Will HDTV prices continue to drop?!

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: spidey07
Good god yes. They are super cheap now.

the year is 2007. The year of HD.

Wasn't 2006 the year of HD before that? How about 2005?

meh, it's an incredible revolution. I've NEVER seen this much advancement in display technology in just the last 3 years. It's a great time to be a video nut.

Just look at the adoption rate, it's rivaling the almighty DVD.

The whole thing pisses me off.
Problems with HDTV:
Most "720p" TVs are 1366x768, meaning that every pixel is interpolated by upscaling.
Most HDTVs overscan, putting to waste the ability to have 1:1 pixel mapping with a digital signal. Again, an image smaller than the screen's resolution is being up scaled, and every pixel interpolated. There is no reason whatsoever for this.
The lack of channels. The only ones in HD are major networks, some movie channels, and some documentary channels, and not all of them are available from every cable provider.
Since the vast majority of channels are still in "SD", they will look terrible scaled and stretched on an LCD or plasma.

A lot of those problems are solved by CRT HDTVs, as pointed out by funboy42. BUT, those are way too heavy. I would have bought a 32" for $200 if I had a way to get it into my Jeep, but it wasn't possible at the time.

 

[iRONic]

Hmmmmm...

The TV I bought is $1,899.00 now

I paid $1,629.00 - $130.00 for it ~5 months ago.

Greetings from Amazon.com.

We thought you'd like to know that we shipped your items, and that this
completes your order.

You can track the status of this order, and all your orders, online by
visiting Your Account at http://www.amazon.com/gp/css/history/view.html

There you can:
* Track your shipment
* View the status of unshipped items
* Cancel unshipped items
* Return items
* And do much more

The following items have been shipped to you by Amazon.com:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Item Price Shipped Subtotal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Amazon.com items (Sold by Amazon.com, LLC):
1 Samsung HL-S5087W 50" 1080... $1,629.99 1 $1,629.99

Shipped via Eagle USA (estimated arrival date: 08-December-2006).
Tracking number: XXX

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Item Subtotal: $1,629.99
Shipping & Handling: $52.19

Shipping Savings $-52.19
Super Saver Discount $0.00

Total: $1,629.99

Paid by Mastercard: $1,629.99

=================================================

Hello from Amazon.com.

We're writing to confirm that we have processed your refund for
$130.00 for the above-referenced order.

This amount should appear as a credit on your next credit card
statement. For more information about this refund, please visit Your
Account (http://www.amazon.com/your-account) to view the
above-referenced order. Completed returns and refunds will appear at
the bottom of the order summary page.

For more information on how we calculate refunds, please visit our
web site at http://www.amazon.com/refunds

We hope this is a satisfactory resolution for you. However, if you
have any questions or concerns, please use this link to contact
Customer Service:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/contact-us/returns-and-refunds.html

Thank you for shopping at Amazon.com.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
The whole thing pisses me off.
Problems with HDTV:
Most "720p" TVs are 1366x768, meaning that every pixel is interpolated by upscaling.
Most HDTVs overscan, putting to waste the ability to have 1:1 pixel mapping with a digital signal. Again, an image smaller than the screen's resolution is being up scaled, and every pixel interpolated. There is no reason whatsoever for this.
The lack of channels. The only ones in HD are major networks, some movie channels, and some documentary channels, and not all of them are available from every cable provider.
Since the vast majority of channels are still in "SD", they will look terrible scaled and stretched on an LCD or plasma.

A lot of those problems are solved by CRT HDTVs, as pointed out by funboy42. BUT, those are way too heavy. I would have bought a 32" for $200 if I had a way to get it into my Jeep, but it wasn't possible at the time.

WOW.

Put the crack pipe down. You can get a very good CRT RP HDTV for super cheap that will blow away any direct view TV. We're talking 55" under 1000 bucks cheap.

