720P - 1080i - 1080P CONFUCE

[iwanrs]

1. I have DVD player capable of up scaling standard DVD to 720P and 1080i, which format give a better picture quality overall?
2. How good is the latest 1080P format compare to 1080i or 720P, is the quality difference so obvious? Can our naked eyes see the different?
3. What format is adapted by HD-TV in USA (NTSC) and UK/Europe (PAL)?
4. What is the standard format of D-Theater (or DVHS)?
5. What is the standard format of HD-DVD and Blu-ray?
You can see how confuse I am with so many HD resolution, not to mention HD-DVD and Blu-ray contribute more chaotic situation.
Many Thanks
:lease:

[Mike_CA]

2. How good is the latest 1080P format compare to 1080i or 720P, is the quality difference so obvious? Can our naked eyes see the different?
1080p is not a broadcasting format. It will only be used in the near future for Blue-Ray, PS3, and PC to HDTV connections.

3. What format is adapted by HD-TV in USA (NTSC) and UK/Europe (PAL)?
The US uses ATSC(8VSB) and UK/Europe uses COFDM for OTA broacasts. Both use 64QAM and 256QAM for cable.

See transmission schemes in the following article.

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci339456,00.html

5. What is the standard format of HD-DVD and Blu-ray?

Click here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=631350) for a discussion concerning the different formats.

[sbowler]

Its unlikely for the majority of viewers that they will notice any difference between 720p and 1080i on most setups, unless your using a very large display screen. Even 1080p will only look marginaly better on very large screens an front projection systems. IMHO

[iwanrs]

Hi Sbowler,
If I have Sanyo Z4 and Carada Criterion 134" 16:9 Brilliant White screen in a total dark HT room and play standard DVD to be up scaled by OPPO or Samsung DVD player via HDMI/DVI connection. Which format should I switch? 720P or 1080i.
I feel the picture of 1080i is somehow a bit softer than 720P, are my eyes correct?
Many Thanks
Iwan

[Welsh Whirlwind]

Have a scan through theses forums and you'll see there are alot of questions which answer in some detail what output you should choose, but the general concensus is that you should output 720P when you are watching films with intensive action scenes or sport ie football - the signal is processed progressively and thus reduces the trailing effect on the TV screen. An interlaced signal - 1080i displays more lines on the screen and is therefore more detailed but there is a very slight delay as 1080i 'interlaces' the picture in 2 parts: 540 lines are laid down, then, another 540 lines fill between the gaps - so this is not always the best option to choose when watching a fast sport like football as the player/ball framerate may drag/trail...
Next generation TV's are able to display 1080p ie 1080 lines progressively or at the same time hence eliminating any trailing effect whilst not compromising on any detail; PS3 will be able to output in 1080p.

Hope this Helps!!

[iwanrs]

Thanks Welsh,
That is a plain and simple explanation:
720P for fast moving scene like sport.
1080i for not so fast moving scene like movies.
Can I conclude like this:
If we put aside the speed of moving scene, 1080i is generally better or superior than 720P?
I think, I got it.

Iwan
:thumbsup:

[NicolasB]

Thanks Welsh,
That is a plain and simple explanationPlain and simple, perhaps, but entirely wrong.

If you're asking "what would be the best format for the programme makers to film a high definition programme in?" then an answer like "720p for sport" might be correct. But that's not what we're dealing with, here. For hi-def material the decision as to whether to shoot or encode in 720p or 1080i has already been made. The question here is whether it is beneficial to try to convert one format into the other at your end - and the answer to that is alnost always "no, it isn't" regardless of what format it was shot in. If the original is 720p and you convert it to 1080i you will lose either resolution or frame rate or both (depending on how the conversion is done). If the original is 1080i and you convert to 720 you will definitely lose a lot of detail, and you can't gain frame rate to compensate.

If we're talking about a signal that is standard defintion in the first place, rather than about an actual hi-def signal, that's diferent again. There is really no definite answer to questions like this. It depends on the capabilities of your display and the capabilities of whatever it is you're using to do the upscaling.

If you're watching a standard definition film on (say) a 1366x768 LCD screen, then you are going to have to do some upscaling somewhere along the line. It may look better if you output the raw interlaced signal and let the screen do deinterlacing and scaling; or it may look better if you let the player handle the deinterlacing while the screen does the scaling; or it may look better to let the player deinterlace and upscale to (say) 1280x720 and then have the screen scale that again to 1366x768; or it may look better if the player upscales to 1920x1080 and the screen scales back down. There's simply no way to tell without trying it.

On balance, DVD players tend to do a slightly better job of deinterlacing and scaling than displays do, and stand-alone scaler/deinterlacer devices are better again. But there's no way to be sure of this without trying it.

[razerindemix]

If you're watching a standard definition film on (say) a 1366x768 LCD screen, then you are going to have to do some upscaling somewhere along the line. It may look better if you output the raw interlaced signal and let the screen do deinterlacing and scaling; or it may look better if you let the player handle the deinterlacing while the screen does the scaling; or it may look better to let the player deinterlace and upscale to (say) 1280x720 and then have the screen scale that again to 1366x768; or it may look better if the player upscales to 1920x1080 and the screen scales back down. There's simply no way to tell without trying it.


