasma, simply because it is a much better quality source.

picture vertically on a 86cm smaller than a 68cm???? :blink:

I don't know what tv you got but my 68cm crt I had definetely had a smaller vertical than the 37" TV I now have - go do some measuring.

and not that viewing distance calculater and that tired old argument again ! this has been argued over and over again - I might not be able to fully resolve 1080i at upto 3m on my 1024 line display but the extra resolution on true 1080i does make quite a difference I can assure you.

I doubt very much your 86cm crt can even resolve and display 1080 lines.

tests on a TFT PC monitor :P phewy!

I repeat what I said above to the person asking if the better resolution will help a 37" and suggest he go check out a sharp lcd right now with 1080i material and see what its like at the viewing distances he'd be considering. When seen I'm sure he'd agree the additional resolution is of benefit and not just for the 60" + displays you push.

point of note, anything under 70-100" is "little" for owen 

and I actually own a 37" and as much as owen doesn't believe it I actually do notice and appreciate very much its 1024 lines for true 1080 and thats at viewing distances upto 3m.

The extra resolution will not be a waste believe me. Just go out and check out even now a sharp 37" with their true 1080 material and see how good it can look at what would be typical viewing distance for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


slightly off topic but this may be of interest to pj fans.

Indianapolis, IN, Sept. 8, 2005: Texas Instruments (TI) (NYSE: TXN) at CEDIA today announced and showcased 1080p resolution (1920 x 1080) chipsets for the front projection market. 1080 is the high-definition resolution standard for many highly anticipated content applications in the near future, including broadcast, gaming, and high-definition video players. DLP 1080p resolution chips will be made available to customers for both single-chip and 3-chip applications, enabling incredible detail for the ultimate HD viewing experience.

According to market-watcher Pacific Media Associates (PMA), DLP technology holds 69.8% of the consumer front projection market in the U.S. as of 2Q05. The addition of DLP 1080p chipsets will allow customers to offer maximum-HD for front projection, rounding out current strong DLP 720p HD offerings. The breadth of 720p and 1080p projector choices will give consumers high-definition options that meet their price and performance choices. In addition, DLP products with 480 and 576 resolutions continue to thrive in the consumer market, providing great video viewing experiences for current DVD and gaming standards. Manufacturers who will be announcing front projection products based on DLP 1080p technology in the near future include: Barco, Christie Digital, Digital Projection International, DWIN, InFocus, Marantz, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, projectiondesign, Optoma, Runco, Samsung, Sharp, SIM2 and Yamaha.

This news comes shortly after the TI announcement of increased color performance available for DLP front projection single-chip products with BrilliantColor™ technology. With up to 6-color processing, which moves significantly beyond other technologies' limitations of 1-color-per-chip processing, BrilliantColor™ technology will enable a greater than 50% brightness increase in mid tone images, common in video and natural scenes, translating into truer, more vibrant colors.

"We aim to meet both the needs of our customers and the needs of the market; and adding DLP 1080p technology to our offering will allow our customers to round out their product lines and fill a specific market need," said Lars Yoder, Business Manager, TI DLP Front Projection Products. "Consumers will benefit from products with maximum HD resolution that will provide incredible detail of the images and deliver a truly amazing viewing experience."

"We are very excited about the addition of DLP 1080p 3-chip technology to our product offering," said Nancy Fares, Business Manager, DLP Cinema Products. "This allows our partners to offer flagship products with an exceptional image to the high-end theater enthusiasts."

CEDIA attendees can experience DLP 1080p technology for both front and rear applications, as well as BrilliantColor™ technology, at TI DLP Products booth #248.

also this from Epson for RPTV fans

Epson CrystalPRO HD Displays Featuring True 1080p Native Resolution

In addition to its full line of front projectors, Epson is introducing two unique rear projection HD displays that achieve true 1080p native resolution. Available in 55 and 65-inch screens, the new Epson CrystalPRO HD displays represent the company's most advanced display products to date and are the first to use Epson's new 1080p 3LCD OptiFocus optical engine.

"Some projection companies today are claiming they achieve 1080p performance using part-time imaging or virtual pixels that create the illusion of seeing 1,080 full-time vertical lines of resolution," said Jodi Maugham, product manager, Home Entertainment Division, Epson America. "Epson's new 3LCD engines deliver true 1080p resolution, which means there are actually 1,920 x 1,080 pixels on each of the three LCD chips. The end-benefit for consumers is full-time color and full-time resolution that gives them superlative high-definition detail and accurate color performance."

