Why 1080p is so important in a display

[spidey07]

This article does a really good job of explaining the benefits of 1080p and why it's necessary with today's HD content, given that the majority of HD content is 1080 already it only makes sense.

There is no 1080p content - it's not needed and with film based sources completely a non-issue

I won't notice it because I sit far away to fully resolve each pixel - Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

It doesn't matter because according to distance charts I'm too far away to notice - other aspect is better ability to scale non-1080 sources such as DVDs or SDTV.

So it's almost the year 2008, get the facts straight on why it's so important to only look at 1080p displays.

-edit-
article
http://hometheaterhifi.com/vol...80p-3-2007-part-1.html

 

[DBL]

Just when you think you have all the facts completely laid out, something like this appears.

HDGuru

Perhaps this helps to explain (beyond what was already known with regard to picture quality) why a set like the 720p kuro looks so much better than many 1080p LCDs?

Either way, I'd like to see a list of the sets. This seems to be another notch in the Plasma corner.

 

[montypythizzle]

I just want it because I will probably use a display as a computer monitor.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: DBL
Just when you think you have all the facts completely laid out, something like this appears.

HDGuru

Perhaps this helps to explain (beyond what was already known with regard to picture quality) why a set like the 720p kuro looks so much better than many 1080p LCDs?

Either way, I'd like to see a list of the sets. This seems to be another notch in the Plasma corner.

That's a reasonable explanation. If the TVs processing is crap it doesn't matter what the resolution is.

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: DBL
Just when you think you have all the facts completely laid out, something like this appears.

HDGuru

Perhaps this helps to explain (beyond what was already known with regard to picture quality) why a set like the 720p kuro looks so much better than many 1080p LCDs?

Either way, I'd like to see a list of the sets. This seems to be another notch in the Plasma corner.

That's a reasonable explanation. If the TVs processing is crap it doesn't matter what the resolution is.

Of course.

It highlights the difference between theory and reality. I'm sure it will upset quite a few people to learn that their 1080p TV (Sony KDL-46XBR4 for example) cannot properly deinteralce a 1080i signal in order to display a 1080p picture. Currently, that seems to be the way most people are going to see 1080p on their TVs (Blu-ray and HD-DVD the only other way) since no one expects the broadcasting standards to change anytime soon.

 

[zinfamous]

article?

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: spidey07
I won't notice it because I sit far away to fully resolve each pixel - Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

I thought I should provide a link to show people just what distance we're talking about. This chart shows the general distance (relative to screen size) at which you can see the difference between 1080p and 720p. For example, at 10 feet from a 50" screen the typical person will not be able to see the difference in resolution between 1080p and 720p. Between 7-10 feet some of the additional detail from the higher resolution will be resolved, but it's not until you're 6 feet from the 50" screen that you see the full benefit of 1080p. Not everyone wants to sit 6 feet from a 50" screen.

I also want to point out that the "viewing distance to appreciate HD" is not the same as the viewing distance to appreciate 1080p, since 720p is also HD. You don't have to have the same viewing angle as at a movie theater to see this extra resoltuion (see chart for viewing distances). 720p looks a heck of a lot better than SD I would say that the jump from SD to 720p is MUCH bigger than the jump from 720p to 1080p. It seems that CNET (link) agrees with me:

...as we've been saying all along, once you get to high-def, the difference between resolutions becomes much more difficult to appreciate. We've done side-by-side tests between two 46-inch LCD HDTVs, one with 1366x768 resolution and the other with 1080p resolution, using the same 1080i source material, and it was extremely difficult for us to see any difference. It becomes even more difficult at smaller screen sizes or farther seating distances--say, more than 1.5 times the diagonal measurement of the screen. We've reviewed a 37-inch 1080p LCD, for example, where it was impossible to see the separation between horizontal lines at farther than 45 inches away.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: kalrith

Originally posted by: spidey07
I won't notice it because I sit far away to fully resolve each pixel - Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

I thought I should provide a link to show people just what distance we're talking about. This chart shows the general distance (relative to screen size) at which you can see the difference between 1080p and 720p. For example, at 10 feet from a 50" screen the typical person will not be able to see the difference in resolution between 1080p and 720p. Between 7-10 feet some of the additional detail from the higher resolution will be resolved, but it's not until you're 6 feet from the 50" screen that you see the full benefit of 1080p. Not everyone wants to sit 6 feet from a 50" screen.

