New TV (DLP)!!

[London Geezer]

Anyways, that last paragraph was just academic. In actuality, an ED display will not show any benefit with 720p over 480p when equivalent source material is used.

Understood how the xbox being aloud to render at higher resolution is a best case senerio and with next gen consoles always rendering HD resolutions and downsampling internally when needed it won't show the same difference. However, your last point which I quoted got me thinking; 480p is 720x480, where as my ED display is 852x480. So, wouldn't I be gaining a little over 18% resolution by letting the display downsample thw image to the native resolution of the glass instead of downsampling a HD source to 480p externally? Also downsampleing at the source only to do upsampling at display is asking for trouble as well I would think, eh?

I'm not too sure about the resolution of 480p, but if it really is 720x480 (and not 852x480), again, it really depends on the set you have. Some Plasmas will just output a straight 720x480 image, maybe your set uses its additional resolution to try and make things look slightly better.

Some sets are just better than others.

I think you should just try all the different cases out (downsampling at the xbox end or at the display end) and see what looks the best in your eyes, we can't really tell you what the best option is, cause ultimately, it's your eyes, and a display we don't know.

 

[Ty]

Some Plasmas will just output a straight 720x480 image, maybe your set uses its additional resolution to try and make things look slightly better.

All of the ED Plasma sets I know are 852 Native Resolution.

 

[London Geezer]

Some Plasmas will just output a straight 720x480 image, maybe your set uses its additional resolution to try and make things look slightly better.

All of the ED Plasma sets I know are 852 Native Resolution.

Oh right, yeah i thought i'd seen that strange number around.

Well, as i said, if ED resolution is 720x480, and if the set is a good one, it might just use the additional 132 horizontal pixels in each line to add detail.
Or maybe some of those lines are just "invisible" lines, used for other kind of information... I don't know leave me alone!!!

 

[Mintmaster]

Anyways, that last paragraph was just academic. In actuality, an ED display will not show any benefit with 720p over 480p when equivalent source material is used.

However, your last point which I quoted got me thinking; 480p is 720x480, where as my ED display is 852x480.

You sure about that? Going from 1080 to 720 to 480, you multiply by 2/3 each time. Going from 1920 to 1280 (horizontal resolutions of 1080i and 720p respectively), you also multiply by 2/3. Why would 480p be any different? 1280 * 2/3 = 853.

EDIT: hmm, after googling, it turns out that both 480p and 480i standards have only 704 horizontal pixels. That's pretty messed up (a 22:15 ratio? WTF?). Looks like you're right.

Still, the 21% more pixels in an ED is only a fraction of the 172% more pixels you should get going from 480p to 720p. I don't think it would be noticeable except in rare circumstances. I definately would not pay for an HDTV reciever or content with an EDTV.

 

[kyleb]

Actually, the aspect ratio is either going to be 4:3 or 16:9, the "pixels" simply arn't square. As for your last comment, are you speaking theorticly or have you have you seen an ED display next to an HD display and compared HD and SD content between the two?

 

[Mintmaster]

Yup, I know pixels don't have to be square, but they are for the other resolutions, and many HD displays (LCD RP, DLP, plasma) have square pixels for this reason. 1080i and 720p have square pixels, so I think it's odd that 480p doesn't. I mentioned 22:15 because usually non-square pixels at least have some reason behind being so.

I am speaking theoretically, yes. Usually they don't hook up HD content to ED displays in stores, likely because the improvement is minimal. Even with computers, increasing resolution by one step is 60% more pixels, and the improvement, while noticeable, isn't that big.

 

[kyleb]

Humm, all the ED displays I have seen in showrooms were running HD content. So not speaking theoreticly but from experiance; I think you are greatly overestimating the difference. Also, check out Ty's comments here for an opinion from someone else who has had the opportunity to see the difference in person.

 

[RussSchultz]

IN the US, when speaking of "SD" content, people generally mean analog or NTSC.

HD content over a 480P capable device will spank NTSC content over a 480P device every time.

A 480P device can display higher bandwidth of color resolution than NTSC (or even PAL) can provide.

And, to tie it to a graphics card analogy: consider 800x600 or 800x600 w/4x AA. Which would you rather play?

 

[Ty]

1080i and 720p have square pixels, so I think it's odd that 480p doesn't.

Whoa, I'm getting confused.

I thought it's not the signal resolution (1080i or 720P) that determines the shape of the pixel as much as it's the display.

In other words, some displays have rectangular pixels which has nothing to do with the signal being fed into it.

EDTV PDPs ALL have a pixel structure made up of squares - afaik anyhow.

I am speaking theoretically, yes. Usually they don't hook up HD content to ED displays in stores, likely because the improvement is minimal.

Which stores are you talking about?

Both Goodguys & Tweeter (as I'm writing this I'm not sure if you're in the USA) run HD programming to just about every set.

Likewise I'm sure Magnolia HiFi (merged/bought out by BestBuy) probably runs HD signals as well.

 

[Mintmaster]

Humm, all the ED displays I have seen in showrooms were running HD content.

I guess I was wrong. Most of the ED displays in stores that I've seen show DVD content, but I haven't really paid too much attention to ED when checking out the displays. Anyway, the setup needed to test the 21% pixel advantage is not particularly easy, as explained below.

So not speaking theoreticly but from experiance; I think you are greatly overestimating the difference.

A little miscommunication going on here. Overestimating what difference?

