High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition News & Informative Articles Get the Latest High Definition News & Informative Articles Here! Please post newsworthy information here only! This forum is NOT for your first post. Thank you!

1080i vs. 1080p clearly explained - finally!

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-28-2006, 09:53 AM   #31  
No HD? We have a problem.
 
stchman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 52
Posts: 2,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hdrichtv
Actually, there is no such thing as a 1080p/60 broadcast, and there won't be for years if not decades to come.
I agree, too much bandwidth required. Sat will never do it. The ATSC spec does not have it. It will be HD-DVD or BluRay only.
stchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 12:49 PM   #32  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 176
Default

Also, if you look at the latest high def box specs,(Direct TV, Dish Network, Comcast), they max out at 1080i.
hdrichtv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 06:55 PM   #33  
jco
HD is NOW!
 
jco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: South Florida, USA
Posts: 149
Cool Deinterlacing isnt always the way to go...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hdrichtv
Actually, there is no such thing as a 1080p/60 broadcast, and there won't be for years if not decades to come.
I never claimed there was ( home video will though ) but many posts were implying that the 1080i/60 signal will always look better if deinterlaced into a "fake"
1080P/30 signal. Not true. Only if the original source material
has corrolated "progressive" type signals (fields) like from a 24 fps movie.
JCO
jco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 06:59 PM   #34  
jco
HD is NOW!
 
jco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: South Florida, USA
Posts: 149
Cool Why not SAT for 1080P/60?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
I agree, too much bandwidth required. Sat will never do it. The ATSC spec does not have it. It will be HD-DVD or BluRay only.
Why do you say SAT will never do it?? It only takes twice the bitrate/bandwidth of 1080i and SAT could offer this as something
better than cable/OTA since they are not bound by FCC rules against doing so like ATSC.
JCO
jco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 07:55 PM   #35  
Administrator
 
rbinck's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 16,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jco
Why do you say SAT will never do it?? It only takes twice the bitrate/bandwidth of 1080i and SAT could offer this as something
better than cable/OTA since they are not bound by FCC rules against doing so like ATSC.
JCO
I guess I have a problem understanding what would be shot in 1080p/60. Movies won't be and broadcast TV won't be, so what will be that satellite could use?

It seems like to me that there will not be much, if any, source material for 1080p/60. Movies can be transferred via 1080i/30 or 1080p/24. In fact today there is not much that is sourced in 1080i/30 except for sporting events.
rbinck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 08:16 PM   #36  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

There's also no reason there couldn't be broadcast at 1080p/24, which is less bandwidth than 1080i/30, or broadcast at 1080p/30--it's the same bandwidth as 1080i/30.

(I'm not saying there *will* be, just pointing out that "1080p" is not a bandwidth issue--in fact, progressive frames compress more efficiently than interlaced frames).
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2006, 04:43 PM   #37  
Administrator
 
rbinck's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 16,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY
There's also no reason there couldn't be broadcast at 1080p/24, which is less bandwidth than 1080i/30, or broadcast at 1080p/30--it's the same bandwidth as 1080i/30.

(I'm not saying there *will* be, just pointing out that "1080p" is not a bandwidth issue--in fact, progressive frames compress more efficiently than interlaced frames).
There is no reason except it would require switching from format to format and I don't see that ever happining. Heck, here in Houston they can't seem to switch between the HD and SD feeds correctly.
rbinck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 05:01 PM   #38  
What is HD?
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default A Case for 1080p/60 Input

I find it interesting that this thread has strong wording and a lot of acceptance for not needing 1080p. There are a few hints at why 1080p is worth while. I would like to make a more complete case for 1080p/60.

It is true that movies are “filmed” at 24 fps, that there are no current plans for more than 1080i on TV and that cable will not carry 1080p for a long time because of bandwidth. BUT: Most new “digital” shooting of movies is done at 60 fps, not 24 fps - Star Wars III being a good example. One of the formats for immerging digital movie theaters is 1080p/60. The Blu-Ray camp has already stated that they will master BDs directly from /60 fps digital masters where available, and I must assume that HD DVD will do likewise. It is just becoming possible to produce 1080p/60 on personal computers. A couple of “pro-consumer” digital video cameras can produce 1080p/60. From an output viewpoint, even with the best de-interlacing, a good 1080p HDTV will show less motion blur from a 720p/60 source than will 1080i (think of the HDTV football broadcasts now broadcast at 720p).

