1080p: A discussion

Blue_Tech · 09-15-2005, 04:40 AM

The more I learn about 1080p, the more problems I find.

Recently, while viewing The HDTV Primer, I find that 1080p is almost a waste of time in terms of money spent. Those that are fervent on the new 1080p sets should consider the following...

The TOP 3 higest resolution formats dictated by the ATSC standard are:

1080i60 - 30 frames/sec, 60 fields/sec, transmitted as Interlaced

1080p30 - 30 frames/sec, 30 fields/sec, transmitted ProScan

1080p24 - 24 frames/sec, 24 fields/sec, transmitted ProScan

Put best, and sub-quoted directly from the linked article:

Quote:

Originally Posted by kq6qv@aol.com

If 1080p is to 1080i what 480p is to 480i, then 1080p is 60 frames per second. Monitors that can actually do this are rare. Quite simply, there are no 1080p60 sources.

I think alot of folks who are familiar with 720p60 are getting the wrong impression. The subject of 60fps is just now really being discussed in earnest on the forums. So everyone sees the fairly decent benefit of 60fps and immediately thinks this transfers over to all the new 1080p sets.

In reality, the 1080p sets will give us the smoother image of ProScan but with the high "flicker rate" experienced when viewing 1080i displays, namely CRT's. And so, flicker induced eyestrain and headaches may continue to ensue.

From these articles, and other knowledge I've gained, it seems that 1080p designations from manufacturers are really just sets with reduced flicker, mainly through electronic trickery.

Could this be why its so hard to find a 1080p set that actually accepts a 1080p input???

Apparently, the only true 1080p content out there is 1080p30. Does such content even exist?

Furthermore, in close examination of the above three formats and a bit of thought... one could assume that 1080i CRT's are already showing us 1080p30 images. After all, this particular format is not beyond the capabilities of high end CRT's, or is it?

The ATSC standards do not even designate a 1080p monitor interface, we may never see an input designated with 1080p markings per se.

Those TV's with marked 1080i inputs... what are they actually being fed? Can HD CRT's handle the 60 fields per second?

Its alot of questions, and inquiring minds ought to know. Makes me feel like 1080p TV's are just hype.

Thoughts?

**Blue puts on his fire retardent suit**

LordGamer · 09-15-2005, 11:28 AM

Very good post.

1080p has been very confusing to me as of late, but the more I have looked into, the more it seems to be pointless at the present time.

I'll look into 1080p content in a few years, but right now, I'm not interested.

CatManDoo · 09-15-2005, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordGamer

Very good post.

1080p has been very confusing to me as of late, but the more I have looked into, the more it seems for it to be pointless at the present time.

I'll look into 1080p content in a few years, but right now, I'm not interested.

I would not be surprised if there are no 1080p TV broadcasts 5 years from now. I think it will only be important when used in conjunction with the new HD DVD's. I'll hold off buying a 50" plasma until CableCard 2.0 is available, but I would never hold off buying one just because they're 720/768p instead of 1080p. CC 2.0 is important to me whereas 1080p is not. I'd take it, but I don't need it.

LordGamer · 09-15-2005, 12:03 PM

I feel the same way, CatManDoo.

Personally, I don't believe you will see 1080p broadcasts within ten years...current HD broadcasts are still far from mainstream and still in many areas of the country, not even available.

Cable Card 2.0 is something that I am interested in too, do you know when they will be available by chance?

CatManDoo · 09-15-2005, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordGamer

I feel the same way, CatManDoo.

Personally, I don't believe you will see 1080p broadcasts within ten years...current HD broadcasts are still far from mainstream and still in many areas of the country, not even available.

Cable Card 2.0 is something that I am interested in too, do you know when they will be available by chance?

Trying desperately to find out: Other thread on CC 2.0

There's an excellent set I want really bad and I'd buy it tonight if it had CC 2.0 but I just won't pull the trigger til it does....

**rbinck** · 09-15-2005, 07:37 PM

Here are some thoughts.

I just returned from the CEDIA show where I checked out several 1080p sets. The difference is somewhat independant from the source. In the 65" 720p sets you could see the individual pixels at a distance of about 5 feet. On the same size 1080p sets no such thing. Think about it. 2 million pixels vs 1 million pixels. The front projectors were hard to see the individual pixels even on 120" screens.

As far as the source goes, the signal will be scaled to fit the increased resolution and they work very well.