Both Epson CrystalPRO HD displays achieve 5000:1 contrast ratio. They are constructed with sophisticated, glossy black exterior designs with space-saving dimensions that make them ideal for built-in cabinet designs. Other key features include 10-bit, 3D Digiscan digital video processing, multiple screen modes, built-in 30-watt (15x2) amplifier for external speakers, pre-set and customizable color modes, 3D graphic user interface, and multiple input sources including two HDMI ports, PC input and RS-232 controls. Epson CrystalPRO HD Displays will be available in January 2006.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What makes you believe you can see 1080 or even 1024 lines resolution from more then 1.5 meters on a 37” display alebonau?

All available scientific studies on human visual acuity say that a normal human can’t.

I have done my own tests using a TFT PC monitor with 1600x1200 resolution and resolution test patterns to see what resolutions I could resolve and at what distances, and my results confirmed almost exactly what the scientific studies of human vision found.

While I generally agree with your comments about screen size/resolution/viewing distance (i.e. extra detail can not be perceived on smaller screens at large viewing distances) I think you overlook issues like depth perception.

From my experience when you move further away from smaller screen displaying HD, you certainly lose the ability to resolve the extra fine detail, but the HD screen still gives a greater sense of depth, with more dynamic richer colours.

While I agree that you certainly don't get the full benefit of HD resolutions on smaller screens at large viewing distances, they can still look a lot better than SD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
picture vertically on a 86cm smaller than a 68cm????  :blink:

I don't know what tv you got but my 68cm crt I had definetely had a smaller vertical than the 37" TV I now have - go do some measuring.

Certainly it depends on the manufacturer.. my Sony 86 cm HD CRT has the same vertical height as my Philips 68cm 4:3 TV.

I doubt very much your 86cm crt can even resolve and display 1080 lines.

I know my one, the Sony KVHR36M31, doesn't resolve the full 1080 lines, but it was definately higher than any LCD or Plasma at the time of purchase.

tests on a TFT PC monitor wacko.gif phewy!

I don't know about TFT's but on my PC CRT, I can see a HUGE difference between an SD and HD broadcast.

While I generally agree with your comments about screen size/resolution/viewing distance (i.e. extra detail can not be perceived on smaller screens at large viewing distances) I think you overlook issues like depth perception.

From my experience when you move further away from smaller screen displaying HD, you certainly lose the ability to resolve the extra fine detail, but the HD screen still gives a greater sense of depth, with more dynamic richer colours.

While I agree that you certainly don't get the full benefit of HD resolutions on smaller screens at large viewing distances, they can still look a lot better than SD.

I agree.. HD is not just about the higher resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The extra resolution will not be a waste believe me. Just go out and check out even now a sharp 37" with their true 1080 material and see how good it can look at what would be typical viewing distance for you.

Which Sharp 37" display sold here is capable of displaying 1080 lines? Do you mean the 45"? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Which Sharp 37" display sold here is capable of displaying 1080 lines? Do you mean the 45"?  :blink:

actually you are quite right checkign the specs of the 37" of the sharp it is not in fact 1080 capable. This is the one I've seen

http://www.carltonaudiovisual.com.au/?q=node/view/230

The 37" did look very good as far as resolution and beats the pants off anything else its size, overall picture though I still feel lacked compared to plasma.

The 45" you mention is 1920x1080i and 1080p capable to boot. I have not seen the 45" as yet.

http://www.carltonaudiovisual.com.au/?q=node/view/277

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha alebonau, the person with the super human vision.

You should henceforth be known as “Hawkeye”.

Since you can resolve 1024 resolution on a 37” screen from 3 meters, you should have no problem reading the fine print in a news paper at 4 meters, which is about double the distance that us normal folk can manage.

Since almost all digital displays currently on the market, even the expensive ones use bob deinterlacing for 1080i video, and therefor only deliver unscaled 540p to the screen, I don’t know how you figure you can see 1024 lines of resolution in the first place.

Have you ever viewed a 1080 resolution test pattern compared to a 540 res pattern on your Plasma?

I’ll bet not.

Even the people with 50” Plasma’s don’t notice that their screens are only giving them unscaled 540p from 1080i video.

