High Definition. Already, at least name wise, we could be in trouble. What might be next: Very High Definition? Enhanced Very, Very High Definition? Maybe a numbering scheme should have been used instead. At least it would have had more scope to grow.
Anyway, enough of that blithering. High Definition is something which is going to affect us all and it seems to have been presented to the consumer so poorly that many do not know how to tell if a TV is actually High Definition or just compatible with a High Definition input. Therefore I will go over the simple checklist shortly and explain roughly what it all means and what you should look for in a new screen. Whilst pertinent to most markets, this is going to be based on the HD Ready spec developed by EICTA in Europe. The spec defines that there is more to a TV being HD Ready than just having a certain resolution. Even if not in Europe, you might want to consider these specs when looking for a new screen.
Non-High Definition televisions are now called standard, or even low definition. This is said to reflect the resolution of the screen. Up until recently resolution was something best left for computer screens, but now it is something more of us will have to come to terms with. Basically it is a measurement of the amount of pixels on the screen usually defined as widthx height. If you’d like more info on that, check out Wikipedia. Since all high definition screens have a wide aspect ratio, I will only compare them to the standard definition widescreen sets—assuming older 4:3 sets are now obsolete. If you would like more information on aspect ratios, or are unfamiliar with the jargon, please read both of our short articles on the subject (part one here, part two here) before continuing.
Standard definition resolutions differ between countries, formats and aspect ratios, and whilst that sounds a lot it is fairly simple to follow. These are defined by the number of horizontal lines that run across the screen which is also how High Definition is measured. Whilst you might not have heard standard television resolutions described this way, it is useful to know about as a comparison tool.
As well as resolution, an image on screen is defined by how it is presented. There are two options here: Interlaced or Progressively Encoded/Scanned. An interlaced image updates alternative lines on the display every cycle—fast enough for many to not notice—and progressive scan images update every line with every refresh cycle. This gives a more solid image with less flicker, however it is twice the information to carry.
Standard television broadcasts utilise an interlaced image. However, certain games consoles and DVD players (amongst other devices) support a progressive output. Therefore, as well as 480i and 576i, we also have 480p and 576p. Since this is a step up from standard definition, this has been termed Enhanced Definition but people seem to rarely use this description, more often than not, defining it by its content (480i, 480p etc.). Maybe it is this that will be how HD is referred to in the future—everything will be HD but the resolution will get larger.
High Definition sets have several easy to understand requirements that, for some reason, many people just do not know about. Perhaps it is to do with the current lack of HD source devices, which has meant, aside from the screens, there is nothing for the public to conceptually grasp as HD. Once HD broadcasting comes truly of age the knowledge will be more widespread, but that is going to be a bitter pill to swallow for those who have purchased ‘flat screen’ televisions only to find they are not going to be compatible with the new broadcasting systems. Incidentally, does anyone know why they are called ‘flat screen’ TVs? My old Sony CRT had a flat screen—thin screen makes more sense in defining these new toys. I digress.
The minimum number of horizontal lines that a screen must have to be classed as HD is 720, and these should be able to display a progressive format video. Therefore we can term this 720p—all HD Ready screens must have 720 horizontal lines. This is generally coupled with a width of 1280 pixels however this is not always the case. Check out the caveats section below. Since humans view in a widescreen aspect ratio (there is a debate about the actual aspect ratio, but it seems to be around 1.78:1 or 1.85:1—something close to 16x9 anyway), televisions have been moving into a wide format for several years now. The introduction of DVDs and widescreen broadcasting has helped push this concept forward and from this we realise our second HD Ready requirement—the screen must be in a wide aspect ratio.
The HD Ready specification also includes requirements for the inputs of the screen. Most of these televisions will come with such inputs as Composite, S-Video, SCART (if you live in Europe!) and even VGA for connection to a PC, but these are all additional to that defined in the specification. An HD Ready screen must have two very specific inputs and these are:
Not to be confused with a single composite input, a component input features three RCA type connectors and does support high definition. However, the yellow composite input is normally accompanied with a red and a white audio lead. A component lead carries video only. If the set has a DVI input then it must also support HDCP which is a form of copy protection. HDMI sockets support HDCP by default.
Finally, a small techy bit—the digital inputs have to support the following:
Nb: that is not to say the component input does not need to support these. It is just assumed it does since it is required to support HD signals as industry standard. Here is the accompanying quote from the specification for that part:
HD ready displays support analogue YPbPr as a HD input format to allow full compatibility with today's HD video sources in the market.
