Plasma Vs. Lcd

[JimmyNeutron]

Both my Pioneer plasma and my Mitsubishi 65" projector handle 720p and 1080i. I can tell you that regardless from where I sit there is a difference between the 2. I've never bought into the notion that someone says I had to sit x feet from the screen if it is y inches large to see any difference. My eyes don't care about pixels or resolution on a screen at any distance - they just soak up as much info that is thrown their way. So when a 1080 signal gets to my eyes over a 720 signal - I can see it. I've seen 1080p on display floors and they are even sharper than 720p - at any distance.

Jimmy

 

[Duffinator]

Both my Pioneer plasma and my Mitsubishi 65" projector handle 720p and 1080i.

While it's true they both handle 720P and 1080i they don't display both resolutions. Your plasma only displays 720P images and your RPTV only displays 1080i. So you have to take into account the scalers and deinterlacers in both sets which can have a significant impact on your picture quality. You would need a flexible display that's capable of displaying both resolultions in their native format to make an apples to apples comparison.

 

[uofmtiger]

Both my Pioneer plasma and my Mitsubishi 65" projector handle 720p and 1080i. I can tell you that regardless from where I sit there is a difference between the 2.

720"p" is broadcast by CBS - it looks very, very good. 1080"i" is broadcast by ABC and is also very, very good.Jimmy

You do not even know that ABS was in 720P and CBS is 1080i, so you do not even know which source you are even looking at!!

ver bought into the notion that someone says I had to sit x feet from the screen if it is y inches large to see any difference. My eyes don't care about pixels or resolution on a screen at any distance - they just soak up as much info that is thrown their way. So when a 1080 signal gets to my eyes over a 720 signal - I can see it. I've seen 1080p on display floors and they are even sharper than 720p - at any distance.Jimmy

Display floors seldom have properly calibrated sets.

The science of how we see is prevalent and if it was false, we would have a hard time correcting vision with charts. If we could see fine detail at any distance we could read every line on the eye chart. My main television is 61 inches and I sit about 12 feet from the screen. The recommendation is to sit 7'7 inches away from a 1080P TV of 61 inches to get full resolution. That is not something that will work in my home.

"Say you're viewing a 720p set from a distance such that it takes up 21 degrees of your viewing angle. Replacing this set with a 1080p set of the same size and sitting the same distance away will look almost identical. No significant additional detail will be revealed. "
http://www.gadgetbench.com/screensize/index.php

and

http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationReso...e/PenetrantTest/Introduction/visualacuity.htm

The above is based on 20/20 vision, which I have, so I will base my choices on that.

I have a 42 inch, 1080P, being delivered this week for the bedroom, so I am not against 1080P. It is just not an improvement if you sit far enough away.

I've seen 1080p on display floors and they are even sharper than 720p - at any distance.

:headscrat At ANY distance??? WOW!

 

[JimmyNeutron]

You do not even know that ABS was in 720P and CBS is 1080i, so you do not even know which source you are even looking at!!



Display floors seldom have properly calibrated sets.

The science of how we see is prevalent and if it was false, we would have a hard time correcting vision with charts. If we could see fine detail at any distance we could read every line on the eye chart. My main television is 61 inches and I sit about 12 feet from the screen. The recommendation is to sit 7'7 inches away from a 1080P TV of 61 inches to get full resolution. That is not something that will work in my home.

"Say you're viewing a 720p set from a distance such that it takes up 21 degrees of your viewing angle. Replacing this set with a 1080p set of the same size and sitting the same distance away will look almost identical. No significant additional detail will be revealed. "
http://www.gadgetbench.com/screensize/index.php

and

http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationReso...e/PenetrantTest/Introduction/visualacuity.htm

The above is based on 20/20 vision, which I have, so I will base my choices on that.

I have a 42 inch, 1080P, being delivered this week for the bedroom, so I am not against 1080P. It is just not an improvement if you sit far enough away.

:headscrat At ANY distance??? WOW!

I watch LOST on ABC in 1080, while I watch CSI on CBS in 720 - go figure.

I guess if you sit far enough away any resolution will suck. I'm saying that if you look at a 720p image and a 1080i image they will look, at the least the same, and at best the 1080i will look better, no matter what your viewing distance is - in a normal room. I'm not saying you have to sit 16 feet back just cause your display is 65", then take out the slidruler, and the measuring tape...... Just a normal viewing distance. 1080i looks better. If you think your 720p display looks better than 1080, maybe you should consider getting another display. :thumbsdn:

 

[JimmyNeutron]

While it's true they both handle 720P and 1080i they don't display both resolutions. Your plasma only displays 720P images and your RPTV only displays 1080i. So you have to take into account the scalers and deinterlacers in both sets which can have a significant impact on your picture quality. You would need a flexible display that's capable of displaying both resolultions in their native format to make an apples to apples comparison.

