Half Empty or half full? Why 768x1024 is HD

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 02-21-2006, 06:15 AM

Not only are going against Sony, Pioneer, and all A to Z, but if you mislead anyone from this point onward that 768x1024 is not HD or ED, you are intentionally misleading them.
Ask the moderators who they believe after they read this

" A 42-inch flat-panel plasma display, for example, comes in at least two resolution "sizes": 854 x 480 (called ED) and 1024 x 768 (called HD). Not surprisingly, the reason is cost: "
"
"Thus, it is the number of pixels on the vertical axis that really determines how much detail is visible."
http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/p...efinition.html

Now they can expel your membership & deltete you from this site if you mislead people.
If you want to accuse Sony to pioneer and everyone of lying, I would recommend you keep it to yourself.

Ward Cleaver · 02-21-2006, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Posted By Cryptic Static - "It reminds me of two old ladies arguing..."

...And you're right out here arguing with us.
You have a total of 7 posts, and most of them (as of this writing) have been argumentative.

Regards,
-Ward

Ward Cleaver · 02-21-2006, 07:20 AM

Sole Survivor, I don't care what anyone "advertises."

The fact of the matter is in the math. That cannot be denied.

Anyone out here on this forum with even a modicum of knowledge knows that no plasma panel under 50" is capable of displaying true HDTV.

The minimum resolution necessary for displaying true HD is 1280 x 720.

1024 x 768 is not capable of displaying true HD.

Geese, I can't believe I have a couple of stragglers out here who are actually trying to argue against mathematic principals.

Once again, HDTV is displayed in a 16:9 aspect ratio...16 pixels on each line for every 9 lines of picture in the frame.
The formula used to determine the necessary resolution of a 720P HDTV signal in a 16:9 aspect ratio is as follows...720 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1280. (720 X 16 /9 = 1280)

Now, if we were talking about an aspect ratio lower than 16:9, then the resolution necessary to display true HD would be lower.
However, such is not the case. HDTV is displayed in an aspect ratio of 16:9, and with a 720P signal and an aspect ratio of 16:9, it must have a resolution of 1280 x 720 to display true HD content.

That's math, it can't be denied and that's just the way it is.

I'm sorry if that shatters some preconceived notions you may have had about your tv, but, that's just the way it is.
If your tv has a resolution of less than 1280 x 720, then it is not capable of displaying content in true HD.

Incidentally, the same formula above can be used with a 1080i signal...

1080 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1920.
(1080 X 16 / 9 + 1920).

Boys, from this point on, you're no longer arguing, debating and haranguing with me...you're arguing, debating and haranguing against a mathematic principal.

That is going to make you appear quite silly indeed.
Might I suggest you wake up and smell the coffee.

Regards,
-Ward

John C · 02-21-2006, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

Once again, HDTV is displayed in a 16:9 aspect ratio.
The formula used to determine the necessary resolution of a 720P HDTV signal in a 16:9 aspect ratio is as follows...720 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1280. (720 X 16 /9 = 1280)

I think this is where the logic in your argument breaks down. It must be DISPLAYED in 16:9. That is not the same as having to have a native pixel count that is 16:9. For example, if a TV had a native pixel count of 1280x1440 but they were arranged such that the overall picture was 16:9 - in effect the verticle pixels were packed twice as closely together as the horizontal pixels, and it simply upconverted the signal and lit 2 verticle pixels for every one in the original content, you would have a picture that appeared exactly like a native 1280x720 even though the pixel ratio was actually 8:9. I still believe the requirement is that the final picture be 16:9 - not the native pixel count. If I am wrong about that, could someone please provide a link to the governing standard that defines aspect ratio as the ratio of pixels.

Ward Cleaver · 02-21-2006, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Posted By John C. - "I think this is where the logic in your argument breaks down."

There is no "break down" in the "logic" of the argument.

It's pure and simple math and you are using convoluted reasoning and getting yourself confused (plus I detect a lack of understanding on your part as to how an HD signal is transmitted and received).

For an HD signal to maintain a native 16:9 aspect ratio that matches the standard widescreen television format, it needs to have 16 pixels on each line for every 9 lines of picture in the frame.
This is the same whether the signal is interlaced or progressive.