Also, this does not mean it has to have 1080 horizontal lines—it just means it has to accept the input and then scale it to the panel’s native resolution. It is generally better to use an input signal as close to the panels native display as possible to prevent the need for any scaling.
So there we have our HD Ready list of requirements:
“Yes sir this is HD Ready screen I do you good deal”—caveats
Unfortunately we consumers need to have our wits about us when purchasing a new screen in Europe at least since as I just mentioned, signals can be scaled. This means it could be possible to have a screen with less than 720 horizontal lines claiming to be ready for high definition material because it can accept the input and scale it down to the screens native resolution. Therefore, whilst the screen can accept the signal, the viewer will not get the full benefit from it since it has been squashed down to fit into the smaller screen resolution.
I would also be wary of certain plasma screens. I saw one recently which had 768 horizontal lines—should be enough to display a full HD signal right? Not quite! You see it only had 1024 vertical lines instead of 1280 which would be needed to display a full 1280x720 resolution image. That also makes it sound like it is a square screen but plasmas (I heard on a forum where we were arguing on this screens legality in using the HD Ready logo) can have rectangular pixels so it did look like a widescreen set. This is just something for you to be wary of. I didn’t spend too much time on it since I don’t own a plasma screen and don’t intend to buy, one but if you do, make sure you check the entire resolution. Perhaps the spec should have been a little more explicit to cover off occurrences such as this.
Just when we thought we knew what was going on, those clever people at EICTA, obviously bored and needed to justify their jobs, have created another spec, which was released in March. This specification is called HDTV and you can get info on it at the EICTA website.
This defines access to the above HDTV logo and was made to identify devices that “are capable of receiving and processing High Definition television signals broadcast over terrestrial, cable and satellite or pre-recorded“ .
This makes reference to devices which can themselves receive and generate an HD signal, for instance a TV with an integrated HD tuner/receiver, or an HD set top box. It states that the HD Ready specification should be inherently implied by the use of the HDTV logo and so all HDTV logo equipped screens will follow the above guidelines from the HD Ready specification.
So there you have it. I hope that has helped to clear things up a little and that you can use this page as a reference for your HD queries.
Editorial by David Beamish
Anyway, enough of that blithering. High Definition is something which is going to affect us all and it seems to have been presented to the consumer so poorly that many do not know how to tell if a TV is actually High Definition or just compatible with a High Definition input. Therefore I will go over the simple checklist shortly and explain roughly what it all means and what you should look for in a new screen. Whilst pertinent to most markets, this is going to be based on the HD Ready spec developed by EICTA in Europe. The spec defines that there is more to a TV being HD Ready than just having a certain resolution. Even if not in Europe, you might want to consider these specs when looking for a new screen.
A Brief History of Time
Non-High Definition televisions are now called standard, or even low definition. This is said to reflect the resolution of the screen. Up until recently resolution was something best left for computer screens, but now it is something more of us will have to come to terms with. Basically it is a measurement of the amount of pixels on the screen usually defined as widthx height. If you’d like more info on that, check out Wikipedia. Since all high definition screens have a wide aspect ratio, I will only compare them to the standard definition widescreen sets—assuming older 4:3 sets are now obsolete. If you would like more information on aspect ratios, or are unfamiliar with the jargon, please read both of our short articles on the subject (part one here, part two here) before continuing.
Standard definition resolutions differ between countries, formats and aspect ratios, and whilst that sounds a lot it is fairly simple to follow. These are defined by the number of horizontal lines that run across the screen which is also how High Definition is measured. Whilst you might not have heard standard television resolutions described this way, it is useful to know about as a comparison tool.
As well as resolution, an image on screen is defined by how it is presented. There are two options here: Interlaced or Progressively Encoded/Scanned. An interlaced image updates alternative lines on the display every cycle—fast enough for many to not notice—and progressive scan images update every line with every refresh cycle. This gives a more solid image with less flicker, however it is twice the information to carry.
| Format | Number of horizontal lines |
| Standard Television (NTSC: USA, Japan) | 480 |
| Standard Television (PAL: Europe) | 576 |
| Standard DVD (NTSC: USA, Japan) | 480 |
| Standard DVD (PAL: Europe) | 576 |
Standard television broadcasts utilise an interlaced image. However, certain games consoles and DVD players (amongst other devices) support a progressive output. Therefore, as well as 480i and 576i, we also have 480p and 576p. Since this is a step up from standard definition, this has been termed Enhanced Definition but people seem to rarely use this description, more often than not, defining it by its content (480i, 480p etc.). Maybe it is this that will be how HD is referred to in the future—everything will be HD but the resolution will get larger.