You are correct Duff. But to clarify. My older Pioneer plasma has a native 720p panel resolution. My Mitsubishi has a 1080i resolution, and my Runco plasma has a native 1080 resolution panel (I don't have the manual and I can't find enough info to confirm this so I could be wrong - this set was given to me. But the onscreen display shows as 1080i, in addition to the source resolution).


EDIT: I stand corrected on the Runco's resolution. It is indeed a native 768 panel.

 

[Duffinator]

You are correct Duff. But to clarify. My older Pioneer plasma has a native 720p panel resolution. My Mitsubishi has a 1080i resolution, and my Runco plasma has a native 1080 resolution panel (I don't have the manual and I can't find enough info to confirm this so I could be wrong - this set was given to me. But the onscreen display shows as 1080i, in addition to the source resolution).


EDIT: I stand corrected on the Runco's resolution. It is indeed a native 768 panel.

I'm not trying to pitpic you on this but just point out that your comments are your opinions which are fine.

Let's face it. Viewing distances don't matter since most of us have a fixed viewing distance and we are not going to change it with a different resolution set. So in your home if a 720P or 1080i/P set looks good to you then fine. To me I want the highest resolution set possible. I completely buy into the old saying that bigger is better and I'll add to that the more pixels the better, at least to me. :yes: While 1080P sets are here and HD/BD DVD is here there won't be any broadcast signals at 1080P for sometime if ever.

 

[fujifrontier]

my head is spinning

 

[uofmtiger]

I watch LOST on ABC in 1080, while I watch CSI on CBS in 720 - go figure.

ABC was on the forefront of HD programming when we decided to deliver our programming in the HD format of 720p resolution. The 720p format uses progressive scanning, just like your computer monitor. Progressive scanning offers crystal clear images as it virtually eliminates the scanning lines that are visible on most large screen televisions. http://abc.go.com/site/hdtvfaq.html
If you are under the assumption that Lost is in 1080i and conclude from watching it that 1080i is better, then you actually prefer 720P because that is the format Lost is shot in.

Conversely, CBS uses 1080i. http://www.hdtvgalaxy.com/broad274.html

Since you have no clue what you are watching, it is impossible to take anything you say seriously...

a normal viewing distance. 1080i looks better.

Once again, it depends on the content. There is a reason ABC, FOX, and ESPN went with 720p. It is the advantage of progressive on motion.

720p versus 1080i
Some United States broadcasters use 720p60 as their primary high-definition format; others use the 1080i standard. While 720p presents a complete 720 line frame to the viewer between 24 to 60 times each second (depending on the format), 1080i presents the picture as 50 or 60 partial 540 line "fields" (24 complete 1080-line fields, or "24p" is included in the ATSC standard though) which the human eye or a deinterlacer built into the display device must visually and temporally combine to build a 1080 line picture - in CRT type display. To get all 1080 interlaced lines to appear on the screen at the same time on a progressive high-definition display, the processor within the HD set has to weave together both 540-line segments to form the full-resolution frame. It does so by holding the first field in its memory, receiving the next field, then electronically knitting the two fields together. The combined fields are displayed at once as a complete 1080p frame. The main tradeoff between the two is that 1080i may show more detail than 720p for a stationary shot of a subject at the expense of a lower effective refresh rate and the introduction of interlace artifacts during motion. 720p is used by ABC and ESPN because the smoother image is desirable for fast-action sports telecasts. Fox Broadcasting Company uses the tagline "the nation's finest high-definition standard" in advertising its 720p programming.

http://www.answers.com/topic/720p

1080i results in smearing of vertical moving objects which is why Joe Kane and others prefer 720P to 1080i.

I have owned both 1080i and 720P sets and the most important aspect to either is the picture quality being fed. All HD sources are not filmed to the degree that it makes much difference....As you know from experience since you think Lost is in 1080i and CSI is in 720P.

 

[Aage]

Thanks Derek, that's the best explanation I've heard, although my head is spinning a bit, as Fuji said before.

As Eva Gabor on the old "Green Acres" series would say, "But 720p gives you less schmearing ven dey move, dahlink."