I suggest that if you only watch TV, cable and “filmed” movies, then 1080i will give you about as good as it gets. If you are interested in Blu-Ray or HD DVD from digital masters in 2007 or in custom-made content, then 1080p becomes interesting – assuming of course that your viewing distance is closer than 720 best viewing distance. This also implies that you must make a choice between buying a 1080i or p HDTV set now to get the best of what is currently available or waiting to buy until HDTVs are available with AACS 1.0-compliant copy protection keys that allow copying of copy-protected 1080p source to personal PC networks. And if you are interested in a better color gamut and lossless digital audio, you also have to wait for 1.3-compliant HDMI connect. I am not recommending that everyone wait. I just want people to understand that there is a case for 1080p and what the ramifications are of either waiting for AACS 1.0/1.1 and HDMI 1.3 compliance or not waiting. It is my belief that 1080p input, wider color gamut and lossless digital audio will become important long before you replace the next HDTV you buy.
rtjohns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 05:41 PM   #39  
Administrator
 
rbinck's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 16,971
Default

Everything I've read says the 1080p/60 is not in the Blu-ray storage options. Everything I've read also says movies will be stored 1080p/24. Where did you get the info that Star Wars III was shot in 1080p/60? I've never heard that before. Also where did you get the info that new "digital" movies are shot in 1080p/60? This could be very exciting.

All of the 1080p HDTVs that will only accept a 1080i input will also accept a 720p input, so the football will just be scaled from 720p/60 to 1080p/60.

Last edited by rbinck; 09-14-2006 at 05:43 PM..
rbinck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 06:20 PM   #40  
What is HD?
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default

I'll have to look up the sources. But to respond to some of your questions:
Most movies shot digitally are being shot at /60. Some of the original stuff was done at 1080/60. Newer cameras are at higher resolution. Yes, even digitally mastered movies for the normal market will be converted to and stored at /24. But it is my understanding that most of the new digital movie theaters will receive and project one of four formats at /60, one being 1080. So, there will be an increasing amount of 1080p source material.

For clarification on 720p, there were a couple of early responses in the thread saying that you did not need 1080p output. My sentence on 720p paralled an earlier response that pointed out the up-convert improvement on motion content. In my opinion, an HDTV with 1080p output is a better choice than one with 1080i output, whether or not you have 1080p input.
rtjohns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 07:11 PM   #41  
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rtjohns
...Most movies shot digitally are being shot at /60...
Well the few movies I've followed that were shot with Sony and Panasonic HD cameras were shot at 24fps including Robert Rodrigues' Spy Kids, Once Upon a Time in Mexico, Sin City and Singer's Superman Returns. I'm very curious, do you know of any specific movies shot in HD 60fps?
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 07:37 PM   #42  
What is HD?
 

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default

It seems that I have to eat my own words. One should do research before just quoting articles. Thanks to several of you qestioning my "facts," I have been using Google rather extensively the last hour. I have the two articles that I used originally that talk about 1080p/60 as I reported in my first post. It appears that they were flat wrong. Here are a couple of things that I have learned today.
(1) Star Wars 3 was shot with the Sony HDC-F950 digital camera, most of it at 1080/24. A few special effects were shot at higher fps and down converted.
(2) Digital Movie Theaters - the basic formats are not /60 as I had been led to believe. They are 2048x1080/24, 4096x2160/24 and 2048/1080/48.

I apologise for the mis-information presented earlier.

This now takes me back to why 1080p input. I still can not find verifiable information about whether blu-ray will support 1080p/60, the other claim in the articles. This would be the defining reason for 1080p currently, I guess. Does anyone have a full blu-ray spec for what will be supported at full implementation? And the question still remains about what, other than custom material, originally produced at 60 fps, will be available at 1080p.
rtjohns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 09:18 PM   #43  
Can't wait for the switch
 
SpHeRe31459's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California, USA
Posts: 213
Default

Why do you care about 1080p/60 content?

