Printable View
I've recently come up with the scratch to make the leap to high definition but one thing irks me. While I could get a 720p set for much less than 1080p, I can't help but think I should get a 1080p set to be future proof. I know that most games and channels are broadcast at 720p so I could save myself some cash but what are the chances of 1080p becoming the new standard?
I didn't even know that they still made 720p-only sets. Most channels are broadcast at 1080i.
1080p has been the standard for a while now. Games and TV broadcast fall short, but even if they did broadcast in 1080p, the MPEG2 compression is so horrible that it would hardly be worth it. But for Blu-ray and future videogames... hell yeah!
Most LCD TVs less than 40" are 1366x768 native resolution. My 32" LCD is that way. LCD TVs 40" or above tend to be true 1920x1080 resolution.
The smaller TVs will accept a 1080 signal, but scale it down. So you can use it, but it won't look quite as nice. No one makes a TV that simply won't accept more than 720 any more - there's no market for such a thing.
1. Yes, I'd go for a 1080p "Full HD" TV if you got the money. Blu-Ray movies will look better in full 1080p than they'd if downscaled to 720p.
2. If you just want the jump from SD to HD and money is an issue, then go with 1366x768 for 720p support. Everything from DVD (480p via component), Dreamcast and Wii (both 480p via VGA) to Blu-Ray will look a billion times better than on your SD CRT.*
The jump from 720p to 1080p isn't anywhere near as big as from 480i to 720p (or even 480p).
3. 1080i is 540 interlaced lines every other frame. 720p is 720 lines per frame. That's a higher (vertical) resolution and twice the frame rate. Plus 1080i is not actually supported by LCD or Plasma TVs, they have to deinterlace it first. So, for any modern LCD / Plasma TV even 480p would be a better choice than feeding it with 1080i.
* (Genesis & co however will look terrible :()
540 x 2 = 720? 1080i still displays more information per second (62,208,000 pixels per second for 1080i vs 55,382,400 for 720p -- that's nearly 7 million more pixels of detail per second). Also, both resolutions are able to display 60 independent moments in time per second. 720p is not faster, it just draws the entire frame at once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christuserloeser
There is no TV that displays all resolutions natively. 1080i is deinterlaced, but that doesn't take any more time than scaling 720p up to 1080p. 1080i looks fine, much better than 480p due to the increased resolution and detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christuserloeser
Ooops. Typed without thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
That's correct, but it still is not compatible with LCD or Plasma TVs. Any advantage in horizontal resolution is ruined by deinterlacing the image.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
Correct. What I meant was that in 1080i on a 1080i compatible CRT you'd see 540 lines of frame 1, and 540 different lines of frame 2, while 720p on any LCD/Plasma TV you'd get all 720p lines each frame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
As far as I know it does. The much discussed lag in HD video gaming is caused by deinterlacing. - Not that it's of any importance when watching video content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Redifer
-Still, would be interesting to see accurate numbers of how long it takes to scale say: 480p to 1080p and to deinterlace 1080i.
Deinterlacing is easy. If you wait for the entire frame to arrive and then separate and scale, well that's sloppy deinterlacing for a 60fps signal with 60 different moments in time (like a videogame). A good deinterlacer will scale the 1920x540 field the instant it arrives, not waiting for field two. While that image is on display, field two arrives and it is scaled independently of field one. No detail is lost, it's just that the LCD offers less "persistence of vision" than a CRT would since field 2 would be drawn as field 1 was still fading away. Lag = 1/60 of a second with that type of deinterlacing. Of course on still images it *might* look a touch jumpy. When deinterlacing a 1080i (not p) Blu-ray like Planet Earth, it should look no different than 1080p since it is running at 30fps or less, but such style of deinterlacing does take longer because frames must be blended into one image. Lag = about 1 or 2/30 a second. It is indeed compatible if the TV displays it. To say otherwise is very misleading. It's just that the TV doesn't display it natively. But a 1080p TV doesn't display a 720p signal natively, either. So a 1080p TV is not compatible with a 720p signal. See where I'm going?
Bottom line: 1080i looks good, even on LCD sets, much better than 480p does on the same set.
Cool, I'll go with a 1080p set. I was thinking of picking up this TV:
http://www.kmart.com/shc/s/p_10151_1...4h898&sLevel=0
It'll be 220$ on black friday but I haven't heard of the company before. Would this be a good TV?
Thanks man, the TV sounds cool and even if the sound is weak, I have a good sound system so I'm set.
Don't expect your vintage games to look any better than yak vomit on your new TV.
You and everyones bro are probably going for that tv, and ones like it. W/ the sale etc (especially I work for kmart) you should probably camp out if you really want it. Most good stuff er not so good will most likely be gone by noon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
I couldn't agree more! Make sure to have an older TV to play old games on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooter
I know what you're saying!Quote:
Originally Posted by 16-bit
But for sake of sakes the red yellow whit upgrade (for genesis) won't help on new tvs? I think they will/
I don't have one why I'm asking, yet
GLORIOUS 720P is better than regular 720p and 1080p. 720P becomes GLORIOUS 720P when combined with supreme fatness.
I think you mean "phatness". :)
IMHO Fatness > Phatness
Personally I'd recommend 720p native TV's over 1080p or 1080i native
But, only if you plan on getting a 1080p TV after 5 more years or so.
Right now most HD games are 720p native, and look worse in 1080p.
It's annoying having to switch back and forth with my CRT HDTV just to get each game to look their best.