“Dwell in the past and there will be no future”
High Definition sets have several easy to understand requirements that, for some reason, many people just do not know about. Perhaps it is to do with the current lack of HD source devices, which has meant, aside from the screens, there is nothing for the public to conceptually grasp as HD. Once HD broadcasting comes truly of age the knowledge will be more widespread, but that is going to be a bitter pill to swallow for those who have purchased ‘flat screen’ televisions only to find they are not going to be compatible with the new broadcasting systems. Incidentally, does anyone know why they are called ‘flat screen’ TVs? My old Sony CRT had a flat screen—thin screen makes more sense in defining these new toys. I digress.
The minimum number of horizontal lines that a screen must have to be classed as HD is 720, and these should be able to display a progressive format video. Therefore we can term this 720p—all HD Ready screens must have 720 horizontal lines. This is generally coupled with a width of 1280 pixels however this is not always the case. Check out the caveats section below. Since humans view in a widescreen aspect ratio (there is a debate about the actual aspect ratio, but it seems to be around 1.78:1 or 1.85:1—something close to 16x9 anyway), televisions have been moving into a wide format for several years now. The introduction of DVDs and widescreen broadcasting has helped push this concept forward and from this we realise our second HD Ready requirement—the screen must be in a wide aspect ratio.
The HD Ready specification also includes requirements for the inputs of the screen. Most of these televisions will come with such inputs as Composite, S-Video, SCART (if you live in Europe!) and even VGA for connection to a PC, but these are all additional to that defined in the specification. An HD Ready screen must have two very specific inputs and these are:
- Component: Analogue YPbPr input
- DVI or HDMI: Digital input
Not to be confused with a single composite input, a component input features three RCA type connectors and does support high definition. However, the yellow composite input is normally accompanied with a red and a white audio lead. A component lead carries video only. If the set has a DVI input then it must also support HDCP which is a form of copy protection. HDMI sockets support HDCP by default.
Finally, a small techy bit—the digital inputs have to support the following:
- 1280x720 @ 50 and 60Hz progressive scan (‘720p’)
- 1920x1080 @ 50 and 60Hz interlaced (‘1080i’)
Nb: that is not to say the component input does not need to support these. It is just assumed it does since it is required to support HD signals as industry standard. Here is the accompanying quote from the specification for that part:
HD ready displays support analogue YPbPr as a HD input format to allow full compatibility with today's HD video sources in the market.
Also, this does not mean it has to have 1080 horizontal lines—it just means it has to accept the input and then scale it to the panel’s native resolution. It is generally better to use an input signal as close to the panels native display as possible to prevent the need for any scaling.
The final requirements of an HD Ready screen
So there we have our HD Ready list of requirements:
- Have a minimum of 720 horizontal lines
- Be widescreen
- Have a component analogue input
- Have a DVI with HDCP or an HDMI digital input
- Support via the digital input 1280x720 @50 and 60Hz progressive scan (‘720p’)
- Support via the digital input 1920x1080 @50 and 60Hz interlaced (‘1080i’)
“Yes sir this is HD Ready screen I do you good deal”—caveats
Unfortunately we consumers need to have our wits about us when purchasing a new screen in Europe at least since as I just mentioned, signals can be scaled. This means it could be possible to have a screen with less than 720 horizontal lines claiming to be ready for high definition material because it can accept the input and scale it down to the screens native resolution. Therefore, whilst the screen can accept the signal, the viewer will not get the full benefit from it since it has been squashed down to fit into the smaller screen resolution.
I would also be wary of certain plasma screens. I saw one recently which had 768 horizontal lines—should be enough to display a full HD signal right? Not quite! You see it only had 1024 vertical lines instead of 1280 which would be needed to display a full 1280x720 resolution image. That also makes it sound like it is a square screen but plasmas (I heard on a forum where we were arguing on this screens legality in using the HD Ready logo) can have rectangular pixels so it did look like a widescreen set. This is just something for you to be wary of. I didn’t spend too much time on it since I don’t own a plasma screen and don’t intend to buy, one but if you do, make sure you check the entire resolution. Perhaps the spec should have been a little more explicit to cover off occurrences such as this.
One spec to rule them all!
Just when we thought we knew what was going on, those clever people at EICTA, obviously bored and needed to justify their jobs, have created another spec, which was released in March. This specification is called HDTV and you can get info on it at the EICTA website.