 

[Jack G]

Just for the record, I prefer 1080i broadcasts over 720p, and don't really see any smearing, but to be fair, I don't do sports. IMO, CBS has some of the best HD broadcasts of the networks (PBS is nice too).
There are other reasons why some channels prefer 720p-its a lot easier to do, and its also cheaper (hence Fox's preference).
I doubt 1080p will be broadcast anytime soon, if ever. The networks are having enough problems with what they have now.
One of the other advantages of higher pixel numbers (1080p) is that you can sit rather close to your set without seeing the indevidual pixels (the screen door effect).
Just some random thoughts...
Jack

 

[uofmtiger]

Just for the record, I prefer 1080i broadcasts over 720p, and don't really see any smearing, but to be fair, I don't do sports. IMO, CBS has some of the best HD broadcasts of the networks (PBS is nice too).
There are other reasons why some channels prefer 720p-its a lot easier to do, and its also cheaper (hence Fox's preference).
I doubt 1080p will be broadcast anytime soon, if ever. The networks are having enough problems with what they have now.
One of the other advantages of higher pixel numbers (1080p) is that you can sit rather close to your set without seeing the indevidual pixels (the screen door effect).
Just some random thoughts...
Jack

Each person is entitled to their personal preference. Almost all programs (I guess a test signal at the end of the day is still) have motion, so refresh rates come into play. Most HDTVs have the choice of 1080i or 720p and they do better when fed a native signal. Many 1080i TVs, actually down convert 720p to 540i and and then upconvert to 1080i. This is not a fair comparison with a TV that does 720p natively.

There are other reasons why some channels prefer 720p-its a lot easier to do, and its also cheaper (hence Fox's preference).

Interlaced video reduces the signal bandwidth by a factor of two, for a given spatial resolution and refresh rate. So I am not sure how much easier 720p is to do than 1080i. I have not looked into this, but I would love to see your source. I am always willing to learn more about it.

Joe Kane, video guru, has no dog in this race and still prefers 720p:

"Joe Kane Productions is strongly backing all progressive formats over any interlaced video option. Progressive images look better when objects in the pictures are in motion. A progressive image is complete in itself where an interlaced image is often different between the first and second half of the video signal. The differences between the two halves of the picture show up as interlaced artifacts. The vertical resolution of an interlaced signal has to be filtered in order to reduce the visibility of these artifacts. That reduces the real image resolution far below the scan numbers associated with the format. Digital compression of images, which is necessary to make them fit into the space allocated for a broadcasting TV channel or a D-Theater tape, is far more efficient with progressive video at the source than interlaced video." http://www.videoessentials.com/D_TheaterQA.php

 

[uofmtiger]

One of the other advantages of higher pixel numbers (1080p) is that you can sit rather close to your set without seeing the indevidual pixels (the screen door effect).
Just some random thoughts...

This was my point of distance and screen size above. If I was sitting 7 or 8 feet from my TV, I would upgrade to 1080p tomorrow.

 

[Jack G]

You do realise, that that FAQ you linked to was written in 2003, don't you?
From answer 18: " We hope to see it available in the DLP format by the end of 2004. It is our intention to be on the market with 1080p test material as soon as it is practical."

"All Right Reserved. Copyright © Joe Kane Productions, 2003."

Its practical now, and the release of his his HD DVD test disc keeps getting pushed farther and farther back.

That info is a bit out of date. It is rather easy now for TVs and/or outboard procesors to deinterlace 1080i to 1080p without any degredation of the signal. There are still issues (jutter) of converting 1080p24 to 1080p60.

I beleive the broadcast difficulties (1080i Vs. 720p) have been mentioned over at AVS foum by some of the folks from the local TV stations in the HDTV forums. If I have enough time, I'll try to dig them up, but that means searching through over 10,000 post in the thread. Smearing is more of a problem with fast motion, ie sports.

Sorry your TV does the dreaded "Bob and Weave" for 720p, they have pretty much done away with that now. Quite a few manufacturers did that as a cost cutting measure for a breif period of time, so you are not alone.
enjoy,
Jack

 

[P. Shivers]

Even if it weren't for the price differential, I would still choose the LCOS set.

Same here. I've had my JVC D-ILA LCos set for almost 2 years now, and still am amazed by its picture.:yes: I like the recommendation to ask your local TV repair tech's opinion. If I had done that, I never would have bought the Samsung DLP that my JVC replaced. I'm not hanging my monitor on a wall though, so I didn't need to decide which flat panel technology was better.

 

[Aage]

I beleive the broadcast difficulties (1080i Vs. 720p) have been mentioned over at AVS foum by some of the folks from the local TV stations in the HDTV forums. If I have enough time, I'll try to dig them up, but that means searching through over 10,000 post in the thread. Smearing is more of a problem with fast motion, ie sports.