I gotta watch south park in SD on my 65" so I'll get back to this post. But geez are you and funboy severely misinformed. Either that or you haven't seen the glorious HD or the advancement in scalers.

SCANLINES DO NOT EQUAL SHAPER!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
The whole thing pisses me off.
Problems with HDTV:
Most "720p" TVs are 1366x768, meaning that every pixel is interpolated by upscaling.
Most HDTVs overscan, putting to waste the ability to have 1:1 pixel mapping with a digital signal. Again, an image smaller than the screen's resolution is being up scaled, and every pixel interpolated. There is no reason whatsoever for this.
The lack of channels. The only ones in HD are major networks, some movie channels, and some documentary channels, and not all of them are available from every cable provider.
Since the vast majority of channels are still in "SD", they will look terrible scaled and stretched on an LCD or plasma.

A lot of those problems are solved by CRT HDTVs, as pointed out by funboy42. BUT, those are way too heavy. I would have bought a 32" for $200 if I had a way to get it into my Jeep, but it wasn't possible at the time.

WOW.

Put the crack pipe down. You can get a very good CRT RP HDTV for super cheap that will blow away any direct view TV. We're talking 55" under 1000 bucks cheap.

I gotta watch south park in SD on my 65" so I'll get back to this post. But geez are you and funboy severely misinformed. Either that or you haven't seen the glorious HD or the advancement in scalers.

SCANLINES DO NOT EQUAL SHAPER!!!!!!!!!!

There should be no unnecessary scaling, ever. Nothing will ever beat 1:1 pixel mapping,. This is why we set our LCD monitors to their native resolution and ridicule people who don't! By the way, I said that CRT is better because it doesn't have scaling problems.

Edit: Also, I never said more scanlines is better. I'd rather have a 1280x720 image displayed 1:1 on a 1280x720 screen than a 1920x1080 image overscanned and interpolated to a 1920x1080 screen. Try to find a 1280x720 screen- they are amazingly scarce, especially considering that HDTV's resolutions are 1280x720 and 1920x1080!!!!

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
There should be no unnecessary scaling, ever. Nothing will ever beat 1:1 pixel mapping,. This is why we set our LCD monitors to their native resolution and ridicule people who don't!

You so don't "get it"

Sorry.

-edit-
Even your edit proves you don't "get it". You live in the computer world and not the quality world when it comes to video.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
There should be no unnecessary scaling, ever. Nothing will ever beat 1:1 pixel mapping,. This is why we set our LCD monitors to their native resolution and ridicule people who don't!

You so don't "get it"

Sorry.

-edit-
Even your edit proves you don't "get it"

Right... care to elaborate? What is there to get?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Right... care to elaborate? What is there to get?

That resolution when it comes to video is nice, it helps when you blow it up to large screen sizes. A 1-to-1 mapping is great!

But you won't get this with a CRT. The fact that you bring up LCD computer displays dismisses your opinion. Who watches HD on a computer display? If they do then their eyeballs had better be 24" from the screen. No thank you.

When I say you don't "get it", you're used to resolution wars. And as much as I love the 1080p offerings there is much more than resolution.

The reason I am such a big proponent of 1080P displays is because the scalaer/deinterlacers have become so good these days.

Big question for you - do you own a HDTV

 

[GoingUp]

My 50" Panasonic plasma dropped from $3500 retail to $1850 retail in 10 months.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Right... care to elaborate? What is there to get?

That resolution when it comes to video is nice, it helps when you blow it up to large screen sizes. A 1-to-1 mapping is great!

But you won't get this with a CRT. The fact that you bring up LCD computer displays dismisses your opinion. Who watches HD on a computer display? If they do then their eyeballs had better be 24" from the screen. No thank you.

When I say you don't "get it", you're used to resolution wars. And as much as I love the 1080p offerings there is much more than resolution.

The reason I am such a big proponent of 1080P displays is because the scalaer/deinterlacers have become so good these days.