According to this http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/do...2955-13403.pdf
Blu-ray doesn't support 1080p/60 content. Just 24p and 60i. Pretty sure same goes for HD-DVD.

What matters far more are displays that work with 24fps (the film industry standard) material without the issues of 3:2 pulldown.

This means a multiple of 24, and if we want it to also handle the video standard of 30fps plus the 60fps of 720p they need to be multiples of 24, 30, and 60. This leads to 120hz.

Also you do realize that the current Blu-ray player doesn't actually support native 1080p output right? It outputs 1080i/60 into a deinterlacing chip to make the buzzword of 1080p a reality. This is also moot considering with Inverse Telecine 1080p/24 material can be put back together from a 1080i/60 transport stream.

Quote:
In my opinion, an HDTV with 1080p output is a better choice than one with 1080i output, whether or not you have 1080p input.
Is any one arguing against that? I can't see why. 1080p HDTVs accept the full range of standards and are the only sets able to accept the full 1080 line resolution of 1080i without some kind of compromise.

And yes I want to see 1080p/60 input on HDTVs, but really that is for HTPC use.

Last edited by SpHeRe31459; 09-14-2006 at 09:45 PM..
SpHeRe31459 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 09:48 PM   #44  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Even if 1080p/60 were to become a real HD format, I don't think you'll see too many movies shot at 1080p/60, as most directors prefer the look of 1080p/24--the original HD cameras had to be redesigned for a lower frame rate to satisfy them, to the surprise of the engineers.

The heightened reality or "presence" of the higher frame rate makes it look too "real". My experience is with many films it would destroy the suspension of disbelief--the feeling that the movie is something actually happening--and ends up making it feel like you are watching a live performance of a play in your home. Entertaining, but not the film experience.

As for BD and 1080p/60--don't get your hopes up.

This is from the published working spec. of the BDA currently on their website:

"4.3 Video streams

Video streams shall be MPEG-2 video format (ISO/IEC 13818-2) compliant, MPEG-4 AVC video format (ISO/IEC 14496-10) compliant or SMPTE VC-1 video format compliant.

The video formats shown in Figure 4-3 can be used for BD-ROM video streams.

CODECS:

MPEG-2: [email protected] and [email protected]
MPEG-4 AVC: MPEG-4 AVC: [email protected]/4.0 and [email protected]/4.0/3.2/3.1/3.0
SMPTE VC-1: [email protected] and [email protected]

Max. bitrate 40Mbps

VIDEO:

HD

1920x1080x59.94-i, 50-i (16:9)
1920x1080x24-p, 23.976-p (16:9)
1440x1080x59.94-i, 50-i (16:9) MPEG-4 AVC / SMPTE VC-1 only
1440x1080x24-p, 23.976-p (16:9) MPEG-4 AVC / SMPTE VC-1only
1280x720x59.94-p, 50-p (16:9)
1280x720x24-p, 23.976-p (16:9)

SD

720x480x59.94-i (4:3/16:9)
720x576x50-i (4:3/16:9)"

As you can see, 1080p is only 24Fps (interestingly 720p is supported at both 60Fps and 24Fps).

Also, Sony's BD player spec:

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTE...t-About_bluray

shows 1080p/24 as the highest progressive frame rate. I seem to recall an early press release on Sony's (or maybe it was Pioneer's?) player that it would support 1080p/60 output, but I can't find it anymore and I suspect it would simply be 1080p/24 (or possibly 1080p/30) content with each frame displayed multiple times to output 60 per second. It really isn't possible to "upconvert" temporal resolution at this point as this would require interpolating movements in real-time between captured frames, which is far beyond the computational abilties of current hardware and I don't think anyone is capturing at 1080p/60 to produce true 1080p/60 content.
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2006, 10:25 PM   #45  
Can't wait for the switch
 
SpHeRe31459's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California, USA
Posts: 213
Default

BobY I think you and I are saying pretty much the same thing. I linked to a BR spec document that lists the same table you copied and pasted. And your mention of "content with each frame displayed multiple times to output 60 per second" is what is called a 3:2 cadence. I mention it in my post.
SpHeRe31459 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:53 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands