Does 1080p actually matter?

SolarNexus

After exhaustive research on 1080p, I'm rapidly comming to the conclusion that it doesnt matter. At least not in the way we're supposed to think it does.

The first reason being that most HD broadcasts wont ever exceed 720p or 1080i. Of course there are claims that the BlueRay and HD-DVD will output 1080p but reports I've been reading suggest substandard encoding this early in the production and theres never any guarantee that the DVD manufaturers will encode the content to such a high resolution. Moreover suggestions that the ps3 (if it doesnt stall mid flight and fall crashing to the earth as most are starting to suspect) will output 1080p are just as vapourous - no game developer has yet to develop a game exceeding 720p and this will stay the same for some time; and nobody has yet to even know whether the ps3 can actually do anything it claims with the way Sony has been acting lately.

The second being that if you use a set which by definition paints the screen progressively, and supports 1080i (and a native resolution of 1920x1080) then in theory it should automatically deinterlace the picture to produce a 1080p display regardless.

For example, I am told that LCD screens by design display pictures progressively and that only CRTs can properly display interlaced material in an interlaced fashion. This would mean that in practice that any 1080i signal would provide a 1080p picture on any display that can support 1080i and a native resolution of 1920x1080 along with a technology which is inherently progressive (anything other than CRT as far as I can tell).

Lastly, the only technical quality difference between 1080i and 1080p should be that the odd lines are drawn before the even at 60hz. Which given the capability of the human eye, should give no noticable difference at reasonable distances from either display. The notable caveat being those displays that upscale the picture instead of doing proper interlacing.

If this is acurate, then theres really no need to shell out the extra €1000 or so for a 'better' screen, or is there?

As far as I can tell, the only way to display a 1080p picture at present is to grab a computer with a suitable DVI output, stick on a dvi to hdmi dongle and display that on the screen (you can download a couple sample HD content videos for testing). As such I dont think anyone but the video powerhouses are yet equiped to even tell the difference between 1080p and 1080i.

I respect and support any comments of this, the most confusing issue in television technology I think we've had for years.

pH

Let's presume that this is about a screen with 1080 lines and then asking is 1080p better than 1080i and how much more is it worth.

1080i@50hz has a new 'field' every 50th of a second. A field is hald the picture (either the odd or even lines) Here come the big question, are the pair of fields from the same frame, or does the picture move beween the 2 fields.

If the picture moves between the 2 fields (as with 1080i) video then you need to deinterlace. Deinterlacing a 1920x1080 picture in realtime is not a trivial undertaking to do well.

However if both fields are in fact from the same picture, then the panel doesn't really need to deinterlace, it can just do a 2:2 pulldown and put both fields on the screen. In effect this is 'film mode' and it means that 1080i50 is being shown as 1080p25. Ie you are getting a new complete picture displayed on your panel every 25th of a second.

Why is this important? - well film is 25 frames per second (Yes I know it's not but the conversion from 24 to 25 fps in not relevent to this at the mo) So we only need a 1920x1080 frame every 1/25 of a second, which can be achieved using 1080i. If we use 1080p then in effect every 2nd frame is just a duplicate of the previous one and we send twice as much data to no avail.

Its only when we have a progressive source @ 50 fps do you really need 1080p, and strangely enough video games are most likely to want this first, 1920x1080@50fps will look much smoother than 1920x1080@25 fps.

karltimber

was in harvey normans the other day and asked a sales rep about the difference between I and P in ref to an lcd

he started to inform me about I and B ??? with complete gobbly-sh&^e.

was funny

Idleater

Solar nexus, I agree completely with your points, and PH has described nicely where the "benifits" of 1080p are.

I think that since we have barely even got off the ground with HDTV here (I hardly consider sky's service "complete") that we have a long long way to go (certainly more than the lifespan of the current crop of HDTV's) before we reach HDTV2.

If, 1080p is available (say on hddvd) then it will certianly be a while anyway before it is commercially viable to the home user. And even then, you will only get the few films released at the start and at high initial prices.

