Did you notice the next technology to come out is always the bomb & once it's here it always blends into the other technologies? Always compared to plasma & LCD. Anyway the laser set is a rear projection set. Check these aticles out! http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/19/laser-tv-no-plasma-killer/ http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17651&ch=infotech
Also, the ultra HD was a little bit of a marketing trick, they showed a film of a roller coaster, and those of us who remember the old Brady Bunch film at Kings Island remember how sick we were from watching the roller coaster. The feeling they thought was from the reality of ultra HD, really was their depth perception. You will get motion sickness looking at a roller coaster on any standard set. To the other post about the blah.... 720p has better contrast than 1080i, and the reason 720p will not look as good is when you watch 720p on a 1080i or p set. The math has been done by more than one source. & "Contrast and brightness have a greater impact on the human visual system than does resolution. The 720P picture is brighter and has greater contrast than the 1080I picture." http://alvyray.com/DigitalTV/Progressive_FAQ.htm 720p is #1 Fastest and best temporal resolution and the max resolution for the human eye at the average distance.
I have a 1080p TV and NO WAY am I going back to 720p. When 1080p/60 sources become more common (PS3, BluRay etc) I want to be ready to diplay at those pixels.
Well pull your chair about 3 feet away from your set becaue that is the only way you'll be able to see those pixels with the lower frame rate! Wasted resolution for a slower frame rate! Do people read the entire thread here or just the last post? You get more pixles per second with 720p Continued denials of logic and math. 1080p/24 49766400 pixels per second 720p/60 55296000 pixels per second. 720p on 1366x768 62945280 pixels per second "It is not the pixels in a still frame that counts - still video is boring. It is the pixels per second delivered to viewers that matters" http://alvyray.com/DigitalTV/Naming_Proposal.htm "Talk TV, Smart Guy 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. 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). Scan lines are the pixels of the CRT world and, in this case, function similarly. The pixels in some displays are not square, in which case you'll also need to check pixel height. " http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/ "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." http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January/13-ProAV-Old Site Content-2005-501proavparallaxview.htm
Also error5, You have one of the many 1080p sets that only scale to 1080p. Proves my point that more people got into 1080p without any research from the frame rates, mathematics of the eye, or the 1080p sets they bought. If your last comment was about your KDS-R50XBR1 that you have listed in your signature, I hate to inform you that your HDMI inputs are 1080i and 720p. If you put a 1080p signal on that HDMI cable it gets broken down to 1080i as soon as the signal hits the TV. In other words, no different that your 1080i signal from CBS. If your Blu Ray player is in 1080p it gets converted to 1080i when it hits the set and the set will scale it to 1080p like it does all 1080i signals.
That wasn't my point, I have done a lot of research before I bought my sets and I was just pointing out a fact... you were the one that brought up the 1080p Blu Ray. I looked at your profile and I remember the set, would you have been happier if I said nothing and let you go on to believe that your set has a 1080p input when you get your Blu Ray player?
From your own article: http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/ So there is NO DIFFERENCE if you have a good deinterlacer like the Sony.
OK... but, your set is not getting the 1080p signal... all I was pointing out because it appeared that you thought it was. It would be no difference for you to have HD DVD 1080i or Blue Ray 1080p with that set. As far as the pull down like I said before! 720p signal is better than the 1080p one Like you posted... not native 1080p60 "you need to make up, or create new frames" or " (repeating each frame 3 times)" The disks or the signal..... are 1080p/24.... the disk is like a broadcast signal... it not a real 60 frame signal from the source. The players and monitors can pump 24 fps as fast as they want it is just 2x 3x of the 24. The ATSC broadcast format for 1080p goes as high as 30 fps. A real 720p signal is 60 real frames and the set pumps 60 real frames. Each picture with a 720p/60 signal contains fresh pixels for every frame. If you get a 1080p/24 source, you're more than doubling the frames rates. The sets 60 fps pull down mode does not provide a fresh set of pixels in a different position for each frame as a real 720p signal does. Yes pull downs help for flickering and all like said above. They are not real 60 frame images
At the end of the day, there is more pixels per second with the ATSC signal of 720p/60. If you have a 1080p set and a 768 set the 768 set will look better at a distance of 10 feet, what is about average distance for a set that size (50). You can go around it all you want and try to ignore that math, the size of the pixels etc. A lot of people couldn't believe that such a case could be made to debate 1080p vs 720p, but as you see to the 1080p camps surprise, there is a good case for 720p to be considered the #1 signal of the ATSC as well as the 720p or 768 set to provide the best resolution under the average conditions, not even to mention how much better they display the standard signal.
@HD-nut: This is my take on the whole 720p vs 1080p thing. The CE companies are going to promote whatever makes them more money and that at this point is their 1080p line of products. Sadly for them 720p sets have become more affordable for consumers and even with high volume sales likely will not contribute to their profit margin as much as 1080p. You've seen the barrage of 1080p advertising in HT publications and in specialty retailers. Add to this the push for BluRay and HD-DVD by major film studios and CE manufacturers where 1080p is the by-word. Microsoft has gotten into the fray by releasing an HD-DVD add on for the Xbox 360 and a firmware update that allows 1080p gaming thru component and 1080p movie playback thru VGA. Sony counterpunches with the release of the PS3 touting its native 1080p ability with HDMI 1.3. Your arguments can make sense in some quarters but unfortunatley you could be fighting a losing battle - like Don Quixote jousting at windmills. The windmills being the big CE companies and the big movie studios. Just my opinion.
Thanks for seeing my side, I don't think anyone is fighting a battle because 720p, 480p, & 480i sets are still being made. The camp I come form knows it is a good argument, but to the average consumer, they see a bigger number and automatically think it a hands down case, it is not. The effect is that it became a marketing tool for all manufacturers, and the good news is it lowered the price on the 720p sets. It's just that people come to these sites looking for information, and they should see the pros and cons of 720 vs 1080p. Like for instance the up conversion... If you get a 768x1024 plasma, put a sat box in 720p and that will upconvert the standard 480i signal to almost HD quality, or a very high ED format. Put the box back in 480i, the native signal and then back up to 720p and you'll say .....WOW! Plasma handles upconversions well, and one with a 1024 resolution, requires a lot less of a climb for 480i/702 to go to 768/1024 than to a set with high resolutions. This is what I mean that in a lot of cases, bigger numbers are not always better, and consumers should know these things.
Really only 480 lines come to visible, rest are for TXT TV and blank. Read this. That was NTSC put you get the point
Very good, But again it's not just the lines it is also the pixels per second. We're not saying it's 1440, just that at the time it takes 1080i to paint 1080i, 720 painted 1440. I'm saying that 720p is the best at an average distance considering the mathematics of the eye.
pls help me ...I bought the sony k50e200 and its only 1280 720 , i could of got the 1080i for 500 $ more did i fusk up
No, You have a progressive TV, that is 720x1280 progressive and 1080i is an interlaced system, and progressive scanning is better.