As far as the frame rate goes the only issue concerning 60fps is live sporting events where the cameras match the 720p/60fps and then limited to ABC, FOX and ESPN. Any other programming will be 1080i, but since they are using CCD cameras for live events, they will shoot progressive and interlace for broadcast. What that means is the two fields will be from a single frame and so when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original image. If the material is from a film transfer (movies or primetime series) then again each frame will be interlaced and again when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original frame. Other than the possible jutter caused by the 2:3 conversion which is reversed by most displays, you will end up with 24fps on the 1080p set. So yes 1080p/30fps content does exist via the 1080i broadcasts.

Now as far as the flicker goes, the 1080p flat panels will not flicker due to receiving an interlaced signal. Flicker is more related to CRTs or due to horizontal lines occuring between pixels where the line jumps from one to another. 1080p sets give you more lines, thus less likehood to flicker than 720p sets. In any case the reasons that might cause flicker on a 1080p set still exist on 720p sets as well.

CatManDoo · 09-15-2005, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbinck

Here are some thoughts.

I just returned from the CEDIA show where I checked out several 1080p sets. The difference is somewhat independant from the source. In the 65" 720p sets you could see the individual pixels at a distance of about 5 feet. On the same size 1080p sets no such thing. Think about it. 2 million pixels vs 1 million pixels. The front projectors were hard to see the individual pixels even on 120" screens.

As far as the source goes, the signal will be scaled to fit the increased resolution and they work very well.

As far as the frame rate goes the only issue concerning 60fps is live sporting events where the cameras match the 720p/60fps and then limited to ABC, FOX and ESPN. Any other programming will be 1080i, but since they are using CCD cameras for live events, they will shoot progressive and interlace for broadcast. What that means is the two fields will be from a single frame and so when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original image. If the material is from a film transfer (movies or primetime series) then again each frame will be interlaced and again when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original frame. Other than the possible jutter caused by the 2:3 conversion which is reversed by most displays, you will end up with 24fps on the 1080p set. So yes 1080p/30fps content does exist via the 1080i broadcasts.

Now as far as the flicker goes, the 1080p flat panels will not flicker due to receiving an interlaced signal. Flicker is more related to CRTs or due to horizontal lines occuring between pixels where the line jumps from one to another. 1080p sets give you more lines, thus less likehood to flicker than 720p sets. In any case the reasons that might cause flicker on a 1080p set still exist on 720p sets as well.

Thanks rbinck. As usual, a great post. I appreciate the time it takes to relay these insider facts to us all. I sort of understand what you're saying, but I also wonder how many people will be sitting 5 feet from a 65" set. I don't question the ability to see the individual pixels, but what I guess I'm saying is "How often will this scenario really exist?". I know as a kid we used to sit like 2-3 feet in front of the TV (and always got told we'd go blind sitting that close) but that's because our set was about 13". I know sometimes a seating area requires people to be pretty close to the tv due to small room size, but if that's the case, would someone actually put a 65" set in that situation? Nevertheless, you make an excellent point that having over 2 million pixels on a 1080p set would have to be much better than under 1 million on a 720p set.

Just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.(IMHO) Thanks again!

**rbinck** · 09-15-2005, 08:57 PM

At the show you ended up watching displays at about 5 feet. Even backed off at normal viewing distances, the 1080p sets were much better than the 720p sets.

I wish I could have seen some SD material, like from D* or E* to check for artifacts, but the nearest was DVD sources, which looked very good.

borromini · 09-15-2005, 09:57 PM

Picking up on rbinck's comments, there's a very good post by RSawdey on another thread where he goes into detail about why many are missing the boat on 1080p displays when talking about the lack of 1080p source content. These displays will crossconvert 720p content and deinterlace 1080i signals with a resulting quality that exceeds what one sees on a 720p or 1080i display. Those who buy 1080p displays are in fact not wasting their money. Keep in mind that high-def DVD players will likely have the option to output in 1080p.

RSawdey · 09-18-2005, 08:14 PM

Almost... what I've been trying to communicate is that a 1080p/60 display shows a 1080i signal as well as a native 1080i does AND shows a 720p signal as well as a 720p native display does. With the exception of deinterlacing, you're not going to create any improvement or more detail than exists in your input signal. EXACTLY recreating the input signal is the Holy Grail for displays... crossconversion (1080i <-> 720p) results in a lowest common denominator type of compromise & lowered PQ... so either type of single format display will imperfectly show the other format.

09-15-2005, 11:28 AM	#2
LordGamer Lord of Gaming Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 1,788	Very good post. 1080p has been very confusing to me as of late, but the more I have looked into, the more it seems to be pointless at the present time. I'll look into 1080p content in a few years, but right now, I'm not interested. __________________ LordGamer Profile - George Carlin, R.I.P. 06.22.08 HD Qualifications... -- Westinghouse 47" 1080p LCD (LVM-47w1) -- Scientific Atlanta HD Receiver & DVR (8300HD), Comcast -- Sony Playstation 3 -- Microsoft Xbox 360 Last edited by LordGamer; 09-15-2005 at 11:58 AM.

