1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Will there be a 40" or bigger 1080p LCD/Plasma available in the UK b4 the world cup?

Discussion in 'TVs' started by PapAV, Jul 29, 2005.

  1. PapAV

    PapAV
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2002
    Messages:
    187
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +15
    If so will they get to sensible prices by then (under 2k?)

    What's better LCD or Plasma? (or what are the pros and cons) I always thought LCD was better but I've been hearing otherwise lately.

    What would be the minimum specs I should be looking for in waht areas? eg. Brightness, Contrast, Frequency etc.

    ta very much in advance
     
  2. pjclark1

    pjclark1
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,411
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Thailand
    Ratings:
    +271
    the concensus seems to be
    Plasma is good for a dark room
    LCD is good for a bright room with lots of windows
    cos Plasma suffers from reflections. I gotta agree on the plasma front, my panny PWD6 is the bees neez with the curtain drawn, but on a bright day suffers badly from reflections, if I don't draw the curtains. On the plus side, its BIG and they only cost £1000 now.

    Not so sure I would pay the extra for a HD ready one, nobody will be broadcasting HD for the world cup (as far as I know). I'm not sure that the bandwidth will be available for good quality HD broadcasts in the near future, the SD screen is already far more capable than the existing signals over the sat. or freeview. (And a HDCP to non-protected dongle is only £50, if you are worried about that)
     
  3. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    Where from?
     
  4. Toekiller

    Toekiller
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    The recent European Cup ( Liverpool!! :D ) was shown in HD. All of Skys Premiership Games will be HD.

    Going on that basis, the WC should be HD too.
     
  5. Starburst

    Starburst
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    17,838
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Ilkeston
    Ratings:
    +979


    The WC will indeed be filmed in HD but the question is if any UK broadcaster (which means the BBC or ITV) will have the means or even the desire to offer it to the UK public.
    Pan European FTA HD broadcasters of the WC in HD are very unlikely so the best we may get is a 16:9 feed which is a major milestone and a huge step up over the farce of the recent Euro championships.
    I still think that the 4:3 analogue broadcasts from both the BBC and ITV will look better than their Dsat broadcasts though:(

    SKY will be offering all their Premier League games in HD but only when the service is launched which could mean that the 2006/07 season will be the earliest we see footy in HD unless there is an early '06 launch.
     
  6. pjskel

    pjskel
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,676
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +124
    Forget about the BBC doing HD trans for the next 5 years at least. They're concentrating on persuading the old dears that they need digital TV, never mind Hi-Def ones at that.
    NTL is a good bit behind on HD since they concentrated on VOD, as a sellable priority.
    So, when it comes to HD - it's Sky+ and pre-recorded that'll have to float your boat - that and the Euro1080 (HD1), which is another £500 (inc £200 10 year sub) for the box and card.
     
  7. Jonny1973

    Jonny1973
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Beeb has been testing HD satellite broadcasts since last year. They have bought extra satellite transponder space, which most people assume is for HD. They did a test broadcast of Live8 to a giant screen in Cardiff. Why do all this if its 5 years away??? I expect HD BBC to available on satellite and cable next year.

    They need the old dears (who would not be interested in HD) to switch to digital before they can switch off analogue and free up some space for the rest of us to have terrestrial HD.
     
  8. pjskel

    pjskel
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,676
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +124
    Yes, but there's only going to be BBC HD in areas where digital reigns supreme, and it's a long and laborious process getting the various regions to switch over to digital.
    So, I really do believe (after a conversation with someone from the BBC) that we can forget about HD from them for at least the next 2-3 years, or more, depending upon various factors - the main one being the number of people able to recieve a digital signal.
     
  9. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    You are confusing the BBC going TOTALLY HD, with the BBC going PARTIALLY HD.

    Whilst it is true that the BBC won't go to HD digital terrestrial (live at least - there is a remote possibility of opportunistic download to HD PVRs - but don't hold your breath) for a long time, this doesn't mean the BBC won't go HD on other outlets.

    The BBC has just bought more Astra satellite capacity, and has access to a number of HD programme sources, both in-house productions in HD and programme acquisitions and overseas sporting events in HD. The BBC now have two HD outside broadcast units - a medium sized one and a large one.

    Converting regions to HDTV is a red-herring and effectively irrelevant. The BBC didn't have to wait to convert regions from PAL analogue to Digital component to launch their 16:9 service on satellite in 1998, neither did they have to convert them to get DTT launched (they just installed some extra kit in each region). If the proposal for regions to feed their studio outputs to London for encoding in London go ahead, then the regions will require no extra conversion...