1080Ii HD video will look better then SD video on almost ANY screen (including SD models) because it is much cleaner and has much better colour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha alebonau, the person with the super human vision.

You should henceforth be known as “Hawkeye”.

Since you can resolve 1024 resolution on a 37” screen from 3 meters, you should have no problem reading the fine print in a news paper at 4 meters, which is about double the distance that us normal folk can manage.

Since almost all digital displays currently on the market, even the expensive ones use bob deinterlacing for 1080i video, and therefor only deliver unscaled 540p to the screen, I don’t know how you figure you can see 1024 lines of resolution in the first place.

Have you ever viewed a 1080 resolution test pattern compared to a 540 res pattern on your Plasma?

I’ll bet not.

Even the people with 50” Plasma’s don’t notice that their screens are only giving them unscaled 540p from 1080i video.

1080Ii HD video will look better then SD video on almost ANY screen (including SD models) because it is much cleaner and has much better colour.

yep and you obviously have trouble reading the screen in front of you ?

~ I might not be able to fully resolve 1080i at upto 3m on my 1024 line display but the extra resolution on true 1080i does make quite a difference I can assure you.

~

I repeat what I said above to the person asking if the better resolution will help a 37" and suggest he go check out a sharp lcd right now with 1080i material and see what its like at the viewing distances he'd be considering. When seen I'm sure he'd agree the additional resolution is of benefit and not just for the 60" + displays you push.

actually for your info I have infact put a 1024 pattern up onscreen quite a way back to check what my display can do. That was when people were arguing that an alis screen would only display 512 lines - guess what 1024 lines in all their glory ! - have you done the same on a plasma ?

owen you no doubt are quite adamant about anything under 60" or 100" or whatever is you push is point less with HD - I'm suprised by your arrogance but thats fine you keep going around believing what you want to believe.

well I for one do not agree and believe what I see with my own eyes and not going to waste any more time arguing with you as you no doubt have no interest in even reading what I posted.

ps as much as your theory on plasmas and 1080i is interesting, you might check in the attachments section. I posted couple of articles there quite a while back explaining how alis panels display a 1080i signal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alebonau,

Have you ever taken a nice clean 1080i video source and scaled it down to 540, or maybe 576 in software using a PC, and compared it with the full res 1080i vision on your Plasma at 3 meters.

It's best if you maintain the PC output at the panels native resolution if posible, to avoid double scaling in the display which could adversly affect the comparison.

I think you would be surprised at the results.

Give it a go.

By the way, I never said smaller displays are useless for HD.

It’s just that most people will not be prepared to view a small screen from a close enough distance to get much advantage out of it, and that is especially true for 1080p displays.

Visitors to CEDIA who compared 50” 1080p and 720p displays like the Sony SXRD 1080p RPTV and A10 720p LCD RPTV using the same high quality HD video source reported very little difference in visible resolution at less then 3 meters viewing distances.

However, the same display technology in 60” size, at the same viewing distance uncover much more significant differences in detail and resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


To clarify on what Owen said, here's an example. Take a look at these two screenshots:

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/7326/cyberl...xvaonbob0vq.jpg

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/7329/cyberl...vaoffbob5co.jpg

Now if you're at your usual sitting distance from your PC monitor and you don't zoom in on the images, you would probably note that there's hardly any difference between the two images.. well there's not a whole world of difference, and you would probably be stoked if I told you that one of them is at half the vertical resolution than the other. This is probably the amount of difference you would see at 3m away using the exact same material, with one playing at half the vertical resolution, on a 37" display.

However on a much larger display, at the same distance of 3m, you would be seeing much more of the picture, and the difference between the two would be more like this:

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/6388/14uz.jpg

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/2153/24an.jpg

Do ya get it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Davo.

It would be more informative to use real world video scenes or quality still photos in stead of CGI for this comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gday Darklord,

It has been my observation that image depth, or 3d look is dictated by two main factors.

1. Black levels and contrast ratio.

Black must appear completely black to the viewer, and a reasonable contrast ratio must be available. Gray blacks completely destroy image depth.

A good example of this is my new 1920x1200 TFT display, which has no anti reflective coating and a shiny screen finish.

Under bright lighting the blacks on this screen are astonishing, and with no picture displayed the screen looks like a black hole.

Images on this screen look positively holographic, and so 3d in nature you feel sure you could put your hand through the screen.