I also want to point out that the "viewing distance to appreciate HD" is not the same as the viewing distance to appreciate 1080p, since 720p is also HD. You don't have to have the same viewing angle as at a movie theater to see this extra resoltuion (see chart for viewing distances). 720p looks a heck of a lot better than SD I would say that the jump from SD to 720p is MUCH bigger than the jump from 720p to 1080p. It seems that CNET (link) agrees with me:

...as we've been saying all along, once you get to high-def, the difference between resolutions becomes much more difficult to appreciate. We've done side-by-side tests between two 46-inch LCD HDTVs, one with 1366x768 resolution and the other with 1080p resolution, using the same 1080i source material, and it was extremely difficult for us to see any difference. It becomes even more difficult at smaller screen sizes or farther seating distances--say, more than 1.5 times the diagonal measurement of the screen. We've reviewed a 37-inch 1080p LCD, for example, where it was impossible to see the separation between horizontal lines at farther than 45 inches away.

LOL!

You're showing the exact chart and viewing angle that I spoke about!

LOL!

Completely disregarding scaling. Totally disregarding the benefit of true HD. This is the misinformation that must be stopped dead in it's tracks. Stop the misinformation!

This is just too good. Keep it up!

Using CNET as a source! bwahahahahhahhahhah!

Keep going! This is just too funny. Notice that this article is about 35-42 inch displays. Bwahahahahhahahahahahahhahahhahhahahhahaha.

 

[aphex]

Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

Wow... do you even realize how retarded you sound with that?

#1. Money does not grow on trees for everyone.
#2. Not everybody has the luxury to put a tv just anywhere.

720p/1080i still looks a shitload better than SD. And if I can barely notice a difference in the 1080p benefits at 10' with my current 46" 1080i or spending $1000 more for a 60+ inch 1080p, i'd just as soon put my money into a better audio system with a tangible benefit.

 

[aphex]

Even the article you pointed to notes;

The point is, if you want to view the inherently 1080p24 content which is out there (and even native 1080i content) with maximum resolution (and we maintain that an enthusiast who sets up their viewing environment to get the most out of it can see the difference), you need a display capable of 1080p that keeps the
signal in a 1080 line format from input to display surface.

Point taken from that, not EVERYONE needs 1080p.

Of course, you don't need to have a 1080p display to have a great image. In fact, we're happy to concede that in most cases, with most material, there are many variables, starting from basic calibration, the environment (your room), yada yada, that are far more important than having a real 1080p display. In fact, most of us don't own a 1080p display for reasons of price and the move of the technology curve, first generation issues, etc.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: aphex

Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

Wow... do you even realize how retarded you sound with that?

#1. Money does not grow on trees for everyone.
#2. Not everybody has the luxury to put a tv just anywhere.

720p/1080i still looks a shitload better than SD. And if I can barely notice a difference in the 1080p benefits at 10' with my current 46" 1080i or spending $1000 more for a 60+ inch 1080p, i'd just as soon put my money into a better audio system with a tangible benefit.

It's not retarded. I see it all the time. They sit WAY TOO FAR AWAY FROM THEIR TV to appreciate HD. I have to bite my tongue everytime somebody shows off their new HDTV.

You can always move your viewing distance, you don't have to get a larger display.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: aphex

Well that's your fault for not purchasing a display for your viewing distance to appreciate HD or moving closer.

Wow... do you even realize how retarded you sound with that?

#1. Money does not grow on trees for everyone.
#2. Not everybody has the luxury to put a tv just anywhere.

720p/1080i still looks a shitload better than SD. And if I can barely notice a difference in the 1080p benefits at 10' with my current 46" 1080i or spending $1000 more for a 60+ inch 1080p, i'd just as soon put my money into a better audio system with a tangible benefit.

It's not retarded. I see it all the time. They sit WAY TOO FAR AWAY FROM THEIR TV to appreciate HD. I have to bite my tongue everytime somebody shows off their new HDTV.

You can always move your viewing distance, you don't have to get a larger display.

damn dude...what is the prescription on your glasses? :shocked: (as in, you're blind from sitting too damn close to your TV--not a comment about reading the article )

Anyhoo, I enjoyed reading your article. pointed out some specifics of the tech and scaling that I didn't realize before.

However, I find this tidbit even more compelling, linked through the Cnet article (Cnet is not the source, as in this case, the info comes from this shadowy "Imaging Science Foundation," perhaps some evil cabal of analog-favoring despots bent on ruining Spidey's 1080p fap factor.) Who knows for sure what their mission is, but they do say this:

Not as important as you might think. According to the Imaging Science Foundation, a group that consults for home-theater manufacturers and trains professional video calibrators, the most important aspect of picture quality is contrast ratio, the second most important is color saturation, and the third is color accuracy. Resolution comes in a distant fourth, despite being easily the most-talked-about HDTV spec today.

which is what I've been saying all along. sure, 1080p is logically better (Assuming the TV that advertises 1080p actually meets the necessary specs--like extra virgin olive oil, I suspect some 80%+ of the market is adulterated), but does it translate into visual difference when the info reaches the human eye and is processed by our often over-stressed optic nerves? doubtful.