    If you are talking about converting the regional news studios to HD - then that isn't a factor (some of them are still PAL analogue and not digital widescreen standard def - but that hasn't stopped the rest of BBC One being digital widescreen)

    If you are talking about converting regional network production centres to HD - then Bristol has HD kit already (Natural History is shooting HD), London has HD kit (post-production and outside broadcast, with OB units also working into studios for HD studio production currently). Neither Manchester nor Birmingham have studios - so they would just need to upgrade their post-production infrastructure - and in the days of non-linear production this is just a case of upgrading your Avids etc. to HD. Even the new BBC News server editing system in London, produced by Quantel, is effectively HD upgradable (as a similar system is being used in HD by ESPN in the US)

    When Sky launch an HD service - it is VERY likely the BBC will launch on it within a year IMHO.
    I don't know which of the 25,000+ people in the BBC you spoke to - but I would be surprised if the BBC weren't broadcasting HD within 12 months of Sky launching their HD platform. I suspect there has been no public announcements of HD broadcasting because they have to decide a timescale, and are waiting to see Sky's proposition to judge this. They would also have to make a funding case to the director general and then the governors.
     
  10. pjskel

    pjskel
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,676
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +124
    Young chap here in Belfast - think it was general enquiry number. It was a feckin nightmare trying to find any number to call via the website. Never used to be like that!
    I asked to speak to someone in technical, but he offered to help, and sounded as if he knew what he was talking about, so took him at his word.
     
  11. r47463

    r47463
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Messages:
    102
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just remember it's the men in suits that determine the BBC's HD future, not someone on the end of a helpline.
     
  12. Starburst

    Starburst
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    17,838
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Ilkeston
    Ratings:
    +979




    Well a suitable STB for EURO1080 will cost a lot less than £500 and a smartcard is 200 EUROS and you can always use a PC based solution which works out even cheaper (if you already have the PC:) ).

    With the EURO1080 channels being carried on 28.2 you have to hope that a deal is done with SKY for those channel to be accessed by the new SKY+ HD with videoguard encryption. It would make a lot of sense for both SKY and EURO1080 to make this happen since the 28.2 location is in reality a UK/ROI specifc platform and anything that isn't FTA or uses Videoguard will struggle for mass market adoption.
     
  13. pjskel

    pjskel
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,676
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +124
    Sadly what makes sense to us, doesn't translate as well in the business world!
    As for cost - please remember most likely candidates to purchase EURO1080 based on in-store demoing, will more than likely pay the going rate.
    Those geeks amongst us, will happily find ways and means to do it cheaper, bur we're in the minority, not the other way round.
     
  14. Howard Pitfield

    Howard Pitfield
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    814
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +17
    Over on digitalspy thread here someone has posted that HD1 will be on 28.2 fron August.

    Although probably MPEGII using the existing boxes from QualiTV, a French company has a MPEG4 CI card ready to decode MPEG4 - clever chaps. See Neotion

    H
     
  15. richard plumb

    richard plumb
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2002
    Messages:
    14,349
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Windsor
    Ratings:
    +1,028
    agree. Simply because stores have started their 'HD Ready' push on TVs, so people buying these will be wanting content. And the BBC is pretty forward thinking on broadcasting. All of its stations are primarily digital 16:9 - compare that to the rest of the world.

    As for the question - 1080p, forget it - ignoring the availability of sets, sport is likely to be 720p, so settle for a nice simple HD ready set. The new plasmas are very little premium for HD ready over SD these days, so if you are looking at plasma, get a HD one.
     
  16. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    Ah - if you were talking to the general "BBC Information Line" call-centre - then they probably won't know. They're a good bunch - and a lot better than most call-centre staff - but I have a feeling they don't actually work directly for the BBC and were farmed out to Capita when they closed the Duty Office. (I may be wrong)

    I'm not saying this is the equivalent of ringing Sky and asking one of their call centre staff about Sky's future plans - but it is somewhat similar. The short answer is - until a public announcement has been made, the call centre staff won't know.

    This isn't the same as talking to someone REALLY inside the BBC, who might actually know, like someone in the studio operations, production departments, broadcast, or technology direction divisions...
     
  17. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    Had a look at the Neotion stuff - not sure it does quite what you think.