It is like all technology, you pay to be at the forefront. Some people do it, the majority don't. As more and more people demand the technology the price will drop. A perfect example, is skyhd, at the moment it is expensive, with limited programming. As more and more subscribers join, they will only do so if there is more programming etc. HDTV2 is a long long way off yet in this regard.

L.

SolarNexus

karltimber wrote:

was in harvey normans the other day and asked a sales rep about the difference between I and P in ref to an lcd

he started to inform me about I and B ??? with complete gobbly-sh&^e.

was funny

I popped into Blanch earlier today to check out the sets at the various stores (Powercity, DID Electrical, Harvey Normans etc.). Previously when I asked a guy in Powercity once which sets supported 1080p he just said thats ultra high tech (or words to that affect) and told me to check each Television myself individually - which was a pain.

Today I spent about 10mins trying to tell a guy at Harvey Normans what 1080p was... he was clueless - now I just give up if they dont know what I'm talking about and walk away.

To be fair, there were very few sets above 720p. the pickings were exceedingly bare in fact. I think for my entire outing including yesterdays visit to airside, visiting too many stores to count, I found about two maybe three sets that supported (in theory) 1080p - or at least a native resolution of 1920x1080. And of those sets, none touted 1080p compatability.

I think its about time we all settled on the fact that 1080p doesnt exist for us yet, in any way shape or form. The best we're going to get for the forseable future is 1080i which by all counts appears only marginally less quality than 1080p. Even at that, by the time we will be in a situation with a market that saturated enough with 1080p content, there may not even be a need to upgrade for 1080p reasons alone.

big_moe

i have seen a hddvd player outputting a 1080p signal into a 1080p screen and there is a difference. who cares about the differences "in theory" .. see it for yourself and you will be convinced how good it is.

so yes, i think 1080p is better. On a good screen though.

brian_rbk

sony's new X series supports 1080p and the philips cineos ambilight tv's.

legs11

in order to fully justify these resolutions massive screens will be needed, like 50"+ which means most folk will never get to see real differences in picture quality....... ordinary 32" 42" screens wont cut it

FACT

lafors

SolarNexus wrote:

I popped into Blanch earlier today to check out the sets at the various stores (Powercity, DID Electrical, Harvey Normans etc.). Previously when I asked a guy in Powercity once which sets supported 1080p he just said thats ultra high tech (or words to that affect) and told me to check each Television myself individually - which was a pain.

Today I spent about 10mins trying to tell a guy at Harvey Normans what 1080p was... he was clueless - now I just give up if they dont know what I'm talking about and walk away.

I had a similar experience in Harvey N. I was trying to price a V-series sony, while waiting this lad was trying to tell this couple that the screen they were looking at was the best thing since sliced bread.

He said "this picture quality is 'pure hd', its the best you can get. Look at that picture quality, amazin" They were looking at an awful picture standing about 1ft from a >50in tv. I interupted to get the price after 5mins of this. And while he went to check the system for the price, I proceeded to tell the couple not to waste that amount of money without actually doing a bit of research. The man was havin none of it. he just saw big tv...me want. The woman agreed and wanted to leave He's probably going to see this and find me and kill me and my family

Back to the point sorry OP.
Really though all the, 'does it matter' boils down to one question....
how long before we in Ireland actually have the use for 1080p?

The question of is it better or do it matter, well of course its better and it does matter in a few years.
I think it'll be a good to go in 3-4 years, this gen of consoles wont need it, hddvd/br wont either for a few years if at all, they will be too busy trying to kill each other off for the first couple of years. Sky HD, well that wont bother too many, not me anyway (bloody dish). NTL...no sign of hd yet.

So if my current 720p/1080i tv lasts another 3-5 years I'll be happy.
Anyway in 2-3 years we'll all be talking about something newer....PURE HD

pH

big_moe wrote:

i have seen a hddvd player outputting a 1080p signal into a 1080p screen and there is a difference. who cares about the differences "in theory" .. see it for yourself and you will be convinced how good it is.

so yes, i think 1080p is better. On a good screen though.

Oh? which player? which screen? and what was the video being watched?

big_moe

pioneer screen 50", PRO-FHD1.

demo hddvd player, avel-link network player (from Japan).

disc, JVC 1080p demo disc.