And the manuals of these machines will tell u how to make all this happen ? yes ! eg;Press menu twice and hold the use button for 3 seconds

Mod edit: correct formatting.

[Kevo]

Thanks Welsh,
720P for fast moving scene like sport.
1080i for not so fast moving scene like movies.
Can I conclude like this:


Not according to Sky and BBC. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/delivering_quality/pdf/tv/HDBookv01_00.pdf)
The opposite is the case.

1080i for soap, sports, news etc as it gives a more familiar 'video look' and 720p for drama, wildlife etc as it gives the more familiar 'movie look'

Sky Sports have already afte rmuch testing they'll be using 1080i.

[welwynnick]

Not according to Sky and BBC. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/delivering_quality/pdf/tv/HDBookv01_00.pdf)That's a very interesting read. I don't think it was meant for us, but it's gone straight on my favourites list. I have to say I was quite pleased with the emphasis on 1080i, but I think it will provoke a great deal of dicussion, as there seemed to be little appreciation of the benefits of 720p/50 for sports etc, and it appears to contradict a lot of what has been said before.

There were lots of practical considerations for producers etc, like staging and make-up, but also with use of cameras and monitors. Stephen Neal will be pleased to hear that HD CRT monitors were expressly stated as being the best, though LCDs could be used for less critical applications.

Great stuff, Nick

[Kevo]

Great stuff, Nick

:confused:

Er...Don't mention it.

Here's the main BBC index page that includes more HD TV docs, again all aimed at production people rather than us consumers. But interesting none the less.

I think it was first put on the High Def TV forums (can't remember who by), so I can't take full credit

http://www.bbc.co.uk/commissioning/production/hd.shtml

[NicolasB]

1080i for soap, sports, news etc as it gives a more familiar 'video look' and 720p for drama, wildlife etc as it gives the more familiar 'movie look'Regardless, the issue of which native format may be preferable and the issue of which format to convert to, are two entirely separate questions. Everybody please keep hold of that. :)

[add46.88]

I've noticed a few members on AVSforums comment on there being no point in getting a HD-DVD player if your screen size is less than 42"

IMOP thats rubbish,why would manufactures bother selling HD ready sets under 42" if your eyes cannot see that extra detail??

i would imagine you may have to sit closer, but surley i'm still going to enjoy the benifits of HD regardless of screen size

i have a toshiba 37WLT58 and can't wait for HD:grin:

[Mike_CA]

I've noticed a few members on AVSforums comment on there being no point in getting a HD-DVD player if your screen size is less than 42"

IMOP thats rubbish,why would manufactures bother selling HD ready sets under 42" if your eyes cannot see that extra detail??

i would imagine you may have to sit closer, but surley i'm still going to enjoy the benifits of HD regardless of screen size

i have a toshiba 37WLT58 and can't wait for HD:grin:
I think there is a little truth to both. Under many cases, HD is not dramatically better (maybe 30%) than a good progressive DVD. However, it is usually much better than SD broadcasts.

[Nic Rhodes]

I've noticed a few members on AVSforums comment on there being no point in getting a HD-DVD player if your screen size is less than 42"

IMOP thats rubbish,why would manufactures bother selling HD ready sets under 42" if your eyes cannot see that extra detail??

i would imagine you may have to sit closer, but surley i'm still going to enjoy the benifits of HD regardless of screen size

i have a toshiba 37WLT58 and can't wait for HD:grin:

they may have a point, and the manufacturers will sell you what you think you want. It is all down to size of screen and viewing distance. If you sit 2 foot fom a screen, then 37 inch may be fine, if you sit 30 feet away it may be different. US rooms are much larger than UK ones.

[NicolasB]

IMOP thats rubbish,why would manufactures bother selling HD ready sets under 42" if your eyes cannot see that extra detail??Because they think you're stupid enough to buy them anyway. They don't care if you can see any difference or not - they only care whether or not you buy them.

i would imagine you may have to sit closer, but surley i'm still going to enjoy the benifits of HD regardless of screen sizeA 37" hi-def screen becomes indistinguishable from standard definition somewhere between 10 and 13 feet, depending on whether the comparable SD material is 4:3 or anamorphic.

The optimum viewing distance for a 37" screen is a little over 7 feet for a 720p screen or a little under 5 feet for a 1080p screen.

[gandley]

Processing abilities of the displays also play a huge part in this. Some 720p display will throw away half the resolution of 1080i by doing simple scaling and deinterlacing, So not always that simple as thinking 1080i will be down converted to 720p, some i think just convert to 540p and upconvert to 720p.

Also not helpful is the toshiba HD-DVD players are pretty rubbish when set to output 720p. but if you out put 1080i you are hoping that your displays internal processing wont just ditch half of the available resolution.

This could explain why some people cant really see any difference with there 720p sets over SD-DVD. but even with a 1080p set you are still hoping the internal processing is up to the task. So far the ruby seems up to the job.