This defines access to the above HDTV logo and was made to identify devices that “are capable of receiving and processing High Definition television signals broadcast over terrestrial, cable and satellite or pre-recorded“ .
This makes reference to devices which can themselves receive and generate an HD signal, for instance a TV with an integrated HD tuner/receiver, or an HD set top box. It states that the HD Ready specification should be inherently implied by the use of the HDTV logo and so all HDTV logo equipped screens will follow the above guidelines from the HD Ready specification.
So there you have it. I hope that has helped to clear things up a little and that you can use this page as a reference for your HD queries.
Editorial by David Beamish
Advertisement
Aftermath
Member
Join Date: March 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 172
Plasma screens I heard arent great, cos they leave ghost images on the screen? something like that, but what I think we consumers need is a recommendation of which HDTVs to go for and which ones not
Report
Quote
| Reply
Yeah, Plasma screens suck. I left a movie on pause and went to have dinner, I came back 2 hours latter, and voila, ghosting, and a pretty bad case of it. I`ve heard projection aint good either.
Are you talking about burn-in, rather than ghosting?
Those of you with the funds to buy an HD player, make sure it gets the full 1080p, or you're just wasting money. I lokked into it and A LOT of the first gen players are only 1080i/720p.
What do you all think about Sony's new Bravia LCD TVs?
If you mean the SXRD...I have the 60" ....and it awesome!!
most american lcd TV's under $1500 look like C**P. My 27" sony standard res has a better picture and resolution then TV's 3 times the price. The images are PIXALLY and not clear. It like when you make a image into a lower res JPEG for internet. THAT"S what these TV's look like. I work for TARGET and would never buy an LCD TV there. You can;t get the HUGE picture size like a projection or LVD/Plasma but a 36" hi def sony CRT blows away 95% of the so called HIGH DEF plasma/lcd TV's. Even my low res sony looks 100 times better then those c**ppy LCD/Plasma. I think a lot of work is needed to get these TV's to TRUE Hi Def.
I worked for Best Buy corp in Minnesota in the late 90's. PBS and Phillips who worked toghether to create the first Hi Def Plasma tv came to show us, in this HUGE Semi Tralier the future of TV. I was totally blown away at the clarity of the images I saw on these TV's. I continued to see that image quality for a few years. Now it has disappeared. I've only seen a few TV's with that TRUE hig def image quality since.
One of the COOL things they mentioned that will happen in the future. Your average TV station will transmit a High def broadcast or 4 DVD def broadcast, like a football game you watch it and you as the vewier you will be able to switch between cameras and make the football game or event your watching YOUR personal experiance. I hope this will happen because I thought it was amazing thing to hear about.
I think EUROPE is far a head of the USA as far as HDTV and widescreen TV's. We still have to deal with ignorant people who continue to buy full screen DVD's and complain about widescreen black bars. I've converted a few buy telling them, that in 5 years, when full screen TV's are no longer sold, all your DVD's will have black bars on the side of the screen, plus half the movie cut off. They switch to widescreen DVD's pretty quickly when ya tell em that.
I personaly still prefer FULL SCREEN TV's, I own and enjoy watching many full screen TV show's and do not want to stretch the picture to fill a widescreen TV. I would love a 36" Hi Def Sony CRT TV.
I worked for Best Buy corp in Minnesota in the late 90's. PBS and Phillips who worked toghether to create the first Hi Def Plasma tv came to show us, in this HUGE Semi Tralier the future of TV. I was totally blown away at the clarity of the images I saw on these TV's. I continued to see that image quality for a few years. Now it has disappeared. I've only seen a few TV's with that TRUE hig def image quality since.
One of the COOL things they mentioned that will happen in the future. Your average TV station will transmit a High def broadcast or 4 DVD def broadcast, like a football game you watch it and you as the vewier you will be able to switch between cameras and make the football game or event your watching YOUR personal experiance. I hope this will happen because I thought it was amazing thing to hear about.
I think EUROPE is far a head of the USA as far as HDTV and widescreen TV's. We still have to deal with ignorant people who continue to buy full screen DVD's and complain about widescreen black bars. I've converted a few buy telling them, that in 5 years, when full screen TV's are no longer sold, all your DVD's will have black bars on the side of the screen, plus half the movie cut off. They switch to widescreen DVD's pretty quickly when ya tell em that.
I personaly still prefer FULL SCREEN TV's, I own and enjoy watching many full screen TV show's and do not want to stretch the picture to fill a widescreen TV. I would love a 36" Hi Def Sony CRT TV.
