Options
Advice on 1080i 1920x1080 display unit please
Zaphodski
Posts: 4,687 Forum Member
✭✭✭
I have 7 weeks to find a 42" (ish) set that supports both 720p & 1080i in their respective true resolutions (ie for 1080i, 1920x1080) for a budget of £2k ish. Onboard Freeview would be nice however dual HDMI a must. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks.
0
Comments
Plasmas, LCDs, DLP TVs etc are fixed pixel displays; they have to convert all incoming signals to their native resolutions. Also (with the exception of ALiS panels) they all use progressive scanning; they cannot display a native interlaced signal and must deinterlace.
First generation CRT HDTVs sold in the US could display 720p and 1080i without scaling. The scanning circuitry required to do this was very expensive, and all subsequent models (including Samsung's new HD Ready CRT TVs) scale 720p to 1080i. If you are after a 42" screen a CRT TV wouldn't be suitable anyway.
Improvements in LCD and plasma manufacturing, not to mention new technologies such as OLED and SED, are happening so fast that any display you buy now will soon be superceded. A 1080p display may not necessarily have better picture quality than a 768p one because resolution is only one factor in determining the overall picture quality of a TV.
The Philips 42PF9830 42" LCD has 1080p resolution, and you can expect to pay in excess of £3000 for it.
It's worth remembering that 1920*1080i viewed on a 1280*720/1366*768 display will still look fantastic and since it seems that globally more content is broadcast at the higher resolution the issues of watching 720p on a 1080i panel are going to be minor.
Look at it this way, 720p on a 1080i panel will still blow standard definition be it broadcast digital or DVD out of the water and it's progressive by nature which reduces potential problems when viewing on a progressive display (LCD and most Plasmas).
Even now a 1920*1080 display is expensive and will remain so for a while especially as that resolution benefits the larger screen sizes and by extension the larger rooms. Most people will find that a 1280*720/1366*768 display regardless of the HD resolution content it is fed will look stunning:)
I would expect all movies to be stored in 1080i minimum since 35mm film stock can generate that easily and 1080i is the format of choice for HD broadcasts.
Given that if you can afford a 1920*1080 display that is perhaps the best option (not price wise though:) ) and to future proof having it accept a 1080p source is a big bonus.
This then naturally creates my $64k question which is: If a 720 set is next to a 1080 set (both 42/43 inch) and both are fed with a 720 signal would you notice any difference between the quality of the image on the display native to the source (the 720) compared to that of the image on the 1080 after it is upscaled? Has anyone actually seen this test for themselves and can comment as oppose to speculate like the rest of us? Many thanks!
It would make an interesting study by a respected AV magazine, they are probably the only ones who could do it and make sure even models from the same manufacturer actually have the same internal components/processing to make such a test valid. No point comparing like for like from different manufacturers or LCD to Plasma in this regard and even having genuine well mastered 720p/1080i even 1080p samples of the same material could be a problem:)
Emailed this question to Home Cinema Choice & What TV and Video..... if I get a useful reply I'll post it.
A 720 line LCD large enough could potentially look blocky, with the repeating pattern of the colour segments obvious. Turning every 2 lines into 3 lines as a 1080 TV has to do, and with additional horizontal resolution as well could potentially produce a much smoother picture.
The ideal solution though, would be a TV with 2160 lines.
Well it is a safe assumption that having a source that can be mapped 1:1 on a display and everything else being equal will produce a better picture than the same source scaled to a higher resolution display regardless of the quality of the scaling hardware.
However I am making the assumption that a 1280*720 panel would be 42" or below which would make the most of that resolution. There are 42" plus panels at that resolution though but obviously you scale up screen size without increasing the resolutions the "issues" with scaling the 720p source will become more evident.
Why 2160 lines?
No scaling required.....divisible by 720 & 1080! Though I wouldn't expect to see a commercially viable set this side of a manned Mars landing
Of course
Perhaps I am missing something though since a fixed pixel display would still have to create picture information from the source material to fill in all the gaps?