Big question for you - do you own a HDTV

I didn't say anything about watching TV on an LCD monitor. I'm saying that scaling a 1280x720 image to 1366x768 is equivalent to using a non-native resolution on a computer monitor. Okay, maybe TVs scale better, but scaling is scaling.

I don't understand what you are saying about resolution wars. I said that scaling is bad, not that higher resolution is always better.

I have a Dell 2405FPW that doubles as my TV.

Bottom line: Scalling is bad, regardless of the resolutions being scaled. You can argue that modern scalers are very good, but that doesn't change the fact that pixels must be interpolated in order to scale. In no circumstance is scaling up to a higher resolution ever better than having a screen with the same native resolution as the source in the first place (provided it doesn't overscan), which is why I find 1366x768 to be infuriating.

If I had Photoshop installed, I'd find a 1280x720 image and scale it up to 1366x768 to demonstrate.
If you don't understand what I'm saying, think of it as recompressing a 128kbps mp3 to 192kbps. Not only won't you gain quality, but you'll lose quality.

Also, I don't care about interlaced vs progressive. The way I understand it, 1080i means a 1920x1080 image at half the framerate as 1920x1080p.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Also, I don't care about interlaced vs progressive. The way I understand it, 1080i means a 1920x1080 image at half the framerate as 1920x1080p.

wow, you so don't get it.

Stop applying computer monitors to home theather/video.

 

[mercanucaribe]

http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/F_Mario-09.22.04.shtml

That means that a 1920x1080 TV set showing a 1920x1080 picture is actually showing (if I plug in the old 5-percent overscan) something like the central 1824x1026 of what the camera captured. That ain't a terrible idea. If Group B made 1824x1026 fixed-pixel displays, it would be a downright great idea. But they don't.

They make 1920x1080 displays. That means consumers are watching HDTV through the haze of a scaling processor even when they watch 1920x1080 pictures on 1920x1080 TV sets.

Now, then, the mathematician and theoretical physicist in me would like to point out that, in an ideal world, a scaling engine is perfect, and display resolution doesn't have to have anything to do with source resolution.

AHEM

Are those guys gone? Good. Hi, everybody! It's the TV-watching practical engineer here, and I'd just like to point out that, no matter what anyone says about scaling, you just can't beat a pixel-to-pixel matching relationship between camera and display.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Also, I don't care about interlaced vs progressive. The way I understand it, 1080i means a 1920x1080 image at half the framerate as 1920x1080p.

wow, you so don't get it.

Uh... isn't that what you get when you deinterlace?? You ignored the rest of my post too! YOU are the one who doesn't get that a pixel is a pixel, no matter whether it fits your weird worldview of TV being separate from other digital displays or not.

You keep parroting "wow you don't get it wow you don't get it wow".

Tell me right now. Would you rather have a 1280x720 picture on a 1280x720 or a 1366x768 screen?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Also, I don't care about interlaced vs progressive. The way I understand it, 1080i means a 1920x1080 image at half the framerate as 1920x1080p.

wow, you so don't get it.

Uh... isn't that what you get when you deinterlace?? YOU are the one who doesn't get that a pixel is a pixel, no matter whether it fits your weird worldview of TV being separate from other digital displays or not.

You keep parroting "wow you don't get it wow you don't get it wow".

Tell me right now. Would you rather have a 1280x720 picture on a 1280x720 or a 1366x768 screen?

But what if it's not a square pixel?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Tell me right now. Would you rather have a 1280x720 picture on a 1280x720 or a 1366x768 screen?

1920x1080p display.

with awesome color and contrast.

I am so sorry that your exposure to HD has been on a 17" computer monitor. That must suck real bad.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: spidey07
1920x1080p display.

with awesome color and contrast.

I am so sorry that your exposure to HD has been on a 17" computer monitor. That must suck real bad.

You know, if you spent as much time being informative as you spend belittling him, you might actually post something worthwhile. :Q

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: spidey07
1920x1080p display.

with awesome color and contrast.

