According to the Imaging Science Foundation the most important factors that contribute to picture quality, in descending order of importance are: 1. Contrast Ratio 2. Color Saturation 3. Color Accuracy 4. Resolution So you see folks, resolution is the least important. HOWEVER, the bad news for 720/768 supporters is that all the improvements in the 1st 3 factors are all being included only in the latest 1080p displays. Were seeing massive improvements in contrast ratio for 1080p displays. dblbogey7's JVC RS1 projector for example has a whopping 15,000:1 contrast ratio. Sony's future 1080p OLED displays are touted to have 1,000,000:1 CR but take this with a grain of salt. Also the 1080p displays are starting to have HDMI 1.3 connections which enable deep color and better color controls/accuracy. None of these improvements are happening in the 720/768 displays. The newer and upcoming 1080p models are still the best not just because of increased resolution but because the CE makers are also improving contrast ratio, color satration and color accuracy on these sets.
Not using 24 material? & that's what your extensive research into that test leads you to believe? Again all un- researched comments not based in facts... however, all my points were verified by multiple links and professionals. I seen and done the tests myself using the same type sets.
So you're asking me to believe that you have a 1080p/24fps setup from disk to display? What's the model of your HD DVD or BluRay player outputting 1080p/24? What's the model of your 1080p display that has 24fps input with 72Hz or 96Hz or 120Hz? How did you conduct the testing? Was it blinded? Did you use the HQV HD DVD or BluRay benchmark discs? Unless you compare a pure 1080p/24 system vs a 768p/60 system then you haven't proven anything. There's a new kid in town called 1080p/24. The sooner your so called "experts" and professionals" realize that the better for them.
Yea OK... I'll write all those people and tell them they're wrong. Before I research that equipment let me say that I'm not saying that 1080p/24 doesn't have it's benefits or it is not good. But one area of greatness can take away the great benefits from the other. You can't get the same quality of the 720p/60 signal on a 1080p set. I said both sets were great, but to me the 720p/60 signal is the best signal of the ATSC, and you can't see that best when diluting it with over 1 million filler gaps. I provided enough evidence to show that max resolution of the eyes is about 720 with a 50 inch set at about 9- 10 feet. I'll give you 15 links to prove it. Taken that into consideration with the best temporal resolution, puts the 720p signal at #1. Not again to mention the many 1080 vs 720 tests that conclusively shown no differences. I provided those links. The problem here lies where 1080p owners bought into the over emphasis that retail stores promoted, and admitted was over emphasized, so 1080p owners bought into it and they think they achieved HD nirvana. FORMED THE WE GOT THE BEST ATTITUDE" As soon as many facts are brought to light by many verifiable sources that tells them there is no difference in resolution in average conditions and 720p has it's advantages in some cases... GOD... we took you out of your HD Nirvana BS you thought you achieved when buying the set, and that is what is happening here. 768 owners don't defend their purchase as much because they didn't buy their sets trying to reach HD nirvana.... as the 2 articles stated, they looked at the sets and said, why spend the extra money? Called common sense, something new and exiting, over emphasis on 1080p was later admitted by the retail chain and the 768 sets flew out of the stores. As it was said "Find yourself a nice 1366 X 768 TV produced by a Tier 1 manufacturer and let it go at that. Put the $1000 you will save into a good set of speakers and receiver for your home theater. A 1080p display does not look any better than a 720p" http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtv/1080p-vs-720p.html But if you want to keep coming up with reasons to justify your extra spending... defy all the presented facts... knock yourself out... yea... 1080p/24 is #1... you happy now? There you go. You can keep beating the dead hoarse all you want and this debate will never be settled.
You can spin it all you want HDNut but we're not buying it. Your talking points are all outdated and you refuse to accept this. There's a new factor that has tipped the balance and you refuse to accept this. As dblbogey7 said: With the arrival of 1080p/24 whatever advantages of 720/768 had before have now been totally eliminated. Your 15 links have no meaning now since you have to take into consideration the advantages of a smooth, judder-free, artifact-free, 3:2 pulldown error-free, scaling error-free playback. Also juankerr's points are valid. Guess where all R&D dollars and spec improvements in contrast ratio and color saturation/accuracy will go? Not to the fiscally inferior 720/768 sets, but to the more profitable 1080p sets. Face it, 768/60 is slowly being pushed to the side. 1080p/24 is the new king of the hill for movie playback.