However, dim the lights and the gray blacks of the TFT become very noticeable, and the 3d effect is completely lost.

2. Clean image.

A clean image, free of video noise, pixelation, visible pixel structure (SDE) etc, is very important to the 3d effect.

Even with good blacks and contrast, it is almost impossible to get a good 3d image if noise or pixelation are visible.

Since 1080 displays have very small pixels, and can normally provide a smooth clean, pixel free image, even at close viewing distances, they certainly have the potential to provide a nice 3d picture.

However if a low resolution screen is viewed from a distance where the pixels are completely invisible, it should be just as good at providing a nice 3d image, provided that items 1 and 2 are up to the mark.

Good clean HD video is also very helpful in creating a 3d image, provided points 1 and 2 are already met, although high resolution is not required.

HD video also has noticeably better colour then most SD video.

It is still quite possible to get a very nice 3d images from SD video sources like DVD if the replay equipment is of top quality.

When discussing the visible differences between SD and HD it is VITAL to differentiate between HD v SD source video and HD display v SD displays

As I have said before, HD video is normally MUCH better quality then SD video, regardless of resolution. So it is not possible too fairly compare SD with HD using different video sources.

We must use HD video source for any comparison of HD v SD displays.

For the fairest comparison the HD video should be down scaled externally by high quality means to the native resolution of the SD display under test.

Done this way, video source can be pretty much eliminated as a contributing factor in any comparison of display resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Davo.

It would be more informative to use real world video scenes or quality still photos in stead of CGI for this comparison.

Okay, same logic as before..

From 3m away:

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/5603/dxvaoffbob37dn.jpg

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2173/dxvaonbob35sa.jpg

Same distance but on a larger display:

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/7867/image64ge.jpg

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/8752/image73ph.jpg

The point is, you won't be able to see the extra fine details on a small screen from a large distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Thats better, thanks again Davo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since almost all digital displays currently on the market, even the expensive ones use bob deinterlacing for 1080i video, and therefor only deliver unscaled 540p to the screen...

Even the people with 50” Plasma’s don’t notice that their screens are only giving them unscaled 540p from 1080i video.

How certain are you of this, Owen? What do you base it upon?

Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alebonau,

Have you ever taken a nice clean 1080i video source and scaled it down to 540, or maybe 576 in software using a PC, and compared it with the  full res 1080i vision on your Plasma at 3 meters.

It's best if you maintain the PC output at the panels native resolution if posible, to avoid double scaling in the display which could adversly affect the comparison.

I think you would be surprised at the results.

Give it a go.

By the way, I never said smaller displays are useless for HD.

It’s just that most people will not be prepared to view a small screen from a close enough distance to get much advantage out of it, and that is especially true for 1080p displays.

Visitors to CEDIA who compared 50” 1080p and 720p displays like the Sony SXRD 1080p RPTV and A10 720p LCD RPTV using the same high quality HD video source reported very little difference in visible resolution at less then 3 meters viewing distances.

However, the same display technology in  60” size, at the same viewing distance uncover much more significant differences in detail and resolution.

owen when you have actually done some of these comparisons your telling me to do on plasma, used in on a day to day basis on both SD and true HD material then come back and talk about them on this forum.

put some true live 1080i material on a display like mine that can actually display even 1024 vertical lines. View from various distances upto 3m. Do the same by swapping to the SD channel. And then tell me what I'm saying is not true.

best you seem to do is talk about comparisons on tft pc monitors and a 86cm crt of mythical resolving qualities and a picture height smaller than 68cm crt :blink: and some comparisons done at cedia that didn't even involve plasmas anyway.

I have for your information done the comparison your talking about on my panel that can display 1024 lines, hell watch the TV everyday and with real live material not some pc wangled stuff as your suggesting ! Yes Owen true 1080i material on my display looks god damn jaw dropping compared to the SD equivalent. And thats with programs such as the panel on ch 10 and bert on during the day.

And yes I'd like to see some proof as well of what you say !, particualrly how you claim my alis panel and other plasmas apparently delivers 1080i as 540p to the screen ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
owen when you put some true live 1080i material on a display like mine that can actually display even 1024 vertical lines. View from various distances upto 3m. Do the same by swapping to the SD channel. And then tell me what I'm saying is not true.

No no no, you can’t do that to compare man, you have missed the point.

