[Nielo TM]

Originally Posted by rioeire

dont know why is so "bad" to think that full hd is overrated
if all tv signals and videos where 1080p i would agree but in the meantime iMO HD ready is more than enough
but anyway the point is also,why TV manufacturers dont give the chance to buy HD ready LCD like in 2008, at least up to 40 inches

my point is that most people won´t get the benefits in their new panels of the 1080p technology but they will suffer the problems of high resolution TVs upscaling SD signals

We've all provided the facts and answers to your question.

[rioeire]

All right you gave me facts, then how is it possible that SD signals look like XXX in a FULL HD and decent in an HD ready TV

[ricki]

Originally Posted by LX200GPS

I don’t know the answer to this question as I have not seen a Full HD picture in my home. However, if it was conclusively proved by someone that it was overrated then I would not be surprised. You could have a whole new thread in discussing the meaning of “overrated” in this case.
It wasn’t too long ago that component video was considered the best possible way to connect to a display. After that it was an RGB enabled Scart cable. Then HDMI made an appearance and eventually HDMI sockets began showing up on the rear of DVD players. I remember I bought a Demon DVD player around that time and connected to a HD Ready 42” set. I had my old DVD player connected to the same display using a Scart. Could I tell the difference? No, as much as I wanted to I just couldn’t honestly say the HDMI player produced a better picture. The lovely new Demon went back and I made do with my old player.
The difference between DVD and VHS was very plain for all to see. You can even change “VHS” for “Laserdisc” and it was still some leap. There are those who say the difference in PQ between DVD and Blu ray is not all that great, even less between Superbit and Blu ray. From now on the difference in PQ, regardless of what we are discussing, will be much smaller and therefore harder to see.
Don’t forget the industry is geared up to making you feel inadequate with what you already have. They want you to go out and get the “next best thing”. My golden rule is this; if you cannot hear or see the difference then don’t spend your money. Don’t listen to those who swear you are blind or deaf, if it works for them then that’s fine.
Have fun

You mean they were cheating, lying and stealing all along. That is conspiracy in the eye of the law and too bad the law is only meant for a few.

[Curly99]

Originally Posted by ricki

You mean they were cheating, lying and stealing all along. That is conspiracy in the eye of the law and too bad the law is only meant for a few.

I'd say he doesn't mean that, can you explain your reasoning for the above,

[LX200GPS]

That’s not what I meant at all. In a nutshell I’m saying that increments in PQ these days are so small that some people fail to see them and, for them, buying into the next best thing is a waste of money in my opinon.
Always audition before buying and save your cash if you cannot see/hear any improvement. It’s that simple. As I said, I cannot really comment on whether Full HD is overrated or not as I have no experience of it.

[ricki]

Good man lxgps dude I am pulling ya legs. Never mind!

But for you curly, why do you extend the same courtesy to all this manufacturer and ask them sincerely why they mislead peeps in their public relations [advert] which mostly, to me, are misleading to put it in short.

then i will see if have an explanation for the above or rather if the law is not for a few. See the analogy.

[Curly99]

Originally Posted by ricki

Good man lxgps dude I am pulling ya legs. Never mind!

But for you curly, why do you extend the same courtesy to all this manufacturer and ask them sincerely why they mislead peeps in their public relations [advert] which mostly, to me, are misleading to put it in short.

then i will see if have an explanation for the above or rather if the law is not for a few. See the analogy.

so your saying all manufactures are misleading the public with there adverts?

if this were true the advertising standards authority would surely not allow this to happen, if a manufacture makes a claim in their advertising they have to have the data/proof to back up any claims made, same as on here really, you make a sweeping statement and present it as fact, with no proof, information, links to back it up and then try an get round this lack of proof by inferring I should ask the manufactures...

I'll say this for the final time, if you post something as fact the be prepared to back it up with proof, next time the posts will be removed, now let this be the end of this discussion and get this thread back on topic.

