WHY 1024 x 768 IS NOT HDTV

steve43 · 03-01-2006, 03:07 PM

Who do we think came up with these marketing terms (EDTV, SDTV, etc?) They created the terminology and are accurately selling the products, labeled to fit those definitions.

The CEA Digital Television definitions are:

High-Definition Television (HDTV): HDTV refers to a complete product/system with the following minimum performance attributes:

* Receiver: Receives ATSC terrestrial digital transmissions and decodes all ATSC Table 3 video formats

* Display Scanning Format: Has active vertical scanning lines of 720 progressive (720p), 1080 interlaced (1080i), or higher

* Aspect Ratio: Capable of displaying a 16:9 image (1)

* Audio: Receives and reproduces, and/or outputs Dolby Digital audio

Enhanced Definition Television (EDTV): EDTV refers to a complete product/system with the following minimum performance attributes:

* Receiver: Receives ATSC terrestrial digital transmissions and decodes all ATSC Table 3 video formats

* Display Scanning Format: Has active vertical scanning lines of 480 progressive (480p) or higher

* Aspect Ratio: None Specified

* Audio: Receives and reproduces, and/or outputs Dolby Digital audio

Where did you get your definition Ward?

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 03-01-2006, 03:22 PM

768x1024 are EDTV's...let me out of here! ....I'm Ward Cleaver.

depauvillekid · 03-01-2006, 03:33 PM

First of all I'm not your SON, or Sonny or whatever. Just because I conceded to your arguement that all HDTV is 16:9 doesn't mean I believe it.

Your still don't understand what the hell a constant is though. Constant means that the two values in question are inner changeble. For example, the accelaration due to gravity is 9.8m/s(squared). This is a constant because the acceleration due to gravity, g, will always be 9.8m/s and cannot change.

Using 16:9 in your equaltion, mathmatically your saying 16:9 represents HDTV and your using this value to prove that 1280x720 is the minimum resolution to qualify as HDTV. Right?? well saying 16:9 represents a high def signal, and being a constant, implies that 16:9 represent HD signals and only HD signals. But we all know 16:9 can be SD, ED, HD, etc.

You basically need to find another value to use in your equation that pertains to HD and only HD. I'm getting tired of trying to explain the finer details of math to a non-math literate person.

Once again "ALL HD signals are 16:9 widescreen"

is not the same as

"All 16:9 widescreen images are HDTV"

Both sentences have completly different implications. Your equation as it stands implies the second is true. I know you think your right, all I'm saying is you need to rework your equation a bit. What your trying to prove is slightly different than what your equation actually prooves.

depauvillekid · 03-01-2006, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

720 multiplied by 16 then divided by 9 = 1280 (720 x 16 / 9 = 1280).

-Ward

This what your equation ACTUALLY says:

1. We know HD consists of 720 progressive lines.

2. 16:9 may sometimes represent an HD signal. (I said sometimes because sometimes 16:9 can be used to represent a non HD signal such as a widescreen DVD).

3. Therefore we can use these values to find the number of corresponding lines of resolution. i.e. (720 x 16)/9 = x

4. x in this case is 1280; which is the number of corresponding lines to 720.

And thats the end of your equation, where's the rest, where's the part that prooves 1280x720 is the MINIMUM resolution to qualify for HD. All your equation proves is the 1280x720 is in fact a widescreen image and vice versa. All because you rely on 16:9 as your constant. You either need to add another part onto your equation or cahnge your constant.

depauvillekid · 03-01-2006, 04:17 PM

Ward also spreads crap on other forums as well.

Virtual Dr. anyone....
"You are quite wrong about that.
Microsoft still supports Windows 98, and they will continue to support
Windows 98 until June 30, 2006."

This is a direct quote from Ward. Well this is interesting since Microsoft hasn't put out an actual update for win98 in about 3 freakin years.

This has nothing to do with this argument but it does show that Ward is a liar or atleat disillusioned about his facts. You can't hide from me!!!! I'll find ya, muhahahah, muahahaha.

depauvillekid · 03-01-2006, 04:38 PM

Sole Survivor, I read the same article from pro view and I completly agree. 1080p, while it appears leaps and bounds above 720p won't actually show any noticible difference on tv's smaller that say 50", even then you would have to have your face against the glass to see a difference.