The SD channel is inferior quality, as well as lower resolution.

You must use the same HD source downscaled to a lower resolution to do a fare comparison of what your eyes can resolve.

Look a Davos pictures.

HD video on an SD TV will usually look better then SD video on a HD TV.

It makes no difference what size or display type is used. LCD, Plasma, CRT, RPTV the results will be the same on all for any given screen resolution to viewing distance ratio.

Got to run, by.

I dont use that 86cm to view anything by the way, and you should know that well by now dude.

It is in another room for the family, and replaced an old 68cm 4:3 TV.

I have a 21” CRT PC monitor, a 17” TFT monitor and 57” CRT RPTV all showing the same video at the same resolution, at the same time in the same room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gday Darklord,

It has been my observation that image depth, or 3d look is dictated by two main factors.

1. Black levels and contrast ratio.

Black must appear completely black to the viewer, and a reasonable contrast ratio must be available. Gray blacks completely destroy image depth.

A good example of this is my new 1920x1200 TFT display, which has no anti reflective coating and a shiny screen finish.

Under bright lighting the blacks on this screen are astonishing, and with no picture displayed the screen looks like a black hole.

Images on this screen look positively holographic, and so 3d in nature you feel sure you could put your hand through the screen.

However, dim the lights and the gray blacks of the TFT become very noticeable, and the 3d effect is completely lost.

2. Clean image.

A clean image, free of video noise, pixelation, visible pixel structure (SDE) etc, is very important to the 3d effect.

Even with good blacks and contrast, it is almost impossible to get a good 3d image if noise or pixelation are visible.

Since 1080 displays have very small pixels, and can normally provide a smooth clean, pixel free image, even at close viewing distances, they certainly have the potential to provide a nice 3d picture.

However if a low resolution screen is viewed from a distance where the pixels are completely invisible, it should be just as good at providing a nice 3d image, provided that items 1 and 2 are up to the mark.

Good clean HD video is also very helpful in creating a 3d image, provided points 1 and 2 are already met, although high resolution is not required.

HD video also has noticeably better colour then most SD video.

It is still quite possible to get a very nice 3d images from SD video sources like DVD if the replay equipment is of top quality.

When discussing the visible differences between SD and HD it is VITAL to differentiate between HD v SD source video and HD display v SD displays

As I have said before, HD video is normally MUCH better quality then SD video, regardless of resolution. So it is not possible too fairly compare SD with HD using different video sources.

We must use HD video source for any comparison of HD v SD displays.

For the fairest comparison the HD video should be down scaled externally by high quality means to the native resolution of the SD display under test.

Done this way, video source can be pretty much eliminated as a contributing factor in any comparison of display resolution.

Excellent post Owen. No disagreement from me on any of the above. Particularly in regards to black levels. As a CRT man I'm about as picky as you can be when it comes to black levels, and I posted about this very subject only yesterday in an LCD thread here. I also posted a link to a great thread at the AV Forums that I think simulates the importance of black levels quite well (not blowing my own trumpet btw, just stressing that I couldn’t agree with you any more on this one! :blink: ). As far as I’m concerned Black levels are THE most important determining factor in image depth and overall quality. For all the talk of “SD plasmas not resolving PAL signals” talk thrown around here, I’ve seen some 853x480 plasma with good contrast vastly outperform 1024x768 and 1366x768 plasmas with poor contrast, with exactly the same HD source for this very reason alone.

Your LCD analogy is also spot on, as I notice exactly the same thing with my Toshiba 1280x800 TruBrite laptop screen that I’m looking at right now. It’s black levels look great and have that "pure black hole" effect when viewed within a small onscreen area, with other bright surrounding material on screen, and in a brightly lit room. However with the lights out and a pure black screen it’s washed our light grey nightmare. I could almost read a book by it. I'm personally yet to see any LCD that is any different in this regard. It’s simply not possible with a light source directly behind the screen!

The human brain is also far more sensitive to white and black detail (i.e. most of the detail of an image is in the black and white domain) than colour detail as numerous tests have illustrated. Hence the reason we can get way with such chronic colour compression with most codecs without noticing a big drop in colour detail. There's actually a very good section dealing with this on Joe Kane's excellent DVE disc as it goes through a section explains what defines good image quality.

I also agree with your other points regarding clean high quality source without excessive noise etc but I won’t go into that in detail.