This 1080p being stamped on TVs all of sudden reminds me of the virally duplicitous marketing when it comes to digital cameras and digital SLRs--brainwashing the mass market into thinking that MP is all that matters, when a 4 MP, full-size CCD/CMOS will greatly ouperform a 6 or 8MP chip with half the physical size. The bigger chips are finally becoming standard in the SLRs, but the marketing has held that technology back for 5 or more years....despicable, really...

1080p = True HD reminds me of Blu-Ray = Tru HD. laughable, at best. HD is HD. the real difference is between HD and SD (even your article states this). besides, 1080p will no longer be "true HD" when 1360p (or whatever) comes along, will it?

sure, 1080p offers more resolution than 720p; sure, an 8MP camera offers more pixels than a 6 MP camera, however...well, I'm guessing you get the idea now?

 

[Rio Rebel]

The Anandtech way - provide great and useful information, but communicate it in such a way that you alienate everyone.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Rio Rebel
The Anandtech way - provide great and useful information, but communicate it in such a way that you alienate everyone.

and sound like an ass

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Rio Rebel
The Anandtech way - provide great and useful information, but communicate it in such a way that you alienate everyone.

When an entire board is mislead and continually makes incorrect statements it has to be stopped.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Keep going! This is just too funny. Notice that this article is about 35-42 inch displays. Bwahahahahhahahahahahahhahahhahhahahhahaha.

This doesn't sound like a 35-42 inch display, does it: "We've done side-by-side tests between two 46-inch LCD HDTVs, one with 1366x768 resolution and the other with 1080p resolution, using the same 1080i source material, and it was extremely difficult for us to see any difference."

Also, if you don't like CNET as a source I'll give you some others. All of the following quotes are taken from reviews listed on this thread at avsforum (but those guys must not know what they're talking about). These are all from reviewers other than CNET. Some of the articles on that page are reviews about the 1080p Pioneers, so I will limit the quotes to only those reviews on the 768p displays:

The picture in particular is of a totally different class to most flat-screen televisions, and has us looking forward to the September launch of Pioneer's "premium" 'Full HD' screens -- with even higher contrast ratios, according to the manufacturer.

Pioneer's 8th-generation plasma is no hype... the PDP4280XD offers the best post-calibration picture quality I've seen to date. Deepest blacks among all the HDTVs we've tested.

Pioneer PDP508XD is the cream of a bunch of 8G Kuro plasmas that delivers class-leading picture quality. Deepest blacks with full preservation of shadow detail

Revolutionary black levels; Excellent colour fidelity; It's time to start believing the hype - Pioneer's latest-generation plasmas really do take image quality to a whole new level

The best flat TV picture ever; Not just the best 42-inch screen ever, it's the best flat screen yet by some margin.

The hype surrounding Pioneer's eighth-generation plasmas' revolutionary black level is fully justified. The Pioneer PDP4280XD is HDTVTest's current black-level champion, clocking in a minimum luminance that is more than 100% lower than that measured on our previous holder, the Panasonic TH42PH9. As a result, dynamic contrast ratio on the PDP4280XD also skyrocketed to a new record in excess of 3,000:1.

Normally we like to counterbalance our praise of even the very finest TVs with a negative point or two. But try as we might, we simply can?t think of anything bad to say about the Pioneer?s pictures at all. In fact, if it wasn?t for the fact that Pioneer is flogging the screen at what has to be considered quite a premium price point, the only problem the brand might have with the 508XD is making enough of them.

VERDICT
If the price isn't a problem, this should be one of the easiest buying decisions you'll ever have to make.

So, am I saying that 1080p is completely unimportant in a display? Absolutely not. However, I am saying that 1080p is not the MOST important aspect of picture quality. You can't say that the Samsung or Panasonic 50" 1080p automatically have a better picture than the Pioneer 5080 just because of the 1080p. To say that is to go against EVERY professional reviewer who has reviewed this TV and been completely wowed by it. If you sit 6 feet from the TV, then definitely go for 1080p. However, if you're the average person who wants a nice TV in their livingroom, not a dedicated media room, then you'll likely be 8-10 feet from a 50", at which distance the pq of the 5080 is going to stomp all over that of similarly priced 1080p 50" TVs. And just to clear things up again, you don't have to sit 6 feet from a 50" TV to see HD. 720p is also HD, and the advantages of it can be seen at 10 feet from a 50" TV.