However, those people with home projectors will definetly welcome 1080p technology. Also 1080p is making it possible for super large LCD and Plasma displays. new 72" flat panels are already out and I even saw an ad for an 82" plasma flat panel.

But for all those people who just bought a 720p/1080i set don't get worried about being left with a lesser quality tv. Because the fact is you prob won't even be able to see a difference. Also, some people argue technology moves pretty fast and you will need to upgrade. Yes technology moves fast but integration of technolgy is at a snails pace.

Look how long HDTV has been avaible at it won't be necessary to own an HD set for atleast another 5 - 10 years, even then I'm sure theyre be convertors availble for those people who don't ever want to upgrade to HD. Same applies to alternatives to gasoline engines, they have been around for 2 decades, just now are they being used and theyre still a long way off until they become standard if ever.

So basically, just because 1080p came out doesnt mean you will ever have to upgrade to it. My best guess is that the next big change will have to be a new format of TV. right now we have crt's, lcd, plasma, rear projection, dlp, etc, we need a new type of tv to really progress. The human eye can only distiquish so much, 1080p, 2160p, 10,000p, whats the point if the human eye can't notice the difference.

S0LE_SURVIV0R · 03-01-2006, 04:41 PM

depauvillekid,
We know that it doesn't add up to 1280. But, the CEA board said it is in ther vertical? Do these 720x1024 really have 720 vertical scan lines?
(maybe I'm missing something) if so then it is HD.
""The Board defined minimum attribute resolution requirements that, until now, had not existed for High Definition televisions and monitors. Specifically, HDTV displays must have active top-to-bottom scan lines of 720 progressive, 1080 interlaced, or higher."

http://www.digitaltelevision.com/con...con1000aa.html

Allin4greeN · 03-01-2006, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CEA DTV Labeling Definitions found at digitaltelevision.com/consumer/dtvcon1000aa.html

CEA's Video Division Board developed the definitions to more clearly define parameters for the varying levels of DTV products available and to make it easier for consumers to differentiate between the types of DTV products offered.

This is just too hillarious...

depauvillekid · 03-01-2006, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S0LE_SURVIV0R

depauvillekid,
We know that it doesn't add up to 1280. But, the CEA board said it is in ther vertical? Do these 720x1024 really have 720 vertical scan lines?
(maybe I'm missing something) if so then it is HD.
""The Board defined minimum attribute resolution requirements that, until now, had not existed for High Definition televisions and monitors. Specifically, HDTV displays must have active top-to-bottom scan lines of 720 progressive, 1080 interlaced, or higher."

http://www.digitaltelevision.com/con...con1000aa.html

This is the same as my first arguement on this thread. The definitions for HD do not calculate for the horizontal lines. Just as long as the image displayed contain 720 vertical lines displayed progressivly or 1080 verticle line displayed interlaced. And capable of displaying a 16x9 widescreen image.

So I do agree that HDTV is a 16:9 format, but I conceded that a while ago, Ward your still using your math wrong because you still use it in a way that implies all 16:9 images are HD, in which they are not always HD.

1024x720 does meet the criteria for HDTV. It displays 720 lines progressivly and it is capable of displaying a 16:9 image. It would simply crop the signal the same way 4:3 HDTV's do. There are 4:3 HDTV's, Sony makes one. 1024x720 is definetly HDTV without a doubt.

CatManDoo · 03-01-2006, 08:19 PM

Can't we all just get along and agree that Sole Survivor has the best avatar?

Sole Survivor

FSTFUGGER · 03-01-2006, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by depauvillekid

Ward also spreads crap on other forums as well.

Virtual Dr. anyone....
"You are quite wrong about that.
Microsoft still supports Windows 98, and they will continue to support
Windows 98 until June 30, 2006."

This is a direct quote from Ward. Well this is interesting since Microsoft hasn't put out an actual update for win98 in about 3 freakin years.

This has nothing to do with this argument but it does show that Ward is a liar or atleat disillusioned about his facts. You can't hide from me!!!! I'll find ya, muhahahah, muahahaha.

This is true, Microsoft stopped supporting w98 a few years ago.

crypticstatic · 03-01-2006, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CatManDoo

Can't we all just get along and agree that Sole Survivor has the best avatar?

Sole Survivor

All those in favor say I....

I!

Don't worry ward, We all know your answer already, if the avatar isnt displayed with a minimum resolution of 1280x720 then it isnt a real avatar, so I presume your answer to this question is nay?