You have a CRT? It has different issues than LCD/Plasma when it comes to input/output. But anyway, I don't know of *any* CRT HD TV that supports 720p *and* 1080i. What brand and model do you have? Most 1080i sets can be switched between 1080i and 540p (real progressive, not just skipping scanlines like SDTV 240p did). And all 720p CRT sets I've seen only have native resolution, which is 720p. Most likely you have a 1080i or 720p fixed display set, and it's the up/down scaling algorithm that's producing the artifacts you don't like.Quote:
It's annoying having to switch back and forth with my CRT HDTV just to get each game to look their best.
[QUOTE=Christuserloeser;199206]1. Yes, I'd go for a 1080p "Full HD" TV if you got the money. Blu-Ray movies will look better in full 1080p than they'd if downscaled to 720p.[quote]
720p will look better on a native 720p TV than it will scaled on a native 1080p TV (though probably better than 1080 scaled to 720), still it won't look as crisp. (just like when a LCD computer monitor displays below its native resolution, it gets blurry) Same is true to 480p being displayed on 720 or 1080 displays. (though in that case, its pretty pixelated on larger screens, so a little blurring looks OK, smoothing things a bit)
The exception would be with CRT displays, but I'm not sure if they have HD CRTs that will natively scan to 1080p or 720p. (opposed to 480p and 1080i which I beleive all support) In the case of many CRT computer monitors, most definitely will support a variety of resolutions natively, I'm not sure this extends to TVs though.
[quote]2. If you just want the jump from SD to HD and money is an issue, then go with 1366x768 for 720p support. Everything from DVD (480p via component), Dreamcast and Wii (both 480p via VGA) to Blu-Ray will look a billion times better than on your SD CRT.*
The jump from 720p to 1080p isn't anywhere near as big as from 480i to 720p (or even 480p).[quote]
I don't think the difference between 480i and 480/720p is that amazing, really (unless I'm sitting realy close to the screen) 480i looks pretty close to 480p, 480p/60 being more noticeable than 480p/30 though.
In particular, 480i in anamorphic display looks pretty good (with lines compressed and interlacing less visible).
It's noticable, but no more so than comparing 640x480 PC games to 480i video games; the resolution chage with 800x600 or 1024x768 was a lot more noticeable to me than the interlacing. (I'd never even noticed the interlacing or difference with 240p games until I got into duscussions on this forum; no it's pretty easy to notice though)
Well, a CRT HDTV would be able to display true 1080i, again not sure if they can natively support 720/1080p though.Quote:
3. 1080i is 540 interlaced lines every other frame. 720p is 720 lines per frame. That's a higher (vertical) resolution and twice the frame rate. Plus 1080i is not actually supported by LCD or Plasma TVs, they have to deinterlace it first. So, for any modern LCD / Plasma TV even 480p would be a better choice than feeding it with 1080i.
If you're correct on the deinterlacing issues, that's really poor engineering... The most straightforeward routes to converting interlaced to progresive are: accumulating 2 interlaced frames and displaing them as one, and displaing each frame independently with lines doubled (240/288/540p). The former having the issue with combing when motion exceeds 30 fps (and is why filtering tends to be applied), but the latter option doesn't have this problem, and while it will halve vertical resolution, horizontal res will be maintained (without filter induced degredation) and temporal resolution will be maintained as well (60 fps), except now displaed at 60 individal frames per second. (and indeed higher frame and total resolution than either 720p or 480/576p, and equal res -in terms of pixels/s- to 1080p/30)
So single frame display shoudl at very least be an option... should result in minimal lag as well. (as scaling)
1080i is still a pretty big standard for digital video though, like digital broadcast, or the HD camera in my digital video class will only record natively 1920x1080i. (although there is a "motion stills" mode recording 1920x1080 still frames at up to 24 fps -which is movie film speed)
A CRT should have no trouble showing any res as long as its not fixed rate like most SDTVs are (15KHz aka 240/313 lines a field)... 540 or 720 or 1080 lines would only be matter of setting timing factors in the horizontal sawtooth generation mechanism in the TV... how well things look should only be limited to the granularity of phosphors on the CRT itself and how thin the beam could be got. My 28" CRT has ~900 RGB triplets vertically and ~1200 triplets horizontally(perhaps more, since they're narrower horizontally), so in theory one could get acceptable looking HD off it...
all just comes down to if the TV is multisync or not, but being HD, it SHOULD be, and its nothing difficult to achieve, once I gain more knowledge on my TV, and its limitations, I'll be doing lot of fun with it on that area :)
My TV displays 480p and 1080i natively.
It upconverts 720p to 1080i itself.
However, the PS3 being set to display 1080i produces artifacts in games like Metal Gear Solid 4, which are 720p native (actually less than 720p apparently) so I have to switch the PS3 to 720p to make them go away.
They're barely noticeable, but I notice them.
And I can't leave 720p enabled either, because SF2 HD Remix will default to 720p if both 1080i and 720p are enabled.
I wish each game let you select the resolution you wanted it to play in.
So I could select 480p for all the PS1/PS2 games, 720p for the 720p native games, 1080i for the 1080p native games, and 480p for the PS3 games that give you a taller FoV, like Sonic Unleashed, which unfortunately "was designed for wide screen" which means it just cuts off the top and bottoms of the screen when in wide screen.
Sonic Unleashed moves really fast too, so you need that full viewing area if you plan to take secret paths on reflex, and the only way to get it...is 480p
So it'd actually be nice to select if you want 4:3 resolution on top of being 720p, or 1080i/p...for each game.
Sony's way late to do this (so is MS)
My Toshiba TIMM tops out at 800x600, so it looks really good with the Dreamcast VGA out.
You even got the tv metal sonic? Takes 1 to make the ad why I'm asking