Sorry your TV does the dreaded "Bob and Weave" for 720p, they have pretty much done away with that now. Quite a few manufacturers did that as a cost cutting measure for a breif period of time, so you are not alone.
enjoy,
Jack

More great info, Jack. Thanks to you an UofMtiger, I'm starting to get a handle on the issues around this stuff.

So, is it fair to say that as long as the bigscreen TV you get (I'm fairly sure I want a 42") has native 720p that, as far as broadcast is concerned, it gives the audience today's SOTA performance? Or is there some possibility that the broadcasters will get behind 1080p in the near future?

Quite frankly, until there's more clarity in the hi-def optical disc format, I'm not buying either, so broadcast is likely to be the only hi-def I watch.

 

[Jack G]

More great info, Jack. Thanks to you an UofMtiger, I'm starting to get a handle on the issues around this stuff.

So, is it fair to say that as long as the bigscreen TV you get (I'm fairly sure I want a 42") has native 720p that, as far as broadcast is concerned, it gives the audience today's SOTA performance? Or is there some possibility that the broadcasters will get behind 1080p in the near future?

Quite frankly, until there's more clarity in the hi-def optical disc format, I'm not buying either, so broadcast is likely to be the only hi-def I watch.

Well, as Uofmtiger stated, the more pixels, the better. 720p sets are 1366 X 768 =1,049,088 pixels, whereas 1080p sets are 1920 X 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels. Personally, I don't think 720 is SOTA, and I like to look towards the future. Regardless of which format (HD DVD, Blu-ray), if any, wins, something along those lines will be the way things are, in the not too distant future. That may be something to think about when shopping. They do now make plasmas and LCDs in that size range that are 1080p (I think). Westinghouse makes a 1080p either a plasma or LCD in that size-you may wish to look into it(?).
Jack

 

[uofmtiger]

You do realise, that that FAQ you linked to was written in 2003, don't you?
From answer 18: " We hope to see it available in the DLP format by the end of 2004. It is our intention to be on the market with 1080p test material as soon as it is practical."

"All Right Reserved. Copyright © Joe Kane Productions, 2003."

Its practical now, and the release of his his HD DVD test disc keeps getting pushed farther and farther back.

That info is a bit out of date. It is rather easy now for TVs and/or outboard procesors to deinterlace 1080i to 1080p without any degredation of the signal. There are still issues (jutter) of converting 1080p24 to 1080p60.

I beleive the broadcast difficulties (1080i Vs. 720p) have been mentioned over at AVS foum by some of the folks from the local TV stations in the HDTV forums. If I have enough time, I'll try to dig them up, but that means searching through over 10,000 post in the thread. Smearing is more of a problem with fast motion, ie sports.

Sorry your TV does the dreaded "Bob and Weave" for 720p, they have pretty much done away with that now. Quite a few manufacturers did that as a cost cutting measure for a breif period of time, so you are not alone.
enjoy,
Jack

The issue of interlacing vs progressive is still relevant. I was not referring to the article as a whole. The way interlacing builds the picture with 540 lines at a time is still the main issue.

I was not referring to the 1080p section which was not even an option at the time it was written.

If you are asking which is better for all situations, the answer is 1080p. I believe progressive is better than interlaced across the board. However, for my given distance, as I explained above, 1080p does not offer any real benefit over 720P.

Smearing is more of a problem with fast motion, ie sports.

More of a problem is true. However, interlacing is what it is and the way it rebulds the picture generally leaves you with less than 1080 lines of resolution on the screen at any given moment. If this was not the case, no one would care about upgrading to 1080p.

So, is it fair to say that as long as the bigscreen TV you get (I'm fairly sure I want a 42") has native 720p that, as far as broadcast is concerned, it gives the audience today's SOTA performance? Or is there some possibility that the broadcasters will get behind 1080p in the near future?

Broadcasters will probably not switch to 1080p. The benefit of getting a 1080p is the fact that it will covert 1080i to 1080p and offer a tangible benefit over 1080i and 720p if you are sitting close enough to your TV.

 

[uofmtiger]

Westinghouse makes a 1080p either a plasma or LCD in that size-you may wish to look into it

I am getting the 42 inch Westy this week. It does not have an internal tuner, so if you want OTA, you will need a breakout box.

 

[bordeno]

Even though you folks now know everything about HDTV, I still recommend checking out that perky cheerleader on the Samsung website! :tresbon:

 

[Jack G]

I am getting the 42 inch Westy this week. It does not have an internal tuner, so if you want OTA, you will need a breakout box.

That sucks-I didn't know that!

Even though you folks now know everything about HDTV, I still recommend checking out that perky cheerleader on the Samsung website!

I tried, but couldn't find her.
Jack