WHY 1024 x 768 IS NOT HDTV

Ward Cleaver

The proof can be found in mathematics...and relatively basic mathematics at that.

Let me be very basic here.

If we are talking about a 720P HDTV signal, you have a vertical resolution of 720 pixels and an aspect ratio of 16:9.

Knowing those two numbers, you can easily figure out what the horizontal resolution must be using a simple mathematical formula.

720 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1280.

So, the horizontal resolution of a 720P HDTV signal in a 16:9 ratio must be 1280.

1024 x 720 in an aspect ratio of 16:9 is not HDTV.

Remember, HDTV must be in a 16:9 aspect ratio.

You can't argue with mathematics.
I don't know why it is so hard for a few of you to understand.
It is basic mathematics.

Not only is 1024 x 720 in an aspect ratio of 16:9 not HDTV...it cannot be HDTV. The laws of mathematics and physics will not allow it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The same formula can be applied to a 1080i signal to determine the horizontal resolution.

1080 multiplied by 16 and then divided by 9 equals...1920.

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.

FSTFUGGER

Sounds like its time for a class-action lawsuit against all the manufacturers that make 42" plasmas, and all the retailers that advertise them as HD, not "HD Ready". If you head this thing up with that argument, you're likely to be a millionaire when this thing is over.

Good luck!

__________________
Panasonic TH-42PD50U Plasma
Yamaha YHT-360 Home Theater
Xbox 360 Premium

iserum

I was confused too at first, but who cares, PQ is good and that counts it is better than EDTv for sure.

__________________
Panasonic 50PX80U/Pioneer BDP-51FD /Toshiba HD A1/Tivo HD
SAMSUNG LNT-4661F/ Pioneer BDP-51FD/Dell XPS, Nvidia 9500 GT
SONY BRAVIA 40V2500/40 GB PS3, WII, Intel Core 2 Duo with Nvidia 6800
Yamaha RXV1700
Def. Tech. Mythos III, V & Gems,
Super Cube III
Harmony Remote One
Power Conditioner: Belkin PF40

John C

You are absolutely right. The "HDTV signal" must be 1280 pixels of horizontal resolution to maintain 16:9 aspect ratio.

This is the interesting portion of your comments. What is the definitive source for your assertion? According to whom is 1024x720 not HDTV if the aspect ratio is "stretched" to 16:9?

Yes it must, but I still have never seen anything definitive that required the pixels to be square and the native pixel ratio to be 16:9, instead I have only seen a requirement that the final picture be displayed as 16:9. If you have any documentation to support your assertion to the contrary, please share.

Not arguing the math but rather one of your assumptions regarding what the defining standard requires.

Again, I ask what standard suggests that 1024x720 in 16:9 is not HDTV? I have searched and I have not found any such requirement. If one exists, please point us to it. And just f

Again we agree. The signal ratio is not an issue here.

TopperHarley

Ward, you are amazing at rehashing information that almost everyone already knows. Do you just like to see your arogant posts plastered all over the web? Yes, we all know that you have a True HD set. So why don't you spend a little time watching it instead of wasting it continually needling people who don't have a true HD set. You are so into math that you have lost all comprehension of what is truly important... the picture!!!!! Now get off of your high horse and admit that there are non HD sets like the 42PX50U that DO HAVE A BETTER picture than many many many True HD sets out there.

So yes 1024x768 is not True HD. Again, not new information and says nothing about what kind of picture you will have. Get over yourself jerk off.

ChadT74

I hope this post makes you stop crying yourself to sleep at night.

tuccillo

I always assumed the pixels were rectangular and not square to provide a 16:9 aspect ratio with 1024x720 pixels. Anyone know if this is the case for 42" plasmas?

John C

They have to be. That is the only way to display 1024x720 across a 16:9 surface without leaving gaping holes in the picture.

TopperHarley

It depends on the resolution of the set. Not all 42" sets have the same rez. True square is best but most normal human beings can not tell the difference between an rectangular pixel and a squar pixel in terms of picture quality. Only super humans like Ward can tell.
The Panny 50" is True HD and has square pixels. This should lead to a better overall picture. Even though I see no vast improvment in picture quality over the non HD 42PX50u. Int dat sometin?

John C

I actually own a Panny 50", so this isn't about "mine is as good as yours" to me. I want to know the truth.

I have to ask from where did you pull the definition of "True HD". Is there such a thing? Who defines it? Or is this just a label you personally are applying to a set that displays the full resolution of a 720P signal?

Ward Cleaver

Wrong.

Regardless of the resolution, all 16:9 panels utilize square pixels.

In addition, these square pixels are 4.5 times smaller than the rectangular pixels of standard television.

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.

sl7vk

Shouldn't you be studying up on the history of Belgium Ward?

__________________
"Their LCD tv's are also assembled in the Netherlands...Belgium to be exact."
-Ward Cleaver

John C

The web is full of sites that disagree with your assertion. Please see footnote 2 after the list of plasma TVs at the following site. There are pages and pages of similar notes. And if we discussed ED widescreen sets, I think we would find that the standard actually calls for square pixels. Are you sure about your facts on this one?

LINK

John C

We all make mistakes from time to time. No point in bringing this unrelated mistake up in every thread. I would prefer to actually discuss the topic at hand.

TopperHarley

There is factual information all over the web that will explain the defintion of True HD. 1024x768 does NOT meet that criteria. And I am too busy to point to one of the many links that will explain this thoroughly. They are very easy to find. True HD in my opinion is the most overated and overused term in the history of man.