[rioeire]

ok back to topic,

some of you gave some facts to explain that 1080p is better than 720p,and why under your point of view FULL HD is not overrated, remember that what I am trying to prove is not that HD ready TV are better than Full HD TVs, which is not the case

what I am trying to dsicuss is the fact that nowdays most people dont need the FULL HD features on their tellies since most contents are still SD (DVD, TV) and even the ones that are HD come in 1080i formats or HD PS3 or Xbox360 games for example are 720p (95%)

Then, there is the fact that most people dont buy "Big tellies" 37 32 or 42 are probably the most common screen sizes right now and their watching TV distances are not close enough to take full advantages of the FULL HD technology

Then there is the sad fact (IMO) that most TV manufacters dont give the chance to choose between HD ready and FULL HD TV in small LCD screens.

I think that a TV should be chosen by:

1 Level of "real" contrast
2 Black Levels
3 Colors
4 Scaling chip quality
5 Resolution

if the first 4 points above points are equal on a telly a Full HD tV will be better than a HD ready TV but only if the owner of the TV is going to watch 1080p contents at a certain distance because if somebody buys a 1080p TV to wacht just 576i contents , HD ready is more than enough and still future proof for years to come

[Nielo TM]

Originally Posted by rioeire

what I am trying to dsicuss is the fact that nowdays most people dont need the FULL HD features on their tellies since most contents are still SD (DVD, TV) and even the ones that are HD come in 1080i formats or HD PS3 or Xbox360 games for example are 720p (95%)

1080i can be de-interlaced into 1080p without any visible lose in image definition and 25 and 30i contents are essentially progressive (excluding interlaced tele-cine conversion). So for Sky HD, a 1080p set is better suited than 720p (768p).

Also, there's no definitive proof that 720p displays are better at displaying SD than 1080p displays (which excludes 1024 x 768/720 displays).

In addition, it's better to scale 720p to 1080p than to 768p (not to mention the over-scan).

Edit: Remember, the standard 720p composed of 1366 x 768 can't native display 720p or 1080i. It's actually below HD (technically speaking).

Originally Posted by rioeire

Then, there is the fact that most people dont buy "Big tellies" 37 32 or 42 are probably the most common screen sizes right now and their watching TV distances are not close enough to take full advantages of the FULL HD technology

That an opinion, not a fact. I can easily spot scaling and processing artifacts on my 26" 720p (768p) LCD from average distance of 1.5-1.8m. So it's best not generalize.

Originally Posted by rioeire

Then there is the sad fact (IMO) that most TV manufacters dont give the chance to choose between HD ready and FULL HD TV in small LCD screens.

Is there a need to?

Granted, if they produced true 1280 x 720p displays, then a choice would be ideal but that's not the case is it? Besides, we have reached a point where the cost difference between 720p and 1080p negligible at best.

Originally Posted by rioeire

I think that a TV should be chosen by:

1 Level of "real" contrast
2 Black Levels
3 Colors
4 Scaling chip quality
5 Resolution

if the first 4 points above points are equal on a telly a Full HD tV will be better than a HD ready TV but only if the owner of the TV is going to watch 1080p contents at a certain distance because if somebody buys a 1080p TV to wacht just 576i contents , HD ready is more than enough and still future proof for years to come

You've just contradicted yourself.

If res is the lease important factor, that is the point of this thread?


PS: 720p sets are not future proof (nothing is). In fact, 768p sets needs to be removed from the cycle and replaced with 1080p as it's more flexible to game developers, broadcasters and consumers.

http://forums.xbox.com/28946070/ShowPost.aspx

[ricki]

Originally Posted by Nielo TM

PS: 720p sets are not future proof (nothing is). In fact, 768p sets needs to be removed from the cycle and replaced with 1080p as it's more flexible to game developers, broadcasters and consumers.

Xbox.com | General Discussion - [Why 540p Better than 720p]

Is 1080p future proof either? think very hard before u answer

[Nielo TM]

Did I say it was?

You need to read carefully before posting.


Edit: All of todays 720p sets are designed for the low-end sector. So obviously 1080p displays will stand the test of time for longer. Not to mention, current 1080p displays offer more then just increase in resolution.