Ward Cleaver · 03-02-2006, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Posted By DepauvilleKid - "Microsoft hasn't put out an actual update for win98 in about 3 freakin years."

Quote:

Posted By FstFugger - "Microsoft stopped supporting w98 a few years ago."

Incorrect.
Microsoft will continue to offer support for Windows 98 until July 11, 2006.

Read it for youselves at Microsoft's website...and eat your words.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sup...ofsupport.mspx

Regards,
-Ward

Ward Cleaver · 03-02-2006, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Posted By DepauvilleKid - "16:9 may sometimes represent an HD signal."

Incorrect.
That is where you're missing it completely.

An HD signal is always...not sometimes..but always transmitted in a 16:9 aspect ratio.
Thus, it is a constant.

The 720P HD signal is always transmitted in a 16:9 aspect ratio.

Therefore, we can easily figure out the horizontal resolution of the 720P HD signal being transmitted with the following easy formula...

720 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals 1280 (720 x 16 / 9 = 1280).

Thus, a television must have a minimum resolution of 1280 x 720 in a 16:9 aspect ratio to display the true HD signal being broadcast.

All plasma sets under 50" have a resolution no greater than 1024 x 768. This is not enough to display the true HD signal of 1280 x 720.

Regards,
-Ward

Nevada_MO_Guy · 03-02-2006, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

An HD signal is always...not sometimes..but always transmitted in a 16:9 aspect ratio.
Thus, it is a constant.

I think he is onto something.

TV Display Configuration:

Aspect Ratio – The width to height ratio of a TV Monitor or Program.

Aspect Ratio can apply to either the television monitor (hardware), or to the TV program format.
Traditional - (4:3) aspect ratio; the display has 'square' appearance. All Analog TV programs are in 4:3 aspect ratio.
New 'Wide Screen' (16:9) aspect ratio; the display is rectangular.
Digital TV (SDTV) programs can be in either 4:3 or 16:9 aspect ratio.
HDTV is always in 16:9 aspect ratio.
http://www.hdtvinfoport.com/HDTV-Basics.html

03-01-2006, 03:07 PM	#151
steve43 What is HD? Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 3	Consumer Electronics Association Definitions Who do we think came up with these marketing terms (EDTV, SDTV, etc?) They created the terminology and are accurately selling the products, labeled to fit those definitions. The CEA Digital Television definitions are: High-Definition Television (HDTV): HDTV refers to a complete product/system with the following minimum performance attributes: * Receiver: Receives ATSC terrestrial digital transmissions and decodes all ATSC Table 3 video formats * Display Scanning Format: Has active vertical scanning lines of 720 progressive (720p), 1080 interlaced (1080i), or higher * Aspect Ratio: Capable of displaying a 16:9 image (1) * Audio: Receives and reproduces, and/or outputs Dolby Digital audio Enhanced Definition Television (EDTV): EDTV refers to a complete product/system with the following minimum performance attributes: * Receiver: Receives ATSC terrestrial digital transmissions and decodes all ATSC Table 3 video formats * Display Scanning Format: Has active vertical scanning lines of 480 progressive (480p) or higher * Aspect Ratio: None Specified * Audio: Receives and reproduces, and/or outputs Dolby Digital audio Where did you get your definition Ward?

03-01-2006, 03:22 PM	#152
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 48 Posts: 287	768x1024 are EDTV's...let me out of here! ....I'm Ward Cleaver. __________________ 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; 03-01-2006 at 03:30 PM.

03-01-2006, 04:41 PM	#157
S0LE_SURVIV0R Watch this in HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Boston Age: 48 Posts: 287	depauvillekid, We know that it doesn't add up to 1280. But, the CEA board said it is in ther vertical? Do these 720x1024 really have 720 vertical scan lines? (maybe I'm missing something) if so then it is HD. ""The Board defined minimum attribute resolution requirements that, until now, had not existed for High Definition televisions and monitors. Specifically, HDTV displays must have active top-to-bottom scan lines of 720 progressive, 1080 interlaced, or higher." http://www.digitaltelevision.com/con...con1000aa.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"

03-01-2006, 08:19 PM	#160
CatManDoo Miss-Ti, World's BEST Cat Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Lancaster, PA Posts: 1,827	S S Can't we all just get along and agree that Sole Survivor has the best avatar? Sole Survivor __________________ "Miss-Ti, World's BEST Cat!"