Tests are what what matters and progressive scanning is free of what you say... I have film base pull down as well.... it just annoys you that you can't get the best picture from the best signal out there because of 1 million filler gaps. It was I that provided all the evidence and people like you who bought that 1080p hype. LOL! Kool aid my friend. 720p/60 is #1!
More FUD and misinformation. I guess it hurts for you to accept that what you once believed has now been superseded by new and clearly superior technology. "1 million filler gaps" - 1080p/24 has no filler gaps. The video signal is bit-for-bit identical to what's on the disc. "Kool aid my friend." - Another laughable and totally inappropriate analogy. 1080p/24 was not a "kool aid" drink that the CE manufacturers forcefully thrust on the consumer. Instead it was the A/V community that demanded that 1080p/24 be included in the specs. The original 2nd gen 1080p HD DVD players did not have 1080p/24 enabled. It was only when 24fps inputs became available in a few front projectors and plasmas that AV enthusisasts started to clamor for it to be enabled. Actually the PS3 beat HD DVD to the punch and was the first to activate this in the 1.9 update in July. Eventually the A20 and XA2 also got this feature thru the much-anticipated 2.5 update in September. (The 2.7 update released Monday fixed the audio sync issues in the XA2 again because of feedback from the user community.) Now 1080p/24 is standard in the 3rd gen 1080p models and in the current BluRay players and we're seeing more and more HDTV's with 1080p/24fps inputs with displays at 72, 96 or 120 Hz. The excellent afterdawn news staff has been on top of these developments: http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10488.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10285.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/11189.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10050.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10261.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10780.cfm http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/11003.cfm 1080p/24 has become the de facto standard in movie playback for HD DVD and BluRay. Nope. That would be too harsh. Maybe you could suggest that they "rethink their position in light of recent developments."
LOL... The kool aid meant when you sent 720/60 signal to the 1080 set.. Never mind.... BTW.... thank you for the many displays of 1080 sets.
I had the opportunity last night at a dinner party to see what you guys were talking about. The host's HDTV was a new Pioneer 1080p 60 inch Elite plasma. It's the model that accepts the 24 fps signal and is IIRC 72 Hz. It was fed a 1080p 24 fps signal from a Panasonic BluRay player through HDMI. The scenes from several BluRay movies that we saw were indeed very smooth and more film-like than anything I've ever seen before. There was a distinct 3D feel to the picture that's difficult to describe but it was as close as you could get to being in a theater. We have a multiplex with a few 4K projectors and I'd say the experience was with the Kuro was pretty impressive. He had an older model 50 inch 768p Pioneer plasma in his basement and I asked him if we could do a quick comparison. He hooked up the Bluray to the 768p set and used the 720p setting. The older model plasma just didn't match up very well and was blown away. The picture just did't look right and didn't have that film-like quality to it. The 1080i setting looked a little worse and was still vastly inferior to the new 1080p's picture. All my male friends in the party, and several of the women who chimed in, all agreed. Now I see what you guys have been talking about. I'd say that if you have the means the choice is easy if you have BluRay or HD DVD.
60" plasma with 1080P/24 should look incredible, it is for these larger screens 1080P was made for. The 50" 720P is pushing the envelop for 720P, at this size the pixels are starting to become quite noticeable especially when about 6-8' away and closer. It really is about screen size. Although the new specs for 1080P have enabled what appear to be much more vibrant colors, the new 1080P displays look deeper and have more texture IMO, even on smaller screens.
TEXTURE! - exacly the word I was looking for when I said 3d feel on the 1080p/24 setup. Thanks jakewash. The 768p set just didn't have this. It was like someone put a very thin veil over my eyes.
Panasonic's Blu-ray playes don't have 1080po/24 output to my knowledge. In fact I have found that the 3:3 pull-down associated with a 72Hz refresh rate doesn't necessarily make the picture smoother. Ced
All righty folks...after reading multiple pages my head now hurts. I know that the 1080p technology is improving thus making it more sense for the future(especially with larger screen size). Here's the scenerio I'm in: I want a LCD no larger than a 46"...most likely 42", so I'm leaning towards the LG model being sold by CC and BB in todays adds/webpage. It's 720p.....would you "really" notice that much of a difference being that its a 720p from a viewing distance of 8.5-9ft? The price of the 1080p's are still a bit pricey IMHO. Thanks!
Here's the link of that LCD http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8258039&type=product&id=1169857636984