A 1080i signal has 1920 pixels horizontally...1920 / 16 = 120; 120 X 9 = 1080 and...1080 X 16 = 17280 / 9 = 1920.

Again, with a 720P signal...720 X 16 / 9 = 1280.

I'm not so sure what is so hard about these concepts for you to grasp.
(This is not rocket science, it's really just basic math).

As I said, you're missing it by using convoluted reasoning and a lack of knowledge concerning the broadcast and transmission of an HD signal...and perhaps, just a little, you are simply arguing for the sake of argument.

Either way, you are arguing against math...which is very illogical.

Regards,
-Ward

John C · 02-21-2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

There is no "break down" in the "logic" of the argument.

It's pure and simple math and you are using convoluted reasoning and getting yourself confused (plus I detect a lack of understanding on your part as to how an HD signal is transmitted and received).

For an HD signal to maintain a native 16:9 aspect ratio that matches the standard widescreen television format, it needs to have 16 pixels on each line for every 9 lines of picture in the frame.
This is the same whether the signal is interlaced or progressive.

A 1080i signal has 1920 pixels horizontally...1920 / 16 = 120; 120 X 9 = 1080 and...1080 X 16 = 17280 / 9 = 1920.

Again, with a 720P signal...720 X 16 / 9 = 1280.

I'm not so sure what is so hard about these concepts for you to grasp.
(This is not rocket science, it's really just basic math).

As I said, you're missing it by using convoluted reasoning and a lack of knowledge concerning the broadcast and transmission of an HD signal...and perhaps, just a little, you are simply arguing for the sake of argument.

Either way, you are arguing against math...which is very illogical.

Regards,
-Ward

I am sorry that you cannot seem to grasp that pixels do not have to be arranged evenly and that the picture ratio can be different than the native ratio between pixel. I even tried to throw in a simply example to help demonstrate the concept. Personally, I suspect your failure to understand may come from not properly distinquishing between the native broadcast signal and the hardware for displaying that signal. You are right that the SIGNAL needs to maintain a strict 16:9 ratio. It is hardware independant. However, the TV only has to maintain a 16:9 ratio of the final picture, not of the pixel layout. Different TVs scale that picture to whatever their native format is.

And just so that we are clear, I am not arguing over math. I understand your math perfectly well. As I have said throughout this conversation, I am willing to keep an open mind and explore whatever definitive standards you want to introduce. Are you ready to have an open mind and do the same? I have provided links to standards, and detailed explanations for my conclusions. Thus far, all you have contributed is opinionated bluster and disparaging remarks against concepts which you fail to grasp. If you are willing to have a real discussion, then let's do so. If you just enjoy being an anonymous bully in cyberspace, then I really do not need to waste my time trying to have a logical discussion with you any more.

Ward Cleaver · 02-21-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Posted By John C - "I really do not need to waste my time trying to have a logical discussion..."

You are now arguing and debating against a mathematic principle...not against me.
The "logical discussion" on your end was abandoned as soon as you started doing that.

Regards,
-Ward

John C · 02-21-2006, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

You are now arguing and debating against a mathematic principle...not against me.
The "logical discussion" on your end was abandoned as soon as you started doing that.

Regards,
-Ward

No, I am "arguing" against your (likely fallacious) assumption, which you still seem unable to justify.

tanaka · 02-21-2006, 01:12 PM

Ward,

I'll try this again.
I'm not arguing with your mathamatics. Everyone here knows about the resolution numbers. People are arguing your INTERPRETATION of those numbers.
If you don't understand what I just said, please reread before you say something like "you can't argue with the mathamatics".
How about some proof? Maybe I wasn't clear.
How about some PROOF?
How about a link to back up what you are saying? How about it?

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 02-21-2006, 01:49 PM

I'll respond to you, because you were neutral and wanted to see proof. I provided it.
Now you see the lack of it on their end. Not many will say " I stand corrected on that" he is misleading people that come to site to learn about TV's.
Accusung all the major electronic giants of lying.
I sat back and said to myself, who are people going to belive, Sony Panansonic, Pioneer, Smasung, or a guy calling himself Ward Cleaver??? He should banned from here if he misleads people. What about the people who have 4.3 CRT's that accept a HD signal?

It was plain and simple it is the vertical resolution that is measured to qualify. Although I'm no expert, Sony, Panasonic, etc, is using some chart for it to qualify for HD.