09-15-2005, 12:03 PM	#4
LordGamer Lord of Gaming Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 1,788	I feel the same way, CatManDoo. Personally, I don't believe you will see 1080p broadcasts within ten years...current HD broadcasts are still far from mainstream and still in many areas of the country, not even available. Cable Card 2.0 is something that I am interested in too, do you know when they will be available by chance? __________________ LordGamer Profile - George Carlin, R.I.P. 06.22.08 HD Qualifications... -- Westinghouse 47" 1080p LCD (LVM-47w1) -- Scientific Atlanta HD Receiver & DVR (8300HD), Comcast -- Sony Playstation 3 -- Microsoft Xbox 360

09-15-2005, 07:37 PM	#6
rbinck Administrator Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Katy, Texas Posts: 12,337	Here are some thoughts. I just returned from the CEDIA show where I checked out several 1080p sets. The difference is somewhat independant from the source. In the 65" 720p sets you could see the individual pixels at a distance of about 5 feet. On the same size 1080p sets no such thing. Think about it. 2 million pixels vs 1 million pixels. The front projectors were hard to see the individual pixels even on 120" screens. As far as the source goes, the signal will be scaled to fit the increased resolution and they work very well. As far as the frame rate goes the only issue concerning 60fps is live sporting events where the cameras match the 720p/60fps and then limited to ABC, FOX and ESPN. Any other programming will be 1080i, but since they are using CCD cameras for live events, they will shoot progressive and interlace for broadcast. What that means is the two fields will be from a single frame and so when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original image. If the material is from a film transfer (movies or primetime series) then again each frame will be interlaced and again when deinterlaced by the 1080p set will reconstruct the original frame. Other than the possible jutter caused by the 2:3 conversion which is reversed by most displays, you will end up with 24fps on the 1080p set. So yes 1080p/30fps content does exist via the 1080i broadcasts. Now as far as the flicker goes, the 1080p flat panels will not flicker due to receiving an interlaced signal. Flicker is more related to CRTs or due to horizontal lines occuring between pixels where the line jumps from one to another. 1080p sets give you more lines, thus less likehood to flicker than 720p sets. In any case the reasons that might cause flicker on a 1080p set still exist on 720p sets as well. __________________ www.highdefinitionblog.com www.BlogOfHawaii.com Last edited by rbinck; 09-15-2005 at 07:40 PM.

09-15-2005, 08:57 PM	#8
rbinck Administrator Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Katy, Texas Posts: 12,337	At the show you ended up watching displays at about 5 feet. Even backed off at normal viewing distances, the 1080p sets were much better than the 720p sets. I wish I could have seen some SD material, like from D* or E* to check for artifacts, but the nearest was DVD sources, which looked very good. __________________ www.highdefinitionblog.com www.BlogOfHawaii.com

09-15-2005, 09:57 PM	#9
borromini HT Frontiersman Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Northern California Posts: 9,825	Picking up on rbinck's comments, there's a very good post by RSawdey on another thread where he goes into detail about why many are missing the boat on 1080p displays when talking about the lack of 1080p source content. These displays will crossconvert 720p content and deinterlace 1080i signals with a resulting quality that exceeds what one sees on a 720p or 1080i display. Those who buy 1080p displays are in fact not wasting their money. Keep in mind that high-def DVD players will likely have the option to output in 1080p. __________________ "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"

09-18-2005, 08:14 PM	#10
RSawdey Mr. Wizard Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ferndale, Michigan Age: 61 Posts: 5,981	Almost... what I've been trying to communicate is that a 1080p/60 display shows a 1080i signal as well as a native 1080i does AND shows a 720p signal as well as a 720p native display does. With the exception of deinterlacing, you're not going to create any improvement or more detail than exists in your input signal. EXACTLY recreating the input signal is the Holy Grail for displays... crossconversion (1080i <-> 720p) results in a lowest common denominator type of compromise & lowered PQ... so either type of single format display will imperfectly show the other format.

Similar Threads to 1080p: A discussion
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PC requirements for WMVHD 1080p	HDTV_NZ	Computers/HTPCs	36	05-12-2005 11:07 AM
Superbowl in 780p...	mistamista2000	Local HDTV Info and Reception	23	02-12-2005 10:50 PM
Olympics Feed Not Very Impressive	kennedrj	The High Definition Lounge	11	09-02-2004 07:59 PM