I am so sorry that your exposure to HD has been on a 17" computer monitor. That must suck real bad.

You know, if you spent as much time being informative as you spend belittling him, you might actually post something worthwhile. :Q

Doesn't have to be worthwhile. This is common knowledge.

-edit-
sorry, not a nice post.

Compute monitor guys obsess about 1:1 pixel mapping. They don't quite understand video or film. They obsess about thing that are meaningful to a 17" monitor with disregard to what is really important. They obsess about resolution without regard to a "real world" home theater.

In this real world displays are much larger, resolution is important for sure depending on viewing distance. Modern scalers even the built-in one of HDTVs are very good.

This guy is an idiot and doesn't own a HDTV, so therefore his opinion means jack squat.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Doesn't have to be worthwhile. This is common knowledge.

Now that is the most inaccurate thing that has been posted in this thread. And you know that's not a true statement, so obviously your intention is to continue belittling. mercanucaribe, you're wasting your time.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: spidey07
1920x1080p display.

with awesome color and contrast.

I am so sorry that your exposure to HD has been on a 17" computer monitor. That must suck real bad.

You know, if you spent as much time being informative as you spend belittling him, you might actually post something worthwhile. :Q

Doesn't have to be worthwhile. This is common knowledge.

Why would scaled 720p look better than native 720p? Does this still apply to '768p' screens?

SD certainly looks bloody awful scaled onto hdtv, and dvd doesn't look much better (esp. non-anamorphic widescreen).

I'm actually pretty interested, because I'll probably buy an hdtv around the end of the summer (no point now, by the first of april i won't have a chance to watch it again until fall).

 

[Accipiter22]

Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
no, yesterday was the lowest point

if you didnt buy then, may as well kill yourself

hahahhaha good times

 

[mrrman]

for sure...I think plasma will eventually be gone...LCD will rule the market with the laser tv coming into play in a few years if the technology takes off...this is what Ive heard within the MFG industry

 

[MrBond]

Originally posted by: mrrman
for sure...I think plasma will eventually be gone...LCD will rule the market with the laser tv coming into play in a few years if the technology takes off...this is what Ive heard within the MFG industry

I've heard people saying that Pioneer's newest plasma technology looks great and really diminishes the benefits of SED displays (what was supposed to be the next big thing). They're actually making these new displays, while SED remains in limbo.

As far as laser goes, only one company (Mitsubishi) is planning on making them I think - so it may be sort of like LED DLP - a good idea, but not widely used since only a couple companies make the.

Granted this is all speculation at this point.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Good god yes. They are super cheap now.

the year is 2007. The year of HD.

How can 2007 be the year of HD when HD content is still pathetic? Most HD channels seem to be local news. And DiscoveryHD.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: spidey07
Good god yes. They are super cheap now.

the year is 2007. The year of HD.

How can 2007 be the year of HD when HD content is still pathetic? Most HD channels seem to be local news. And DiscoveryHD.

How do you figure? Almost everything I watch is in HD. Sports (ESPN and nationals), movies, discovery, prime-time shows, etc.

mercanucaribe,
Sorry for being an ASS. Was in a bad mood. I appologize.:beer:

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: mad0maxx
Will HDTV prices continue to drop?!

no, they are going to stop making them and switch back to CRT's , so the prices are going to go up, way way up

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Good god yes. They are super cheap now.

the year is 2007. The year of HD.

heh, apparently our definition of super cheap are different. I don't think paying $1500+ for a 40-42" 1080p screen is quite within "the masses" yet. When it is, then I'll say it's cheap.

I personally am waiting for something along the bravia line (close to it, doesn't have to be a bravia) that is 42" and is $6-700. I'd say 1080p, but that is a pipe dream right now, so 720 works fine for me.

And HDMI upconverting receivers become widespread and under $3-400.. good ones.