Similar Threads to WHY 1024 x 768 IS NOT HDTV
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Upconverting DVD player does not look very different from Xbox360 component image 480	chupacabra31	SD DVD Players and Discs	6	12-07-2007 11:31 AM
Plasma screen resolution question	longhornato	Flat-Panel TVs	48	12-03-2007 06:10 AM
Half Empty or half full? Why 768x1024 is HD	S0LE_SURVIV0R	Flat-Panel TVs	180	11-23-2007 07:19 PM
Just bought a EDTV not sure if i can get HDTV please help	dplaya746	Flat-Panel TVs	25	02-03-2007 08:43 PM
HD a consumer Compromise ??	DavidG	The High Definition Lounge	11	05-01-2006 05:10 PM
So, why does it work this way...	LordGamer	Rear-Projection TVs	6	06-06-2005 02:15 PM

03-01-2006, 03:33 PM	#153
depauvillekid xbox 360, Vizio L32, Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: New York Age: 30 Posts: 223	First of all I'm not your SON, or Sonny or whatever. Just because I conceded to your arguement that all HDTV is 16:9 doesn't mean I believe it. Your still don't understand what the hell a constant is though. Constant means that the two values in question are inner changeble. For example, the accelaration due to gravity is 9.8m/s(squared). This is a constant because the acceleration due to gravity, g, will always be 9.8m/s and cannot change. Using 16:9 in your equaltion, mathmatically your saying 16:9 represents HDTV and your using this value to prove that 1280x720 is the minimum resolution to qualify as HDTV. Right?? well saying 16:9 represents a high def signal, and being a constant, implies that 16:9 represent HD signals and only HD signals. But we all know 16:9 can be SD, ED, HD, etc. You basically need to find another value to use in your equation that pertains to HD and only HD. I'm getting tired of trying to explain the finer details of math to a non-math literate person. Once again "ALL HD signals are 16:9 widescreen" is not the same as "All 16:9 widescreen images are HDTV" Both sentences have completly different implications. Your equation as it stands implies the second is true. I know you think your right, all I'm saying is you need to rework your equation a bit. What your trying to prove is slightly different than what your equation actually prooves.

03-01-2006, 04:17 PM	#155
depauvillekid xbox 360, Vizio L32, Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: New York Age: 30 Posts: 223	Ward also spreads crap on other forums as well. Virtual Dr. anyone.... "You are quite wrong about that. Microsoft still supports Windows 98, and they will continue to support Windows 98 until June 30, 2006." This is a direct quote from Ward. Well this is interesting since Microsoft hasn't put out an actual update for win98 in about 3 freakin years. This has nothing to do with this argument but it does show that Ward is a liar or atleat disillusioned about his facts. You can't hide from me!!!! I'll find ya, muhahahah, muahahaha.

03-01-2006, 04:38 PM	#156
depauvillekid xbox 360, Vizio L32, Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: New York Age: 30 Posts: 223	Sole Survivor, I read the same article from pro view and I completly agree. 1080p, while it appears leaps and bounds above 720p won't actually show any noticible difference on tv's smaller that say 50", even then you would have to have your face against the glass to see a difference. However, those people with home projectors will definetly welcome 1080p technology. Also 1080p is making it possible for super large LCD and Plasma displays. new 72" flat panels are already out and I even saw an ad for an 82" plasma flat panel. But for all those people who just bought a 720p/1080i set don't get worried about being left with a lesser quality tv. Because the fact is you prob won't even be able to see a difference. Also, some people argue technology moves pretty fast and you will need to upgrade. Yes technology moves fast but integration of technolgy is at a snails pace. Look how long HDTV has been avaible at it won't be necessary to own an HD set for atleast another 5 - 10 years, even then I'm sure theyre be convertors availble for those people who don't ever want to upgrade to HD. Same applies to alternatives to gasoline engines, they have been around for 2 decades, just now are they being used and theyre still a long way off until they become standard if ever. So basically, just because 1080p came out doesnt mean you will ever have to upgrade to it. My best guess is that the next big change will have to be a new format of TV. right now we have crt's, lcd, plasma, rear projection, dlp, etc, we need a new type of tv to really progress. The human eye can only distiquish so much, 1080p, 2160p, 10,000p, whats the point if the human eye can't notice the difference.