Lincoln6Echo wrote: What do you all think about Sony's new Bravia LCD TVs?
I've got my eye on the 40" X-series one...but September seems a long way off
Might be a few more 1080p capable sets to choose from by then, so it's probably best I wait.
I've got my eye on the 40" X-series one...but September seems a long way off
Might be a few more 1080p capable sets to choose from by then, so it's probably best I wait.
JackJackMN wrote: I would love a 36" Hi Def Sony CRT TV.
Definitely worth it. I own one and it's gorgeous, and it actually doesn't cost that much, all things considered.
Definitely worth it. I own one and it's gorgeous, and it actually doesn't cost that much, all things considered.
I've got two HD Ready Samsung LCD tvs - both sporting 1366x768 resolutions so they won't run 1080p natively but I am very happy with both of them - especially the 32M61B. Looks great for PC and 360 usage as well as DVDs on the Oppo Digital upscaling player. CRTs do have the edge in blacks over the LCDs but otherwise the LCD seems to blow them away on clarity, colour and vibrance, versitility and of course size. I've taken the hit and accepted its not as great in the black levels to have a ton more space in my rooms.
A TV that don't support 1080p is a waste of money. Every Disc prdouced support thsi format, even though the early HD-DVD players don't
Good article, Dave. Thanks for the info. Now, why don't you really put the cat among the pigeons and explain the merits of Plasma v. LCD??
There have been a few articles debating this before, but I haven't seen any relating to Hi-Def.
Also, doesn't anyone else believe Sky is taking the p**s with their HD subscription? Just a few channels and you have to pay a £10p.m. premium! Do the cable companies in the US do likewise?
There have been a few articles debating this before, but I haven't seen any relating to Hi-Def.
Also, doesn't anyone else believe Sky is taking the p**s with their HD subscription? Just a few channels and you have to pay a £10p.m. premium! Do the cable companies in the US do likewise?
I've been wondering this many really hate Plasma but why? I own a 32" Samsung LCD TV and went for LCD because of the price but you'd think considering how many Plasma's are out there and how expensive they are that they are decent technology
No one seems to be able to really backup their point that Plasma TVs are bad. Why are LCD TVs better?
Manny it's actually worse as Sky are ONLY producing a Sky + HD box forcing you not only to pay the £10 price point but another £10 because you have a Sky + box.
I don't want Sky + I'd much rather pay a one off fee for a PVR. I have no interest in Sky period so for me it doesn't bother me. Freeview (non-subscription Digital TV) are trialling Freeview HD in London which I'll be going for.
kåre hansen wrote: A TV that don't support 1080p is a waste of money. Every Disc prdouced support thsi format, even though the early HD-DVD players don't
If you have oodles of cash I'd agree but most don't support 1080i is all they can expect. Besides 1080p TVs are relatively new, in Europe anyway.
Most HD Ready TVs don't support 1080p.
No one seems to be able to really backup their point that Plasma TVs are bad. Why are LCD TVs better?
Manny it's actually worse as Sky are ONLY producing a Sky + HD box forcing you not only to pay the £10 price point but another £10 because you have a Sky + box.
I don't want Sky + I'd much rather pay a one off fee for a PVR. I have no interest in Sky period so for me it doesn't bother me. Freeview (non-subscription Digital TV) are trialling Freeview HD in London which I'll be going for.
kåre hansen wrote: A TV that don't support 1080p is a waste of money. Every Disc prdouced support thsi format, even though the early HD-DVD players don't
If you have oodles of cash I'd agree but most don't support 1080i is all they can expect. Besides 1080p TVs are relatively new, in Europe anyway.
Most HD Ready TVs don't support 1080p.
JackJackMN wrote: I would love a 36" Hi Def Sony CRT TV
I never knew CRTs could support HD. The thing is that TV would be enormous. It would engulf most rooms, no thanks.
JackJackMN wrote: I think EUROPE is far a head of the USA as far as HDTV and widescreen TV's. We still have to deal with ignorant people who continue to buy full screen DVD's and complain about widescreen black bars.
You could be right but at least the USA already has HDTV it's not even launched here yet (late next month, at last).
People complain over here of black bars which I've always found really odd as the extra detail/information from Widescreen is so obvious.
Most people buying NEW TVs go Widescreen in the UK not out of actual choice but because large screen 4:3s are hard to find now so people learn without realising it the improvement of Widescreen. Sadly not all countries are the same, parts of Asia are really behind.
Bangkok, Thailand for example sell some really nice up to date TVs so no problem there but everyone I've ever seen is always 4:3. It's really weird.