[ertoil]

Originally Posted by Gordon @ Convergent AV

OK you are obviously a troll....if you really think the 428 is the pinnacle of plasma performance

Originally Posted by Curly99

it's not a fact, it is your opinion...anyway this is off topic, lets keep to the topic please guys

I try to demonstrate that Full HD tvs like the Sony X4500 , Panasonic V10 - Z1
Loewe Lcd's...etc...only beat even Pioneer 8gen HD Ready plasmas in the
resolution department... taking account that 720p resolution is more than enough
and the Pioneer 428X (not to mention 9g Pioneers of course) beat any current tv
by far in blacks..greyscale...contrast..delta accuracy..etc

[rioeire]

1080i can be de-interlaced into 1080p without any visible lose in image definition and 25 and 30i contents are essentially progressive (excluding interlaced tele-cine conversion). So for Sky HD, a 1080p set is better suited than 720p (768p).

There is more in the world than just Sky i don´t live in the UK I dont wacht SKY HD, here in Spain most of channels DVB are 576i (the look better on a 720p TV) few in 10801 DVB , they look the same for me on a 1080p tv or 720p

Also, there's no definitive proof that 720p displays are better at displaying SD than 1080p displays (which excludes 1024 x 768/720 displays).

My eyes and 4 HDTV I have had are proof enough , SD signals look better in a HD ready TV , and even better on a Plasma TV I cant give you a scientific proof you will have to trust my word or try it yourself

How is it possible that a 720x576 signal would look better on a 1920x1080 than in a 1024x768 if the scaling is bigger ?7

Edit: Remember, the standard 720p composed of 1366 x 768 can't native display 720p or 1080i. It's actually below HD (technically speaking).

I believe you , my eyes dont

That an opinion, not a fact. I can easily spot scaling and processing artifacts on my 26" 720p (768p) LCD from average distance of 1.5-1.8m. So it's best not generalize.

LCD handle SD signals worse than Plasmas TVs (right now the only ones that are HD ready TVs) I dont see any artifacts on my 50 HD ready Plasma TV,I didnt saw any artifacts on my panaonic 37PX70 I saw many artifacts on my Philips 47-9664 at the same distance with the same signals, I have seen many artifatcs on my sisters Pansonic Plasma G10 FULL HD (no as many as on a LCD )

Is there a need to?

For you of course not, since you believe that FULL HD TV handle better SD signals than HD ready sets

Granted, if they produced true 1280 x 720p displays, then a choice would be ideal but that's not the case is it? Besides, we have reached a point where the cost difference between 720p and 1080p negligible at best.

You can honestly say that you can tell the differences on a lets say 42" HD TV at 8 feet between 1080p and 720p? because I couldnt at 8 feet in a 47 FULL HD LCD TV and a 50 HD ready Plasma TV

You've just contradicted yourself.
If res is the lease important factor, that is the point of this thread?

I said that resolution is not a as important as other factors are, I am sure that a Pionner Plasma HD ready from 2 years ago still beats todays Super high End Full LCD HD sets , but people go to retailers thinking " I need a 1080p TV no matter what I am going to use the TV for "

PS: 720p sets are not future proof (nothing is). In fact, 768p sets needs to be removed from the cycle and replaced with 1080p as it's more flexible to game developers, broadcasters and consumers.

maybe but 576i signals are bad in a HD ready TV and they suck in a 1080p TV

Xbox.com | General Discussion - [Why 540p Better than 720p][/QUOTE]

anyway sorry if I sound rough sometimes it is not my intention , blame my english

thanks for sharing your opinions in this thread and thank you , Panny Sammy and LG for still making HD ready Plasmas TV

[matt41]

Full HD (1080) is a good concept to standardise the panel to the feed ( if all games / channels were 1080).
But, when the future holds 3D and higher resolution panels- you must realise were just pawns in marketing game.
1080p panels do not mean a better picture if the set is inherently poor, LCD proves this.

Many so called better digital cameras with higher density sensors purport to be of better quality.

If you sit a distance away that the resolution cannot be seen, by definition the 1080 is a waste of time.

To some the purchase of their TV is a lot of cash ands a decision they feel they took time and trouble over and they’re not to happy if there decision is challenged.