To Spidey's dismay I'm going to link you to another CNET article, but only as my source for the following quote:

Ultimately, we agree with the Imaging Science Foundation (ISF), a group that consults for home-theater manufacturers and trains professional video calibrators, when it says that the most important aspect of picture quality is contrast ratio, the second-most important is color saturation, and the third is color accuracy. Though resolution may be the most talked-about spec these days, it comes in fourth on the ISF list, and after you sit watching five TVs lined up side by side, you understand why. The fact is a relatively pristine high-def source such as Mission: Impossible III looks sharp on just about any HDTV, and your eye, when looking for differences, is drawn first to things like depth of detail in shadowy material (black levels) and the color of the actors' skin tone and how natural it looks. So when buying a TV, the last thing you probably want to do is agonize over its native resolution.

So Spidey, before you use your tag line and just say "STOP THE MISINFORMATION", actually read what I've quoted and the sources. If you still think you know more than all of the professional reviewers and ISF, the group that trains the professional calibrators, then please list your very impressive credentials or at least quote some source that says 1080p is the absolute most important aspect of picture quality. Because if it isn't and the Pioneer 5080 gives a better picture than a similarly priced 50" 1080p TV, then you're doing a disservice to the forum members by feeding them MISINFORMATION.

 

[spidey07]

The misinformation comes from all those "but I won't tell". This article specifically points out why 1080p is important in a very easy to understand way. I never said it was the most important, but it is important and any TV should have this feature provided it has good color/contrast and good processing.

Look at CES - 720 is dieing a quick death.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: spidey07
The misinformation comes from all those "but I won't tell". This article specifically points out why 1080p is important in a very easy to understand way. I never said it was the most important, but it is important and any TV should have this feature provided it has good color/contrast and good processing.

Look at CES - 720 is dieing a quick death.

wow...so it looks like you're coming around to our way of thinking. fine if 720p dies, but ONLY IF the then standard 1080p sets are produced and sold at the same price as 720p.

Again, the entire point of "our crowd" is that 1080p is in no way worth the price premium, considering there are certainly plenty of 720p choices that offer better image quality at a lower price than some 1080p sets.

Also, for the love of God...there is no rational reason for any human to be sitting 6 feet away from a 50" HDTV. ...Remember when your mom would nag you about sitting that distance from the family's 19" B&W tube TV? She was right then.....Although I'm guessing you never listened, and now you have to sit 6 ft away to enjoy your HDTV...

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Rio Rebel
The Anandtech way - provide great and useful information, but communicate it in such a way that you alienate everyone.

:laugh:

 

[spidey07]

So i'm gonna bump this so people can know the history of HDTV and the technology.

Way back when (5-6 years ago) there was the huge debate among videophiles and I was right there in it. 720p or 1080i? This was when DLP was just coming out and the vast majority of displays were CRT based (direct, RP, FP).

One thing that everybody agreed upon was "wow! Can you just imagine if 1080p ever came out! That would be the best of both worlds. But that will probably never happen." And here we are, end of 2007 and it's here, and it's glorious. And they are real.

 

[montypythizzle]

Those AVS people really know how to sway you on TVs, first I came there for some reason and then came out of there wanting a CRT projector, now I want another RPROJ CRT, they make me sick.

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: spidey07
So i'm gonna bump this so people can know how much I like the sound of my own voice

Fixed

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
Those AVS people really know how to sway you on TVs, first I came there for some reason and then came out of there wanting a CRT projector, now I want another RPROJ CRT, they make me sick.

I think you have to keep in mind that there are a lot of folks on those forums who readily admit to seeing no problem in paying 50% more for a 1% performance increase.

However, keeping that in mind, I see no reason to want a Rear projection TV. Compared to a good Plasma, there are so few advantages and so many disadvantages.

 

[Deinonych]

Originally posted by: DBL
However, keeping that in mind, I see no reason to want a Rear projection TV. Compared to a good Plasma, there are so few advantages and so many disadvantages.

What do you feel are the major advantages and disadvantages of RPTVs as compared to plasma displays?

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Deinonych

Originally posted by: DBL
However, keeping that in mind, I see no reason to want a Rear projection TV. Compared to a good Plasma, there are so few advantages and so many disadvantages.

What do you feel are the major advantages and disadvantages of RPTVs as compared to plasma displays?

This is for CRT Projection.

Dis
[*]lower Resolution
[*]not flat
[*]poor Geometry
[*]poorer overall picture quality
[*]bad viewing angles

Adv
[*]bargain prices