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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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
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.
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 .
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
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.
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.
My tests were a little different, but I agree there could be some difference because you're matching the native resolution of the 1080p HD DVD disk. Again you're not using the same TVS, you need side to side tests with the same sets & settings to really tell. In the same manner we tested the ABC 720p signal Private Practice on a 768p and the same show on the 1080p set, and the 768 set was much better. With the DVDs we used the XA2, and to note, the upconversion of standard shot in HD 16.9 widescreen disks worked better with the XA2 in 720 on the 768 set than the upconversion of that disk on the 1080p set with the player in any setting. My results are different, the 720p setting works well on the XA2.
But we're not comparing upconversion here. You said in your post yesterday: With HD DVD (or BluRay) 1080p movies the best display to use is still a 1080p. Now if you can afford a 1080p/24fps setup so much the better.
I agree we weren't talking upconversions, but if you want to go back to the main point I did mention comparisons with HD DVDs should be done side to side with the same type TV and the same settings with just the resolution difference. Like for instance a 40inch Bravia 1080p in vivid next to a 768 Bravia in vivid. Same HD DVD player same movie. I seen the tests.
No matter. error5's point is still valid. If you want the best picture from a film-based source (HD DVD or BluRay) you need: 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. A pure 1080p/24 signal from disk to display is the new standard right now that most enthusiasts try to acquire. You avoid conversion errors and pitfalls resulting in the best PQ available. This just can't be done on a 720p or 768p display.
I know what you're saying I just didn't see them. Something things like that are more relevant on paper than to the eyes. Taken all the signals and every feature, from DVD upconvrsion, 720p signals and the max resolution of the eyes, I will still go with the 768 sets by far, but again, that's me. People have to make to make their own minds. Matter of fact if you want to start talking this artifacts stuff there is some evidence that 1080p sets have more of a problem. 768p sets are better sets. 1080p has Problems with artifacts "A high-resolution image with image artifacts such as motion smearing, incorrect white balance or color points, and grayscale rendering problems may not look as realistic as a lower-resolution image without these problems." http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January/13-ProAV-Old Site Content-2005-501proavparallaxview.htm A lot of the 1080p stuff was marketing S%^t now being admitted. People have went into stores and seen the same Blu ray signals side by side on 768 and 1080p sets and the 768 sold at a much higher scale. These are facts. http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/07/0...hdtv-selection-blames-1080p-for-slipping-sal/ Circuit City admitted "The CE retailer says it may have overemphasized the new 1080p sets. http://www.tvpredictions.com/cc1080062107.htm Now of course CC will not admit there is no difference, if that is the case they will never sell another 1080p set, so they blamed the reason for the 720p sets outselling the 1080p sets on the economy. So you have to smart enough to read between the lines on that one. The fact is, like me, people seen no difference and seen no reason to spend more money. Take those links and research for what it's worth, don't buy into the 1080p hype. But again, make up your mind. If you go to the THX site you can punch in the numbers yourself and see how close you have to be to see 1080p benefits. http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html A lot of side to side tests confirmed this and other sources as well. "We've done side-by-side tests between two 46-inch LCD HDTVs, one with 1366x768 resolution and the other with 1080p resolution, using the same 1080i source material, and it was extremely difficult for us to see any difference. It becomes even more difficult at smaller screen sizes or farther seating distances--say, more than 1.5 times the diagonal measurement of the screen." http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5137915-1.html "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." http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5137915-1.html "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)" http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoff...n//index1.html "The good news is that amongst the 1080p sets they used (the 47-inch Westinghouse and the 50-inch Pioneer) the level of detail was "virtually identical." However, when they compared the image to sets with lower resolutions, they noticed it was harder to pick up on the differences in detail. Overall, they concluded it would be "practically impossible" to tell the difference between the image on a 1080p vs a 1080i or 720p. " http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/1080p/108...-it-213983.php "at the average viewing distance, with the average size of consumer HDTV sets, the human eye would not actually be able to perceive the difference in resolution between 720p and 1080p. This is because the 720p image "saturates" the perceivable resolution of the eye at this distance" http://www.witwib.com/720p "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." When you see the retail chains actually admit over emphasis of 1080p what is that teliing you?.... and that's coming from them... my advice... save your money... get a good 768p set that has a good processor.