    Looking at the modules, I'm not sure if they have video outputs for HD. I wouldn't be surprised if they were SD only - and effectively transcoded incoming MPEG4 to basic MPEG2 for decoding in an MPEG2 receiver. (And thus would only work in SD on an SD receiver - though it is conceivable that they might work in HD on an HD receiver - if there is enough grunt in them - which I'm not convinced of)

    I suspect these modules, being from a french company, are for the forthcoming French SD MPEG4 DTT pay-TV system. The French are running FTA MPEG2, but pay-TV MPEG4 I believe on the TNT (Television Numerique Terrestre) platform.
     
  18. Nic Rhodes

    Nic Rhodes
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    17,133
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Ratings:
    +1,277
    why does everyone want 1080p panels?
     
  19. Joe Fernand

    Joe Fernand
    Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2002
    Messages:
    24,426
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    The Borders
    Ratings:
    +2,593
    Hello all

    PapAV - I very much doubt you'll see a sub £2k 1080P fixed pixel Display in any size for a while yet! I know from talking to Pioneer and Panasonic its not on the immediate horizon for either of those two to launch Plasma panels with such high resolution.

    Nic - I guess its like watts per channel; more must be better!!!

    Joe
     
  20. dsb

    dsb
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    unless i'm being daft surely you'd need a 1080p panel to see the full resolution of a 1080i signal - albeit after it's been prog scanned to 1080p
     
  21. Goose74

    Goose74
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2002
    Messages:
    805
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Romsey
    Ratings:
    +12
    because when displaying 1080i/p they look a lot better than 720p displays - doh!
     
  22. Nic Rhodes

    Nic Rhodes
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    17,133
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Ratings:
    +1,277
    do they? Thanks for 'enlightening' me!! so 720p is now worse than 1080i? Don't forget there is no 1080p format and 1080p is artificially generate and contains NO more picture information.

    As someone who actually has HD now my prefered format is 720p, like everyone else most of my stuff is 1080i however, and despite being one of a handful of people in this country who can actually deal with this material correctly (deinterlacing), I still prefer to view this at 720p and 768p.

    I want more, like Watts, I can buy into but trying to tell me it is better when virtually no one (outside this forum) has any experience of the formats I can't I afraid, in fact many on this forum don't have experience of. Little experience, lots of advice syndrome..;)

    Am I saying 1080p is worse? No I am not, what I am saying that people can have a quantum jump into HD and not have to have the distraction of silly numbers now. 1080p panels are here already, what people seem to want is to pay little for them. Now we have VERY decent HD Ready panels at £800 for 32 inch and £1650 for 40 inch, I see little benefit from 1080p (when it is not part of HDMI spec) as there is no 1080p format spec nor is there likely to be one either, in the immediate future.
     
  23. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    Not strictly true - a non-square pixel 1920x720 panel would come very close to delivering all of the picture information in a 1080i signal - there is very little vertical resolution in a 1080/50i signal above that which can be carried in a 720/50p system and displayed on a 720p display. (Interlacing doesn't deliver full vertical resolution - though it is better than 540/50p - which is the progressive bandwith equivalent)

    However it is entirely possible that 1080/24/25p formats will be able to deliver a full 1080p resolution image to a panel - either using 1080/48i or 1080/50i segmented field sysem (effectively carrying an un-vertically-filtered progressive signal to the screen via an interlaced link) or they may accept 24p or 25p feeds directly.

    Also - the larger the screen - the larger the pixels at a given resolution - so running a higher resolution screen means the pixels become less visible for a given screen-size. Even if the resolution of the the source is less than that of the screen - the higher resolution of the screen and the interpolation introduced in scaling, should reduce the visibility of the screen pixels.
     
  24. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    720p = 1280x720 progressive
    1080i = 1920x1080 interlaced

    The horizontal (1280 vs 1920) resolutions are comparable, and 720 is thus inferior in "numbers" terms. However 720 is not directly comparable with 1080 in vertical numbers terms, because one is interlaced and the other progressive. The accepted rule of thumb is that an interlaced system delivers a vertical resolution of approx 70% of that of an equivalent progressive system (with the same number of lines per frame), so 1080i is roughly equivalen to around 800p - very similar to 720p. Surprise, Surprise, that is why they chose those two numbers!!

    Now this is muddied by a lot of 1080i sources and broadcasts not using the full 1920 horizontal resolution - some 1080i in the US is actually 1280x1080i, and some in Aus (and many recordings) are 1440x1080i.

    This minimises the differences between 720p and 1080i as formats. (In fact some 720p recordings are only 960x720...)