Frankly I have more money than sense ( about £4.50), but in this case for the technology available at the time, I choose a TV that was better on SD compared to the 1080 panel.

Many people are told its better and don’t even get to compare the same TV’s next to each other (or at home!) so why should they come on here with a 1080p set in the home that they are pleased with then give a vote to a HD ready set.

Matt

[ertoil]

How a Lcd could be good for SD if a 2ms lcd is 2.000 times slower
than a 0.001 ms Plasma ?? i think some people is tripping
you ll have "jaggies" in each image movement on lcd
only Samsung and LG small plasmas have a near complete
"jaggies reduction" on Digital SD broadcasts, also they pass
the scaling and "deinterlace" tests like no others

[snadge]

its all down to your seating distance.... you must take this into consideration before you even BUY a TV... it is a very important factor... a lot of people get 47" sets and sit 4ft away and wonder why pic quality is crap... OR buy 26" sets and sit 10ft away and wonder why theres no difference between any format they watch.....

another important factor is WHAT your going to be watching (inputs) - if you plan to watch lots of BLu-Ray / HD / SKY+HD then Full-HD is the best with aspect ratio set to 'just-scan' and all inputs set to 1080p/i - but if you plan just too watch freeview then HD Ready would suffice as there is 'less' scaling to be done... but that said you can get some decent scaling and again artefacts are only noticeable if your sitting too close

with regards to resolutions being exact - the truth is they never are... all TV's apply a default 5% overscan (upscale) - this can be turned off in most modern TV's (mostly in Full_HD but I have seen it in 720p sets) by choosing 'Just-Scan' or 'Exact-Scan' as the aspect ratio instead of 16:9

as for these TV's that are '1080p input' - these are not TRUE FULL-HD SETS as someone previously mentioned... this just means it will take a progressive 1920x1080 video feed and downscale it to 5% larger than the TV's resolution (or the TV's true resolution if 'just-scan' is set) - you dont get any loss of actual quality or gain artifacts as such but you do get much less detail than watching 1080p on a 1080p set...

Just so you know, while Full-HD is a term used - the 'official' term now is HD Ready 1080p
HD Ready 1080p = a TV with 1920x1080 resolution
HD Ready = a TV with lesser resolution (usually 768x1366 in LCDs) but will display 720p, so will have at least 720 lines
HD ready - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...the truth of it is, Full-HD is not over-rated... it has TWICE the detail over HD Ready, you just have to be watching the correct source at the correct seating distance

[rioeire]

Originally Posted by snadge

...the truth of it is, Full-HD is not over-rated... it has TWICE the detail over HD Ready, you just have to be watching the correct source at the correct seating distance

As I have posted before I believe of course that in equal terms of quality and TV watching ambience, 1080p TVs are better than 720p, TVs but as you say: "only if the correct source and the correct distance is kept in mind"

Therefore I believe most people wacht TV at "not" 1080p proper distances, so they do not get any benefit from their higher resolution TVs, in fact most of them wouldn´t even notice any difference wachting the same source on a 720p set , but they indeed will notice the better quality of the 720p set when wachting SD contents

so in that sense I think yes full HD is overrated because people that buy those TVs are in most cases not aware of what they are doing, (not the people that visit Avfroums of course),and people buy 108p tvs thinking that they are doing the correct thing even if they are not going to use Blu Rays or gaming

So when somebody is buying a product thinking he is getting the "best" thing avaliable when in fact a cheaper product will give the client in most of the cases the same quality and in certains ocasion even better quality then yes I think that product is overrated.

[matt41]

I also feel thet so 1080p sets are inherently poor by some manufacturers and sell on the back of being full HD rather than an exceptional 768 set.

Just the other day, a customer in a shed was convinced he needed 1080 on a 37 inch set he was going to sit 12 ft from so was looking to buy an LCD not the HD ready plasma sets on offer.