Could it be something like this?

"Thus, it is the number of pixels on the vertical axis that really determines how much detail is visible."
http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/...definition.html
1024x768 is HD
"A 42-inch flat-panel plasma display, for example, comes in at least two resolution "sizes": 854 x 480 (called ED) and 1024 x 768 (called HD)."

TopperHarley · 02-21-2006, 03:46 PM

Earlier quote from Ward:
"FACT - No plasma tv under 50" is capable of displaying true HDTV. Now, you can argue and debate that as much as you want in an effort to placate yourself and make yourself feel better about your purchase...but, it is still a fact."

Now click on this link:

http://www.tacp.toshiba.com/televisi...p?model=42hp95

Ward, be a real man and admit that the above statement you made is wrong. We need no explanation of what you meant or some political jargon to try and explain this that or the other thing. Simply admit you are wrong. It's OK, you will still see the sun come up in the morning. This is a true test as to what you are made of my friend. To this point I think very little of you. You now have an opportunity to change that.

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 02-21-2006, 04:29 PM

I clicked on that link, the is alao 1024x768.
Same as my Panasonic. Yes it is HD, like mine. Now ole Ward will accuse Toshiba of lying.
So it's everyone but Ward
Sony
Pioneer
Panasonic
Smasung
Purevision
LG
JVC
Plasma buying guide.
All wrong but ward.

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 02-21-2006, 05:24 PM

This site is lying to.......

"Enhanced Definition" Plasma screens (EDTV) do not offer true high-definition TV quality. Instead they offer a "DVD quality" screen resolution of 852x480. For watching DVD-movies, conventional cable or television, or playing video games, the lower resolution is not a factor. You will still be able to enjoy TV shows broadcast in high-definition, however the show will only be as sharp as a DVD. By convention, any plasma with a resolution greater than 852x480 is considered HDTV plasma. These panels include resolutions such as 852x1024, 1024x768, 1024x1024, 1280x768, and 1366x768. With a higher resolution screen, you will be able to take advantage of the additional resolution that high-definition broadcasts offer.

http://www.firingsquad.com/guides/tv...tion/page3.asp

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 02-21-2006, 05:43 PM

Hey this site is lying to,

Q. ARE ALL PLASMA TVS HDTVs?
The short answer to this question is "NO". Here is why:

In order for a plasma TV to be classified as an HDTV or HDTV-ready the television must be able to display a Vertical resolution of at least 720 lines. Some of those "budget" Plasma televisions that are "selling like hotcakes" only display a vertical resolution of 480 lines. These sets are referred to as EDTVs (Extended or Enhanced Definition televisions).

EDTVs typically have a native pixel resolution of 852x480. 852x480 represents 852 pixels across (left to right) and 480 pixels down (top to bottom) on the screen surface. The 480 pixels down also represent the number of lines from the top to the bottom of the screen. This is higher than standard television, but not HDTV resolution. The images on these sets look great, especially for DVDs and standard digital cable, but it is not HDTV.

Plasmas that are capable of displaying HDTV signals have a native pixel resolution of 1024x768 (where 768 also represents the number of lines from the top to bottom of the screen) or higher.
http://www.dtvcity.com/plasmatv/plasma-hdtv.html

tanaka · 02-21-2006, 06:23 PM

Well, I think that settles it for me. Great work.
Going into this thread, I was actually under the impression that anything less than 50" was not true hd. You guys (especially sole) have done a great job to debunk this.
All I ever wanted was some proof on the other side. But that never happened.
Again, nice work. It's case closed for me.

02-21-2006, 06:15 AM	#76
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 45 Posts: 287	Not only are going against Sony, Pioneer, and all A to Z, but if you mislead anyone from this point onward that 768x1024 is not HD or ED, you are intentionally misleading them. Ask the moderators who they believe after they read this " A 42-inch flat-panel plasma display, for example, comes in at least two resolution "sizes": 854 x 480 (called ED) and 1024 x 768 (called HD). Not surprisingly, the reason is cost: " " "Thus, it is the number of pixels on the vertical axis that really determines how much detail is visible." http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/p...efinition.html Now they can expel your membership & deltete you from this site if you mislead people. If you want to accuse Sony to pioneer and everyone of lying, I would recommend you keep it to yourself. __________________ Sony 40 LCD flat panel XBR & Panasonic 37 768p Plasma HD TIVO The human eye can barely perceive a 1366x768 resolution 10 feet away from a 50 inch see http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January...rallaxview.htm 720p Fastest & Best Temporal Resolution Sony "The world's greatest high definition television" Last edited by S0LE_SURVIV0R; 02-21-2006 at 06:17 AM.

