If HD is 720p why are all LCD's 768?

[Nic Rhodes]

err bit confused here. I am sure I have missed your point so:

interlaced signal from DVD, deinterlaced, scaled, interlace to get 1080i. This is then fed to what ever to be deinterlaced again (poorly) and rescaled to fit what ever panel resolution.

HDTV can produce a 1080i signal but is pretty rare at the moment with a small group of HD enthusiast mostly here, deinterlace (poorly again) and rescaled.

Feed to digital panels (LCD, PLasma etc) that have a fixed resolution, (but CRT does not).

virtual resolutions where you move around?, is this bit like adpative pan and scan?

This is about the native resolution of currently available panels not what is broadcast or what is generated from DVD. People want native 1280 x 720 panels they can address 1:1 at 50/60Hz. Period.

[jont]

Wht can't the manufacturers offer a non-scaled option ... ?

If most of the market (as discussed before) is built around 1366 x 768, why not have a 1280 x 720 resolution that sits in the centre of the screen with some (small) black borders ... best of both worlds - keep sproduction costs down and offers those that prefer 1:1 mapping a reasonable solution ...

Jon

btw - was in comet earlier today and saw a tosh lcd screen at 1280 x 720 and had a cracking picture running off their psudeo in-house HD feed (which I guess is a htpc loop running at 720 ??) - looked so much sharper than thos with pictures scaled to fill 768 pixels ...

[pjskel]

See my post above - shaving off a few pixels here and there (and it is only a few!) is not how manufacturers go about cutting costs.
Hell, if it were this simple, wouldn't they already be doing it?
It's not like the cost of a panel is worked out on pixel count - it's how many they can get at particular resolutions from the motherglass.
Think of a manufacturer of cake - he can make a large one, then divide it up into however many pieces he needs, that makes each piece the same size.
So, a Sharp 45" TV will probalby start life as a 1/4, 1/3, 1/5, etc, portion of the motherglass - depends on the max size of glass the factory can produce.

[jont]

pjskel ... I was saying that can they not electronically address 1270 x 720 within a 1366 x 768 screen as well as a 'full screen' 1366 x 768 ?

Jon

[pjskel]

Yes they could, if they so chose, but then you'd not be best impressed with unused pixels having been paid for, sitting there doing nothing.
Bottom line, the small amount of scaling being done, when viewed from typical distances goes unnoticed. It'd be different if you were sat 3ft away from the TV.
So, as of this point in time, there's no justification for reinventing the wheel, and as has already been said, they are moving on to full HD panels. People will probably want larger displays, and as such, they will trade up to this type of panel based TV.

[StooMonster]

Originally Posted by Stephen Neal

Given that the 1280x720 standard dates back from before 1998 (when 720p broadcasts launched in the US), they've had quite a long time to make the change haven't they?

Simple market economics isn't it? Commercial displays that require PC input are a large portion of market. 768 rows works for them, but 720 may not. 720 is typically used for video (and not computer text) and video scales up to 768 without too many issues. Therefore making 768 panels makes sense because it addresses the largest total market with the least complexity; if this was not the case you would have 1280x720 panels all over the market now.

StooMonster

[Stephen Neal]

Originally Posted by jont

Wht can't the manufacturers offer a non-scaled option ... ?

If most of the market (as discussed before) is built around 1366 x 768, why not have a 1280 x 720 resolution that sits in the centre of the screen with some (small) black borders ... best of both worlds - keep sproduction costs down and offers those that prefer 1:1 mapping a reasonable solution ...

Jon

btw - was in comet earlier today and saw a tosh lcd screen at 1280 x 720 and had a cracking picture running off their psudeo in-house HD feed (which I guess is a htpc loop running at 720 ??) - looked so much sharper than thos with pictures scaled to fill 768 pixels ...

Philips do offer this option on some of their 768 line LCD displays apparently. (In fact I don't know if it is an option - or the only way of 720p display)

[Bat-man]

If HD is 720p why are all LCD's 768?

The LCD panels in my Sony are 720.

[neilmcl]

Originally Posted by Bat-man

The LCD panels in my Sony are 720.

But your's is one of the new range of LCD rear pros. I think most people here are talking about standard LCD panels.

[Nic Rhodes]

Jont (and others) re 720 in a 768 panel with a black borders. Great idea, Philips do it already, unfortunately great ideas aren't always used I think it a lovely solution for HDMI and 1:1 pixel mapping.

[Bat-man]

Originally Posted by neilmcl

But your's is one of the new range of LCD rear pros. I think most people here are talking about standard LCD panels.

But the original statement said:
If HD is 720p why are all LCD's 768?

Maybe the forum should be renamed Direct View LCD?

[Nic Rhodes]

Bat your panels may be 720 and you might be able to HDMI 1:1 but how does that help everyone else?

[Bat-man]

Originally Posted by Nic Rhodes

Bat your panels may be 720 and you might be able to HDMI 1:1 but how does that help everyone else?

Sorry - suppose it doesn't!

[Nic Rhodes]

It is a great way forward and to be encouraged but this is really the first step on a long road. Personally I would like to see 1280 x 720 panels and projectors for the low / mid market and 1920 x 1080 for the high end, the former HDMI aware and the latter adding 1080p inputs. This would be a great way forward I believe and would probably significantly reduce the number of posts on the forum!!

[Joe Fernand]

Hello all

jont - lots of Projectors, a few Plasma and I'm sure some LCD monitors already use the 'masking' technique; though they tend to never show the masked area; and simply make every Input signal 'fit' into the 'masked' area.

The problem with having the 1:1 pixel mapped option of say 1280x720 on a 1366x768 active array will be if long term use at 1280x720 means you get uneven 'wear' across the panel and end up with dark/bright areas when you revert back to full screen.

I know a few of the Plasma manufacturers are wrestling with the notion that Video use has now superseded PC use and a move from 1024x768 (42") and 1366x768 (50") to 1280x720 is required - though the Watts Per Channel brigade will have a field day when the manufacturers try and market a lower resolution array as a better buy!

Best regards

Joe