Having said that, even when viewing an HD source on similar screens that are separated by only differences in their ability to resolve fine detail (i.e. all else being equal), the higher resolution the screen, the better it generally looks from any distance. I’m not talking detail here. We're in complete agreement (and Davo illustrated this very nicely above) that the human eye can only distinguish fine detail at a certain distance, related to the screen’s size and resolution. However forgetting this for a moment, and presuming we're talking about exactly the same HD source, presented on screens of differing resolutions, it is my experience that the HD screen will still have a greater sense of depth (the “looking out a window effect” to use an exaggerated metaphor) from even very long distances. Solely because the pixels are packed much more tightly together, giving the screen and extra sense of 3 dimensionality and vividness.

However there are, as we all know, so many variables to take into account with these kind of comparisons, that’s its almost impossible to test under anything under than the most stringent scientific conditions. Source material, compression, de-interlacing and scaling methods, deficiencies in screen technology etc all have to be factored in, making it very hard.

Forgetting all the technicalities for a moment, it is my personal opinion that higher resolution is always worthwhile on ANY screen size, providing the rest of the screen's technology is up to scratch. What I mean by this is that if I had to choose between a high resolution screen with very poor black levels (i.e. most LCDs) or a lower resolution screen with great contrast, then I’d nearly always take the lower resolution screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:blink:

Oh really?!?

Yes! :P I was afraid one of you would think that, hence my reference to it! Was just trying to stress how much I agreed on black levels. Its an area I'm obsessively pedantic about :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How certain are you of this, Owen? What do you base it upon?

Adam

The issue of digital displays only providing upscaled 540p from 1080i video source was a hot topic on AVS a month or two back.

Manufacturers don’t let on what is going on in there deinterlacing systems, but it came to light recently that simple Bob deinterlacing is the norm for just about everything on the market at that time.

Bob deinterlacing effectively treats each field as a frame.

This results in smooth motion, but only provides half vertical resolution (540).

I don’t have any info on specific models, and I think you will find it almost impossible to obtain that information.

The cost of providing the video processing power required to do proper motion or pixel adaptive deinterlacing of 1080i would raise the cost of products significantly, and on displays up to about 50”, the improvement in on screen quality is not considered significant enough to warrant the extra cost.

Hell, the general public, and even most video enthusiasts did not even notice the difference, so the manufacturers made a smart choice. :blink:

Stand alone deinterlacer – scalers that can handle 1080i properly cost thousands of dollars on there own.

The cheaper models like the iScan only do “Bob” deinterlacing of 1080i in the same way as most digital displays.

The good news it that with the large 1080p displays on the way, manufacturers will no longer be able to get away with elcheapo deinterlacing, as it will be to noticeable on a 60” or larger 1080p display.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have seen and read, Owen is spot on when it comes to the vast majority of current HD displays. 1080i to 1080p conversion is nearly always done by a simple bob/line doubling process. Simply interpolate 540 line interlaced fields to 1080 line frames by doubling lines. Couldn’t be easier or cheaper.

This will change with many manufacturers now announcing support for Silicon Optix's awesome HQV chipset, which is currently considered the best consumer range de-interlacing, scaling and noise reduction chipset in the world. Faroudja have well and truly lost the title in this area, until the release of their upcoming 1080p chipset (which is nothing but rumour at this point from what I understand).

HQV de-interlaces 1080i on a per pixel level and can easily weave de-interlace film based 1080i (anything shot at 24p or 25p) to 1080p retaining full vertical resolution, or apply sophisticated motion adaptive de-interlacing to 1080i video content (anything shot in native 1080/50i or 1080/60i). I'm yet to see it in action for myself as it’s currently only available in a few top end flagship products (such as Denon’s awesome 5910 DVD Player) but no one describes it’s performance as anything other than superb. The amount of recent CEDIA expo announcements of manufacturers supporting this chipset was staggering, so it’s obvious they have confidence in it’s abilities (as its currently very expensive to license and use). Going by past trends you can expect to see this technology drop in price and filter down to regular consumer displays fairly quickly (just as Faroudja’s DCDi did with quality de-interlacing of SD content).

To read more about HQV and the benefits it provides, check out the website here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Classifieds Statistics


    Currently Active Ads

    Total Sales (Since 2018)

    Total Sales Value (Last 14 Days)

    Total Ads Value (Since March 2020)
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...