02-21-2006, 07:20 AM	#78
Ward Cleaver 1024 x 768 Is Not True HD Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 263	Sole Survivor, I don't care what anyone "advertises." The fact of the matter is in the math. That cannot be denied. Anyone out here on this forum with even a modicum of knowledge knows that no plasma panel under 50" is capable of displaying true HDTV. The minimum resolution necessary for displaying true HD is 1280 x 720. 1024 x 768 is not capable of displaying true HD. Geese, I can't believe I have a couple of stragglers out here who are actually trying to argue against mathematic principals. Once again, HDTV is displayed in a 16:9 aspect ratio...16 pixels on each line for every 9 lines of picture in the frame. The formula used to determine the necessary resolution of a 720P HDTV signal in a 16:9 aspect ratio is as follows...720 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1280. (720 X 16 /9 = 1280) Now, if we were talking about an aspect ratio lower than 16:9, then the resolution necessary to display true HD would be lower. However, such is not the case. HDTV is displayed in an aspect ratio of 16:9, and with a 720P signal and an aspect ratio of 16:9, it must have a resolution of 1280 x 720 to display true HD content. That's math, it can't be denied and that's just the way it is. I'm sorry if that shatters some preconceived notions you may have had about your tv, but, that's just the way it is. If your tv has a resolution of less than 1280 x 720, then it is not capable of displaying content in true HD. Incidentally, the same formula above can be used with a 1080i signal... 1080 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1920. (1080 X 16 / 9 + 1920). Boys, from this point on, you're no longer arguing, debating and haranguing with me...you're arguing, debating and haranguing against a mathematic principal. That is going to make you appear quite silly indeed. Might I suggest you wake up and smell the coffee. Regards, -Ward __________________ The ATSC (the body whch sets the standards for HDTV) recognizes only two standards for HDTV...1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 www.atsc.org The ATSC standards for HDTV are recognized by the FCC. Last edited by Ward Cleaver; 02-21-2006 at 07:31 AM.

02-21-2006, 01:49 PM	#85
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 45 Posts: 287	I'll respond to you, because you were neutral and wanted to see proof. I provided it. Now you see the lack of it on their end. Not many will say " I stand corrected on that" he is misleading people that come to site to learn about TV's. Accusung all the major electronic giants of lying. I sat back and said to myself, who are people going to belive, Sony Panansonic, Pioneer, Smasung, or a guy calling himself Ward Cleaver??? He should banned from here if he misleads people. What about the people who have 4.3 CRT's that accept a HD signal? It was plain and simple it is the vertical resolution that is measured to qualify. Although I'm no expert, Sony, Panasonic, etc, is using some chart for it to qualify for HD. Could it be something like this? "Thus, it is the number of pixels on the vertical axis that really determines how much detail is visible." http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/...definition.html 1024x768 is HD "A 42-inch flat-panel plasma display, for example, comes in at least two resolution "sizes": 854 x 480 (called ED) and 1024 x 768 (called HD)." __________________ Sony 40 LCD flat panel XBR & Panasonic 37 768p Plasma HD TIVO The human eye can barely perceive a 1366x768 resolution 10 feet away from a 50 inch see http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January...rallaxview.htm 720p Fastest & Best Temporal Resolution Sony "The world's greatest high definition television"

02-21-2006, 03:46 PM	#86
TopperHarley This baby only has 1 arm! Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 265	Earlier quote from Ward: "FACT - No plasma tv under 50" is capable of displaying true HDTV. Now, you can argue and debate that as much as you want in an effort to placate yourself and make yourself feel better about your purchase...but, it is still a fact." Now click on this link: http://www.tacp.toshiba.com/televisi...p?model=42hp95 Ward, be a real man and admit that the above statement you made is wrong. We need no explanation of what you meant or some political jargon to try and explain this that or the other thing. Simply admit you are wrong. It's OK, you will still see the sun come up in the morning. This is a true test as to what you are made of my friend. To this point I think very little of you. You now have an opportunity to change that. Last edited by TopperHarley; 02-21-2006 at 03:48 PM.