JackJackMN wrote: One of the COOL things they mentioned that will happen in the future. Your average TV station will transmit a High def broadcast or 4 DVD def broadcast, like a football game you watch it and you as the vewier you will be able to switch between cameras and make the football game or event your watching YOUR personal experiance. I hope this will happen because I thought it was amazing thing to hear about.
Can't you do this already? You've been able to in the UK for 5+ years now with Sky Sports Extra. In reality it's more of a gimmick.
dbeamish wrote: CRTs do have the edge in blacks over the LCDs
I've heard that argument too and my simple answer is so I'm supposed to put TWO TVs in my living or bedroom? Yeah that would work.
LCDs overall blow CRT out of the water in virtually every aspect. As you nicely put.
I never knew CRTs could support HD. The thing is that TV would be enormous. It would engulf most rooms, no thanks.
JackJackMN wrote: I think EUROPE is far a head of the USA as far as HDTV and widescreen TV's. We still have to deal with ignorant people who continue to buy full screen DVD's and complain about widescreen black bars.
You could be right but at least the USA already has HDTV it's not even launched here yet (late next month, at last).
People complain over here of black bars which I've always found really odd as the extra detail/information from Widescreen is so obvious.
Most people buying NEW TVs go Widescreen in the UK not out of actual choice but because large screen 4:3s are hard to find now so people learn without realising it the improvement of Widescreen. Sadly not all countries are the same, parts of Asia are really behind.
Bangkok, Thailand for example sell some really nice up to date TVs so no problem there but everyone I've ever seen is always 4:3. It's really weird.
JackJackMN wrote: One of the COOL things they mentioned that will happen in the future. Your average TV station will transmit a High def broadcast or 4 DVD def broadcast, like a football game you watch it and you as the vewier you will be able to switch between cameras and make the football game or event your watching YOUR personal experiance. I hope this will happen because I thought it was amazing thing to hear about.
Can't you do this already? You've been able to in the UK for 5+ years now with Sky Sports Extra. In reality it's more of a gimmick.
dbeamish wrote: CRTs do have the edge in blacks over the LCDs
I've heard that argument too and my simple answer is so I'm supposed to put TWO TVs in my living or bedroom? Yeah that would work.
LCDs overall blow CRT out of the water in virtually every aspect. As you nicely put.
Here's a great article on LCD vs. Plasma, especially as it says Black Levels (if they bother you) are better on Plasmas, you'll need to copy/paste:
http://www.cnet.com.au/hometheatre/tvs/0,39026023,40036500,00.htm
The last paragraph/heading being particulary good:
"Which is better value for me right now: Plasma or LCD?"
http://www.cnet.com.au/hometheatre/tvs/0,39026023,40036500,00.htm
The last paragraph/heading being particulary good:
"Which is better value for me right now: Plasma or LCD?"
kåre hansen wrote: A TV that don't support 1080p is a waste of money. Every Disc prdouced support thsi format, even though the early HD-DVD players don't
I can see what you are saying, but in reality that isn't really the case. A TV that is 720p will cost around £1000 but a TV which is 1080p will cost around £10,000. Might as well get a 720 now and then change in a few years time if you want to. By then anyway I assume we'll have even higher resolution screens so perhaps people will skip 1080 entirely!
Manny Kiro wrote: Good article, Dave. Thanks for the info. Now, why don't you really put the cat among the pigeons and explain the merits of Plasma v. LCD??
There have been a few articles debating this before, but I haven't seen any relating to Hi-Def.
Also, doesn't anyone else believe Sky is taking the p**s with their HD subscription? Just a few channels and you have to pay a £10p.m. premium! Do the cable companies in the US do likewise?
Thanks Manny. That's a tricky one and maybe I will. Just had a baby so time is at a bit of a premium now :-) Basically, you get screen burn more on plasmas and shouldn't at all on LCDs (in practise I still think in might be possible but it takes a lot longer to appear). For that reason alone I wouldn't bother with a plasma. They are large sizes where as similar sized LCDs are more expensive but I think LCD is the better technology as I think we can see from the amount of LCDs that are flooding the market with it seems plasmas starting to take a back seat until we get to the very large screens. Also, don't plasmas need re-gassing or something after a few years? Too much hassle imo
I can see what you are saying, but in reality that isn't really the case. A TV that is 720p will cost around £1000 but a TV which is 1080p will cost around £10,000. Might as well get a 720 now and then change in a few years time if you want to. By then anyway I assume we'll have even higher resolution screens so perhaps people will skip 1080 entirely!