Idleater

big_moe wrote:

pioneer screen 50", PRO-FHD1.

demo hddvd player, avel-link network player (from Japan).

disc, JVC 1080p demo disc.

So not the latest Simpsons series then?

Better ring and cancel my order for 1080p...

In all honesty, the cost of that setup must be (very vague guesswork) €5k for the screen, whatm €2.5k for the player, and maybe they throw in a 1080p dvd for free?

Great, but what are you going to do when you get home with it? Brag to everyone that you have 1080p, and top it all off by watching Nationwide off the aerial?

Jeez, using that screen for sky HD would probably end up with a worse picture than a 720p screen, due to the rescaling involved...

L.

big_moe

actually the screen is 10K and there was no cost on the player. it was from JVC. anyway.. i agree with you, 1080p at the moment is useless. Denon have a new DVD player with 1080p upscaling and it only costs €3799. for the moment i am happy with my 1080i screen. 1080p is absolutely amazing but you need a 1080p signal. in 5 years or so i would reconsider buying 1080p but as i said at the moment 1080i all the way.

moe

SolarNexus

it only costs €3799

your joking right? 'only' €3799?

thats more than most high-def (1080i) plasmas, just for a dvd player.

big_moe

yeah sorry, maybe i should have put in a after that "only costs..." it uses this upscaler technology that is used by tv studios in the USA. Obviously not the exact same one but the same company...

Sparky

To me 1080i/p will be of only good use when I want to watch a picture on a 70" + screen.
Theres no point on having 1080i/p on any screen smaller than that as 720 does the job for that bracket of TV's.

Plus the fact is that 1080 is still expensive compared to 720 tvs.
Id say most new sets in a year or so will probably have 1080 as standard along with HDMI 1.3 or even 1.4 or even 1.5

SolarNexus

I started this thread for that very reason - I'm currently in the market for a 70" screen. Considering the price of one of these things, I'd want it to be as future proof as econimically possible

melekalikimaka

legs11 wrote:

in order to fully justify these resolutions massive screens will be needed, like 50"+ which means most folk will never get to see real differences in picture quality....... ordinary 32" 42" screens wont cut it

FACT

finally someone who agrees with me

Calibos

You wont see the difference at 90 inches either. 720p looks fantastic on my AE900 720p PJ projecting at a 90in screen with seating about 11ft back. Some lads over at avforums have tested 1080p material on a Sony Ruby 1080p PJ projecting on a 90in screen to compare with one of the lads 720p Yamaha DLP. Couldn't see any difference. Was only when the lad pulled out an 133in screen he also had and projected onto that, that the could see a difference.

So in my scenario 1080p would allow me to sit 6ft from my 90in screen and maintain the same PQ I get from 720p at 11ft. I do not want to sit 6ft from my screen!! Alternatively 1080p would allow me to increase my screen size above 130in viewed from 11ft while maintaining and even surpassing the PQ I am accustomed to. Thing is my 90in screen is as large as I can go in my 94in wide room

1080p is worthless to me unless I move to a bigger house.

I can actually see a difference between 720p and 1080p on my 24in Dell 2405 1920x1080 monitor which seems paradoxical at first glance but is easily explained by the fact that I sit 2ft from my computer monitor. If I sit further back the differences quickly disappear. ie Unless you are sitting within 3.5-4ft from your 42-50in 1080p plasma you simply wont see the difference.

Remember half the improvement with HD, be it from Sky or new HD-DVD formats is the improved bitrates and colourspace. You are getting that with 720p anyway.

Idleater

SolarNexus wrote:

I started this thread for that very reason - I'm currently in the market for a 70" screen. Considering the price of one of these things, I'd want it to be as future proof as econimically possible

But surely the backlight in the screen will be busted by the time 1080p material is readily available? You then have to buy a new screen anyway.

L.

SolarNexus

nereid wrote:

But surely the backlight in the screen will be busted by the time 1080p material is readily available? You then have to buy a new screen anyway.

L.

doubtful, but in any case the bulb is readily user-replaceable. not sure of the price though.