So not only was he convinced he needed the resolution, it was directing him to an LCD set, which still to my eyes is a poorer format.

matt

[ertoil]

1080p full detail is only noticeable in a 50" at less than 5.9 Feet

imagine; you have 1 Million pixels in 1366X768 at 40"
if you have 2 million pixels (full hd) you ll have to sit
touching the screen with your nose to appreciate
the full full HD detail

the avforums reviewer remembering in all hd ready plasma reviews
that 1024X720 is NOT true HD...well ok....if 720X576 is the maximum
SD resolution...what is 1024X720 ? what i want to say is that
1024X720 in a 32-37" inch plasma is simply amazing and you
wont need anymore for a long time

[Boostrail]

Originally Posted by ertoil

1080p full detail is only noticeable in a 50" at less than 5.9 Feet

Who says (other than you)?

For HD viewing where the broadcast is at 1080i it is very noticeable that a picture that only requires de- interlacing on a 1920x1080 panel rather than down scaling on a 1366x768 or 1024X720 panel is far better even on 32" screens at around 2 metres viewing distance. If you want to prove this technically just record the BBC HD Testcard and play it back on both types of panel.

[rioeire]

Originally Posted by Boostrail

Who says (other than you)?

For HD viewing where the broadcast is at 1080i it is very noticeable that a picture that only requires de- interlacing on a 1920x1080 panel rather than down scaling on a 1366x768 or 1024X720 panel is far better even on 32" screens at around 2 metres viewing distance. If you want to prove this technically just record the BBC HD Testcard and play it back on both types of panel.

You must have a hawk vison to tell differences at 2 meters with a 32 TV (no mater what Tv of course)

And of course all these charts on the internet saying that you need to be 2 meters away on a 50 TV to tell the difference in HD sources materials are false

yesterday I was at this retailer here in Barcelona, they had two Samsungs Plasmas TV the B430 an the B850 side by side with a 1080i SPanish HD channel witha movie, at 1 feet distance they looked absolutely the same to me, of course the prece wasn´t the same

B430 -699 euros
B850--1500euros

so for me not only is FULL HD overrated, is also overpriced

[Curly99]

Originally Posted by rioeire

And of course all these charts on the internet saying that you need to be 2 meters away on a 50 TV to tell the difference in HD sources materials are false

Please post proof of this, otherwise it's just your opinion which you should stop posting as fact and posting because I saw it instore is not proof.

[rioeire]

Originally Posted by Curly99

Please post proof of this, otherwise it's just your opinion which you should stop posting as fact and posting because I saw it instore is not proof.

I mean the charts like these ones (see below), I was being sarcastic when I said "false" what the charts show is that you have to be at 7 feet on a 50 inches TV to see the differences between 1080p and 720p

on these forums and web pages

1080p charted: viewing distance to screen size -- Electronics NEWS - about-electronics.eu



http://www.about-electronics.eu/wp-c...ngDistance.gif


or you can go here and calculate it for yourself

Viewing Distance Calculator


or this one on this forum

HDTV and Audio thread - English Forum Switzerland

http://www.the-home-cinema-guide.com...istance-03.jpg

or this one

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...579/284992.gif



http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/ass...alk2_large.jpg

Mod Comment: images altered to a link, don't hotlink to images from sites that you don't have permission to do so from



I dindt proof as fact what I saw on the shop, I cant proof my eyes !
the charts show that to take full advantage of a fULL HD TV of 50 inches you need to be around 7 feet distance, more or less 2 meters

[ertoil]

I agree with the third graphic....1080 42" less than 1.7m..useless (imho)
you will be blind in some weeks
hey...think about the cash your saving and this 2010 the HD Ready
Panasonic and Samsung Plasmas are even cheaper and prepared
for 24p material Blurays

If i try a 1080p panel it could will be a Pioneer krl-37v lcd on budget price
and use it for pc too

[turk3y]

Originally Posted by Nielo TM

In addition, modern 1080p panels have supeioer blacks and it required for 3D.

is that better blacks or 1080p required for 3D?

given you can do 3d with colours (red / green) at any res I think it sounds like total marketing to make people upgrade their tv....

as film is 24 frames and video in 25 coupled with the fact all panels are at 50hz minimum there is plenty of scope for an image for each eye for active switching, but why settle for less than the maximum reward for all the hard work the marketing dept have been up to

[JanAndersen]

The arguments around distance and resolution the eye can see, is a classic misunderstanding of this isssue.