Manny Kiro wrote: Good article, Dave. Thanks for the info. Now, why don't you really put the cat among the pigeons and explain the merits of Plasma v. LCD??
There have been a few articles debating this before, but I haven't seen any relating to Hi-Def.
Also, doesn't anyone else believe Sky is taking the p**s with their HD subscription? Just a few channels and you have to pay a £10p.m. premium! Do the cable companies in the US do likewise?
Thanks Manny. That's a tricky one and maybe I will. Just had a baby so time is at a bit of a premium now :-) Basically, you get screen burn more on plasmas and shouldn't at all on LCDs (in practise I still think in might be possible but it takes a lot longer to appear). For that reason alone I wouldn't bother with a plasma. They are large sizes where as similar sized LCDs are more expensive but I think LCD is the better technology as I think we can see from the amount of LCDs that are flooding the market with it seems plasmas starting to take a back seat until we get to the very large screens. Also, don't plasmas need re-gassing or something after a few years? Too much hassle imo
Maybe you should wait 12 to 18 months for the new OLED lcds that are coming out - they are meant to be fantastic.
I can see what you mean Dave about the sales guys - here in Australia the way they throw the HD letters around is discusting.
In any case, if I was about to spend 3 to 4 grand on a new tv, I would do heaps of research first, then even go out to a store and take my dvd player with me to try it out before I bought.
I can see what you mean Dave about the sales guys - here in Australia the way they throw the HD letters around is discusting.
In any case, if I was about to spend 3 to 4 grand on a new tv, I would do heaps of research first, then even go out to a store and take my dvd player with me to try it out before I bought.
Dude ive always wanted to ask you but what the hell is this Evil Squirrel of Doom thing?
Westinghouse has a 1080p "monitor" here in the States. As far as I know it is the only true 1080p TV/Monitor. I do agree with some of you, early adopters are going to be in for a surprise when the can't get 1080p on the new players.
I am still researching which TV to buy...so many options. Any suggestions (remember I am in the States).
I am still researching which TV to buy...so many options. Any suggestions (remember I am in the States).
Aftermath wrote: Dude ive always wanted to ask you but what the hell is this Evil Squirrel of Doom thing?It's actually an indie movie that's coming out soon - go here for some info and links.
Anyone actually seen a 1080i and 1080p TV side by side to see the difference. I just don't believe that it can be that much different. 1080i is beautiful. I can't imagine progressive scan makes that much difference on the image.
i bought a pioneer pdp 505 xde plasma last summer and fed with a gd source the picture is amazing , if you're spending that kind of money you got do it right and buy a gd dvd player with a scaler,i've ran vhs thru it and it looks pathethic , cheap players may look gd on a crt screen , and as for leaving a still picture on your screen for a couple of hours why didnt you hit stop on your dvd player then resume all screen are subceptable to screenburn leaving a still image on screen
Adrian wrote: Anyone actually seen a 1080i and 1080p TV side by side to see the difference. I just don't believe that it can be that much different. 1080i is beautiful. I can't imagine progressive scan makes that much difference on the image.
You have a screen which has a native 1080 resolution but which can't accept a progressive signal? Otherwise I'd be surprised if a lower resolution with progressive scan wasn't giving a better image than a scaled 1080i one.
AIDIE wrote: and as for leaving a still picture on your screen for a couple of hours why didnt you hit stop on your dvd player then resume all screen are subceptable to screenburn leaving a still image on screen
Plasmas are a LOT more susceptable than LCDs. If LCDs can get it at all, which I'm not sure they can.
D
You have a screen which has a native 1080 resolution but which can't accept a progressive signal? Otherwise I'd be surprised if a lower resolution with progressive scan wasn't giving a better image than a scaled 1080i one.
AIDIE wrote: and as for leaving a still picture on your screen for a couple of hours why didnt you hit stop on your dvd player then resume all screen are subceptable to screenburn leaving a still image on screen
Plasmas are a LOT more susceptable than LCDs. If LCDs can get it at all, which I'm not sure they can.
D
dbeamish wrote:
You have a screen which has a native 1080 resolution but which can't accept a progressive signal? Otherwise I'd be surprised if a lower resolution with progressive scan wasn't giving a better image than a scaled 1080i one.
I think there are a lot of sets that display 1080i, but won't display 1080p. It doesn't mean they won't accept a progressive signal. They also display 720p and 480p, just not 1080p. I don't think 1080p was part of the original HD spec was it?