    As you say - in "systems" terms there isn't much in it.

    The differences between subjective picture quality evaluations of the two formats - comparing 1080i and 720p native video acquisition, and also comparing 1080p and 720p native shooting, as well as 1080i and 720p native film conversion, will often tell you more about the quality of the equipment used to originate/transfer, than the actual formats.

    1080i video cameras are actually 1080p or 4320p internally, and thus when their output is converted to 1080i or 720p you benefit from vertical oversampling. If you use a 720p native camera, you may not think the picture looks as good if it uses a 720p native sensor, and doesn't benefit from oversampling. (However many people shooting 720p native use the 4320p cameras instead of 720p ones...)

    (4320p cameras are really common in HD - that is how the Philips/Thomson LDK6000 works - and it has a large share of the market.)

    As for 1080p not existing as a format - that isn't true. It doesn't exist as a TRANSMISSION format in use, but most HD drama is shot in 1080/24p (with just a small amount in 720/24p. Many Fox and ABC shows broadcast in 720/24p are shot 1080/24p and downconverted.)

    It is entirely conceivable that 1080/24-30p HD pre-recordings may become available - delivering the full 1080 line vertical resolution that a non-interlaced 1080 line source can deliver. These aren't available yet - but it is possible.

    I think the format that is least likely to appear in the near future is 1080/50p or 1080/60p. AIUI this is not proposed for either pre-recorded media or broadcast yet.

    Yes - and 1080i is going to be viewed de-interlaced by the vast majority in the UK as, unlike the US, 1080i native sets are going to be very unusual... (HD CRTs are unlikely to be plentiful...)

    1080/60p may not be part of the HDMI spec - but it IS part of the DVI spec. (Anyone using a 1920x1080 resolution on their PC or Mac is likely to be using it, they won't be using a 60i feed...)

    1080/25p or 30p could easily be carried as a 1080/50 or 60i signal - as long as there is no vertical filtering caused by interlacing. You would then just be able to do a field-combine to create your frame, with no resolution loss.

    (24p could either be carried as 48i or 3:2 pulldown 60i with sensible flagging)

    I fully agree with your sentiments that you can't just compare numbers - and say 1080p is better than 720p. You have to look at the bigger picture - a lousy 1080p display will look worse than a good 720p display.

    Given that plasmas, DLPs and LCDs all have to perform large amounts of video processing to actually generate their pictures (CRTs don't...) - then the quality of this processing and the techniques used will be just as important as the resolution. In fact subjectively - things like black level, image brightness, colourimetry, response time etc. are probably far more important in defining how nice a picture display is to look at.

    Certainly I'd rather have a decent 720p display than a poor 1080p one.
     
  25. Nic Rhodes

    Nic Rhodes
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    17,133
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Ratings:
    +1,277
    :thumbsup: Exactly Stephen another excellent post by the way :thumbsup:

    That saved me loads of typinf :smashin:

    Re 1080p TRANSMISSION, yes fully aware of this but was keeping it to 'AV' To sum up for me 1080i or 720p not much in it as a 'format', as a display one is WAY cheaper.....

    Re DVI vs HDMI, computer vs AV, well documented here (in my posts and elsewhere), both are quite different......for example (in general)

    DVI 720P@50Hz no, 720p@60Hz yes, 1080i@50 Hz no, 1080p@50 Hz no, 1080p@60 Hz yes.
    .

    HDMI 720P@50Hz yes, 720p@60Hz yes 1080i@50 Hz yes, 1080p@50Hz no.

    Will we see 1080p as a AV format, I think no :cool: but other may differ

     
  26. Stephen Neal

    Stephen Neal
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    6,080
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +681
    I think the only driving forces for 1080/50p or 1080/60p in the near future will be games consoles - specifically the PS3 (as Sony are much more aligned to 1080 than 720 - mainly due to the 1080i nature of the Japanese HiVision HD systems)

    I suppose a driving force for 1080/24p, 1080/48i or 1080/60p interconnects would be the lack of 60i 3:2 pull-down issues (and the de-interlacing issues) for 1080 display of 24p originated material - just as 480/60p has been driven by this, and 720p accommodates. (3:2 progressive frame replication is much less of an issue than de-interlacing 3:2 pulldown interlaced stuff with mixed source-frame frames. Though flagging 3:2 correctly in the 60i stream would also be possible)

    (This is a non-issue in Europe where 1080/25p and 2:2 1080/50i doesn't have this problem)
     

Share This Page

Loading...