Its all about scalling.

If you mainly receive in 1080, or your favorite programs/films/priority are in 1080, better with a FULL HD. Else the TV set will have to convert the format from 720p to 1080, which adds artifacts and lines flimmering, for LCD sets there may be an issue of timing -> motion blur, as the system has to do a convertion, when its buzy already compensating for the slow technology in LCD panels.

For LCD, there is one more advantage, the more pixels to play with, the better picture quality.

Adding all together, looking at the near future - Full HD is the answer and worth it.

[ricki]

i saw a samsung advert for their new set UE46C5800. It has a resolution of 1920x1200. Does anyone notice that?

That is more than 1080p i guessed you guys should change your discussion because your overrated full HD has just been superseded. That life isn't?

--------------------------------------------------------------



Samsung UE46C5800 46 Inch Freeview HD Full HD Series 5 Luxia LED TV

46" Full 1080p Ultra Slim LED TV Set
1920 x 1200 Resolution
Freeview HD Tuner
Mega Contrast

[rioeire]

Originally Posted by JanAndersen

The arguments around distance and resolution the eye can see, is a classic misunderstanding of this isssue.

Its all about scalling.

If you mainly receive in 1080, or your favorite programs/films/priority are in 1080, better with a FULL HD. Else the TV set will have to convert the format from 720p to 1080, which adds artifacts and lines flimmering, for LCD sets there may be an issue of timing -> motion blur, as the system has to do a convertion, when its buzy already compensating for the slow technology in LCD panels.

For LCD, there is one more advantage, the more pixels to play with, the better picture quality.

Adding all together, looking at the near future - Full HD is the answer and worth it.

correct, as you say "If you mainly receive in 1080"but who does nowdays?

who is realling taking advantages of 1080p panels?

those who play next generation console games and those who play BD but in most cases most people are still using 576i signals,

becuase even if no overscan is involved at 3 meters (10 feet) is very hard to tell or almost imposible to see the differences of a 1080p input on a FULL HD set or in a HD ready set (42 inches for example), but from that distance yes it is likely the viewer will see the diferences when those two panels are playing a 576i signal

I would love to see HD ready plasmas with the same elctronic and components level as high end FULL HD Plasmas....

[JanAndersen]

Originally Posted by rioeire

correct, as you say "If you mainly receive in 1080"but who does nowdays?

who is realling taking advantages of 1080p panels?

those who play next generation console games and those who play BD but in most cases most people are still using 576i signals,

becuase even if no overscan is involved at 3 meters (10 feet) is very hard to tell or almost imposible to see the differences of a 1080p input on a FULL HD set or in a HD ready set (42 inches for example), but from that distance yes it is likely the viewer will see the diferences when those two panels are playing a 576i signal

I would love to see HD ready plasmas with the same elctronic and components level as high end FULL HD Plasmas....

In Denmark, HD is broadcated in 1080i. We now have more than 17 HD channels here. My daughter of 11 insists of a HD HDMI connection for her PS3

I suppose also a priority; perfect news and soap-series, or perfect movies ?

[rioeire]

Originally Posted by JanAndersen

In Denmark, HD is broadcated in 1080i. We now have more than 17 HD channels here. My daughter of 11 insists of a HD HDMI connection for her PS3

I suppose also a priority; perfect news and soap-series, or perfect movies ?

well here in Spain we dont have any free HD channels yet, (they are, but still testing)but as you say the ones you have in your country are 1080i which is an HD ready resolution I have had a FULL HD set and a HD ready set, 1080i signals look the same to me at any distance in both TVs

and its not jus soap opera , football in SD is much better in a HD ready set
I use HDMI PS3 on my HD ready tv(most games ar still 720P) and it looks great

Perfect movies on a FULL HD ? it takes more of calibration than resolution IMO to get a perfect movie. and still you have forgotten about the DVD (people have thousands of them) , they look better on a HD ready TV (less scaling)

But again to get real benefit you have to sit very close to your tv and it has to have a big diagonal as you can see on the charts I have posted before

today the benefits of a 1080p IMO are few and the differences with a HD ready TV set are small , but the price difference is big