You have a screen which has a native 1080 resolution but which can't accept a progressive signal? Otherwise I'd be surprised if a lower resolution with progressive scan wasn't giving a better image than a scaled 1080i one.
I think there are a lot of sets that display 1080i, but won't display 1080p. It doesn't mean they won't accept a progressive signal. They also display 720p and 480p, just not 1080p. I don't think 1080p was part of the original HD spec was it?
Lots of sets will display 1080i which in the HD Ready spec. However at the moment a lot of them scale 1080i to the sets native resolution which is often something like 1366x768 or 1280x720 pixels. Images at such high resolutions scaled down to your panels native resolution generally shouldn't look as good as an image at the panels native resolution - especially if its native resolution supports progressive scan which provides a much more pleasent image than an interlaced one.
As for 1080p not being in the HD spec - well its not included as mandatory in the HD Ready spec. HD Ready is a baseline however, not a maximum to aim for.
As for 1080p not being in the HD spec - well its not included as mandatory in the HD Ready spec. HD Ready is a baseline however, not a maximum to aim for.
I found the above article to be less than useful. It's not about the native resloution of a panel but rather the quality of the scaler that is within the 'set. I have a 43" Plasma (Pioneer PDP436XDE) that has a resolution of 1024x768 and yet it produces an excellent HD picture from my Xbox 360 and Sony RDRHXD910 upscaling DVD player. Certainly much better than any of the Samsung sets that I've seen that have the so called full HD native resolution. I have seen HD satellite material running through it and was amazed at the quality. Home Cinema Choice calls this set the "greatest plasma we've ever seen." As regards the debate re plasma/LCD. I've seen many LCD sets and have been very disappointed with the picture qulaity when you start to get up to screen sizes of 36" and higher. The image just doesn't seem to be as stable as with plasmas.
It is about the native resolution.. The quality of the scaler only comes into it if you are feeding it a resolution different to that of the screens native display. I am sure you are very happy with your screen which I assume squeezes a full HD image to fit instead of having a decent resolution in the first place, and I'm sure your plasma is lovely - but I wouldn't buy one and with a resolution like that I don't recommend anyone else does. The article isn't a comparisson between LCDs and Plasmas - jsut talking about the HD Ready spec.
Aren't both LCD and Plasma Progressive by design so surely 1080i is going to output progressively anyway?
I was going to go for the Philips 37PF9830...1920x1080 panel, winning awards for picture quality all over the place (although that may have been the 32" model) and generally well thought of - and then I found out that even with the right native resolution it can't handle 1080p! Hopefully they'll address that with an upgraded model in the near future.
V. disappointed as I've been quite impressed with my Philips CRT over the years and would quite happily go for them again (well, I sort of have anyway - the CRT went kaput a week or so ago, so I got a 26" Philips LCD to tide me over until the monster TV I want turns up on the shelves
)
Also, I think it was mentioned that 1080p sets are (or will be) around 10,000GBP, but as far as I can tell you should be able to get them for under 3000 (and possibly a long way under that).
V. disappointed as I've been quite impressed with my Philips CRT over the years and would quite happily go for them again (well, I sort of have anyway - the CRT went kaput a week or so ago, so I got a 26" Philips LCD to tide me over until the monster TV I want turns up on the shelves
)Also, I think it was mentioned that 1080p sets are (or will be) around 10,000GBP, but as far as I can tell you should be able to get them for under 3000 (and possibly a long way under that).
I hear what you're saying about not recommending any set with less than the full native resolution. It's interesting tho that none of the magazines or other industry sources that I've read and have access to seem to agree with you...
Advertisement
New Editorials
Guilty Pleasures: Footloose
DVD
Indiana Jones: Top 20 Moments
DVD
DVDActive Lost and Found: Part 2
DVD
Guilty Pleasures: Biggles: Adventures in Time
DVD
Active Essentials: Rambo
DVD
Horrific Reviews
Silent Hill
UK - DVD R2
Blood Trails
RU - DVD R5
Dawn of the Dead: Unrated Director's Cut
US - DVD R1
Dracula Saga, The
US - DVD R1
They Live
UK - DVD R2
Advertisement
Most Talked About
The Dark Knight
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Hellboy II
US - DVD R1 | BD
Kung Fu Panda
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Tropic Thunder
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
US - BD
Hot Easter Eggs
Spider-Man 2: Special Edition
US - DVD R1
Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story
UK - DVD R2
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
US - DVD R1
Speed: Special Edition
UK - DVD R2
Family Guy Presents: Blue Harvest
UK - DVD R2
Unseen Reviews