I don't think you can beat 1:1 mapping and since 1080i and 1080p will be in the majority both on broadcast and certainly pre-recorded if you can afford a 1920*1080 display then that is the route to go, best of the two alternatives if money is not a factor.
But if it's a fixed pixel display, then it still wouldn't solve the problem of deinterlacing on 1080i signals.
The ideal solution would be a multi-scan display with the capability of producing both 720p and 1080i natively (as far as I know, only a CRT can do this, maybe a projector also, not so sure about SED/OLED).
I agree that 1:1 mapping is the ideal, however since we have been lumped with two standards that's not possible for both with one display. A 2160 display would in theory allow 1:1 with different size images (the more I think about it the less I like the idea), leave the gaps blank or interpolate.... I think I'll stick with 1920.. :rolleyes:
Tell me about it.
My Philips LCD 1:1 maps a 1280*720 source on it's 1366*768 res display leaving a black border all the way around. I simply will not watch content like that and to be honest I have had no issues with 1080i content for the last year so expect the same when I have SKY HD.
Acording to the BBC R&D White Paper the best way to show 720P is on a 1920 * 1080 panel, see page 11.
There's an enormous amount of confusion around this issue right now - a lot
of it to do with a horrifically misleading and misinformed article that
appeared in the Daily Mail a couple of weeks ago.
A simple answer to your question would be that yes, from my experience there
is a tiny difference in the quality of a 720p signal watched on a 720/768
line screen and a 1080-line screen, with the 720/768-line picture looking
fractionally better. But this difference is so marginal that it's only
visible at all on really high quality screens of 42in or bigger.
The difference in quality is so small that it actually leaves other issues
around the 720/1080-line debate as far more important. By which I mean the
simple fact that HD broadcasts both here and in America are available in
both 720 and 1080-line formats on the grounds that 720p works better for
fast moving images, like sports footage, because of its progressive nature,
with 1080i looking better with more static, documentary-type footage thanks
to its slightly higher native pixel count. So in my opinion, and the
opinion, it would appear, of broadcasters around the world, the benefits of
using different formats for different content types far outweigh any tiny
issues there might be with scaling each format to fit either 720 or
1080-line screens. I'm not aware of there being any raging debates about the
720-1080-line TV issue in the US, where HD has been available in both
formats for some time now.
So my main point is that The Daily Mail seems to have just swallowed some
marketing bilge from TV makers trying to increase their margins by selling
premium-priced 1080-line TVs.
Having said all that, if you are able to say with certainty that most of
your HD viewing is going to be in 1080i rather than 720p - say, you're not
particularly into sports, and are thinking of getting an HD DVD or Blu-ray
DVD player - then you might as well go for a 1080 screen if you can afford
one (they're currently being marketed as 'premium products').
And this is especially true if you hold on a little while and get one of the
new generation of TVs able to receive 1080p signals. For my experience is
that having a native 1080 screen DOES make a small but noticeable difference
with the new 1080p format that Sony is claiming will be available via its
PS3 console and on Blu-ray discs. So if you're so committed to HD that you
really think you'll want to experience 1080p in action when it becomes more
widespread (it's currently only being talked about as a premium, niche
format within the industry), then this is a much more worthwhile reason to
get a 1080-line screen than the minute differences between scaled and
unscaled 720p and 1080i signals. But only if the TV you buy can actually
receive the 1080p signals (at the moment, very few can).
Hopefully this has given you a little more clarity on this complicated
issue. Bottom line is that only really, really hardcore HD fans armed with
magnifying glasses(!) will probably notice/care about 720p/1080i lines
scaling issues, and even then they can't totally sidestep the problem so
long as 720p and 1080i broadcasts with their different benefits both exist.
For me it's only if you're obsessed with 1080i HD documentaries or are
interested in going the 1080p route down the line that 1080 line TVs really
come into their (expensive) own.
A useful reply which have thrown up a few more questions which I hope will also be answered.