02-21-2006, 04:29 PM	#87
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 45 Posts: 287	I clicked on that link, the is alao 1024x768. Same as my Panasonic. Yes it is HD, like mine. Now ole Ward will accuse Toshiba of lying. So it's everyone but Ward Sony Pioneer Panasonic Smasung Purevision LG JVC Plasma buying guide. All wrong but ward. __________________ Sony 40 LCD flat panel XBR & Panasonic 37 768p Plasma HD TIVO The human eye can barely perceive a 1366x768 resolution 10 feet away from a 50 inch see http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January...rallaxview.htm 720p Fastest & Best Temporal Resolution Sony "The world's greatest high definition television"

02-21-2006, 01:12 PM	#84
tanaka Paradigm Studios' Babey! Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 210	Ward, I'll try this again. I'm not arguing with your mathamatics. Everyone here knows about the resolution numbers. People are arguing your INTERPRETATION of those numbers. If you don't understand what I just said, please reread before you say something like "you can't argue with the mathamatics". How about some proof? Maybe I wasn't clear. How about some PROOF? How about a link to back up what you are saying? How about it?

02-21-2006, 05:24 PM	#88
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 45 Posts: 287	This site is lying to....... "Enhanced Definition" Plasma screens (EDTV) do not offer true high-definition TV quality. Instead they offer a "DVD quality" screen resolution of 852x480. For watching DVD-movies, conventional cable or television, or playing video games, the lower resolution is not a factor. You will still be able to enjoy TV shows broadcast in high-definition, however the show will only be as sharp as a DVD. By convention, any plasma with a resolution greater than 852x480 is considered HDTV plasma. These panels include resolutions such as 852x1024, 1024x768, 1024x1024, 1280x768, and 1366x768. With a higher resolution screen, you will be able to take advantage of the additional resolution that high-definition broadcasts offer. http://www.firingsquad.com/guides/tv...tion/page3.asp __________________ Sony 40 LCD flat panel XBR & Panasonic 37 768p Plasma HD TIVO The human eye can barely perceive a 1366x768 resolution 10 feet away from a 50 inch see http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January...rallaxview.htm 720p Fastest & Best Temporal Resolution Sony "The world's greatest high definition television"

02-21-2006, 05:43 PM	#89
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 45 Posts: 287	Hey this site is lying to, Q. ARE ALL PLASMA TVS HDTVs? The short answer to this question is "NO". Here is why: In order for a plasma TV to be classified as an HDTV or HDTV-ready the television must be able to display a Vertical resolution of at least 720 lines. Some of those "budget" Plasma televisions that are "selling like hotcakes" only display a vertical resolution of 480 lines. These sets are referred to as EDTVs (Extended or Enhanced Definition televisions). EDTVs typically have a native pixel resolution of 852x480. 852x480 represents 852 pixels across (left to right) and 480 pixels down (top to bottom) on the screen surface. The 480 pixels down also represent the number of lines from the top to the bottom of the screen. This is higher than standard television, but not HDTV resolution. The images on these sets look great, especially for DVDs and standard digital cable, but it is not HDTV. Plasmas that are capable of displaying HDTV signals have a native pixel resolution of 1024x768 (where 768 also represents the number of lines from the top to bottom of the screen) or higher. http://www.dtvcity.com/plasmatv/plasma-hdtv.html __________________ Sony 40 LCD flat panel XBR & Panasonic 37 768p Plasma HD TIVO The human eye can barely perceive a 1366x768 resolution 10 feet away from a 50 inch see http://proav.pubdyn.com/2005_January...rallaxview.htm 720p Fastest & Best Temporal Resolution Sony "The world's greatest high definition television" Last edited by S0LE_SURVIV0R; 02-21-2006 at 05:54 PM.

02-21-2006, 06:23 PM	#90
tanaka Paradigm Studios' Babey! Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 210	Well, I think that settles it for me. Great work. Going into this thread, I was actually under the impression that anything less than 50" was not true hd. You guys (especially sole) have done a great job to debunk this. All I ever wanted was some proof on the other side. But that never happened. Again, nice work. It's case closed for me.