I've been trying to say that it will be very hard to distinguish between a 720p signal and a 480p signal on an ED display. I believe this is the "last comment" you were originally referring to.

To test this in a store, you'd need two HD recievers feeding identical ED displays side by side, with one reciever set to output 480p and the other to 720p. Some high end audio recievers with video scaling might also work.

Also, check out Ty's comments here for an opinion from someone else who has had the opportunity to see the difference in person.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with your reasoning that there's more to PQ than just resolution. I was just pointing out that the improvement you saw with 720p over 480p on your ED display with XBOX had nothing to do with your display.

 

[Mintmaster]

1080i and 720p have square pixels, so I think it's odd that 480p doesn't.

Whoa, I'm getting confused.

I thought it's not the signal resolution (1080i or 720P) that determines the shape of the pixel as much as it's the display.

No, I wouldn't say that's right.

Consider the "perfect display", with super high resolution (say 10,000 x 10,000). How would it display a 1080i signal? The ideal image has square pixels for 1080i and 720p. For 480p, however, that isn't the case.

In other words, some displays have rectangular pixels which has nothing to do with the signal being fed into it.

True. But I'm talking about the signal. Many AVI files, for example, have non-square pixels. They are scaled to fit the resolution your monitor is running at, so you see the image you're supposed to.

 

[kyleb]

A little miscommunication going on here. Overestimating what difference?
.

The difference between an ED and HD plasma in displaying HD content. I get the impression that you think the difference is huge, but that doesn't hold up with my experience and reports from others who have seen the two side by side.

Also, I suppose I should point out that I'm not just talking about my Xbox when discussing the difference between 480p and 720p on my display. I have a PC hooked up as well, and there is some alising on vertical lines when running WMV-HD video with a 480p output, where as it goes away when running 720p. Again, the difference is modist, but all the same I have to dissagre with your suggestion that one would be better off sending 480p to an ED display rather than 720p.

 

[RussSchultz]

Depends on your scaler. It could be better/worse to send 480p to your display.

 

[kyleb]

But you have to use the scaler on the display either way since 480p is less than the horsonal resolution of the display, eh?

 

[Ty]

I've been trying to say that it will be very hard to distinguish between a 720p signal and a 480p signal on an ED display. I believe this is the "last comment" you were originally referring to.

To test this in a store, you'd need two HD recievers feeding identical ED displays side by side, with one reciever set to output 480p and the other to 720p. Some high end audio recievers with video scaling might also work.

You know I would have agreed with you but for some reason when I step into a showroom, I clearly see a difference. In fact I would have said that the 480P signal would be better since there would be less scaling. But it's not, the 720P picture clearly looks better.

One can somewhat simulate this by watching a HD version of a movie from cable and then watching the DVD version. It's not apples to apples as you are suggesting but it's probably easier for the average home owner to pull off.

No, I wouldn't say that's right.

http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/plasma4.html

Hitachi's CMP4121HDU is a 42" high-resolution monitor with 1024x1024 non-square pixels and Alternate Lines of Scanning (ALiS) imaging, and tips the scales at 77 pounds.

There are quite a few manufacturers that use ALiS panels for some of their models.

Consider the "perfect display", with super high resolution (say 10,000 x 10,000). How would it display a 1080i signal?

The panel would scale it more in one direction than the other.

The ideal image has square pixels for 1080i and 720p. For 480p, however, that isn't the case.

Ok. It's also not the case depending on the formatting of the signal, 2.35:1, etc. So you're talking about the pixel structure of the signal and I'm referring to the pixel structure of the display?

True. But I'm talking about the signal. Many AVI files, for example, have non-square pixels. They are scaled to fit the resolution your monitor is running at, so you see the image you're supposed to.

Ok, so now I got lost as to the point of this. Doh.

 

[Crisidelm]

Just to interfere in here... Yesterday I had the chance to watch the Champion's League final in HD (1080i) thanks to the German channel Sat.1 which freely broadcast it (sweet) via sat (Astra 19.2°E). Is somebody interested in the final penalties recording? It's a hefty 800+Mb file.

 

[Mendel]

vertically you pretty much can't be but a very few degrees from the screen height.

In my personal experience, I can either sit on my sofa or sit on the floor next to sofa and play games without noticing any difference. But if I do in fact stand up, there is a noticeable contrast difference.

Therefore, I have moved my dance mat next to my ye olde 28" CRT television

 

[London Geezer]

vertically you pretty much can't be but a very few degrees from the screen height.

In my personal experience, I can either sit on my sofa or sit on the floor next to sofa and play games without noticing any difference. But if I do in fact stand up, there is a noticeable contrast difference.

Therefore, I have moved my dance mat next to my ye olde 28" CRT television

Err... You have a dance mat?

Anyway, let's put it this way, how bad is it compared to old-style rear projection TVs viewing angles then?

I still haven't seen a DLP while it's on so i haven't been able to test it.

 

[Mintmaster]

Anyway, let's put it this way, how bad is it compared to old-style rear projection TVs viewing angles then?

As I've said before, it's waaay better than CRT rear projectors. I think the problem is that the CRT's can't generate nearly as much light output as DLP, so the screen has to let more light through to the viewer (even then it's not as bright). This means they can't diffuse the light as much to different directions.

Anyway, go check it out when you have the chance.

 

[Mintmaster]

A 480P device can display higher bandwidth of color resolution than NTSC (or even PAL) can provide.

And, to tie it to a graphics card analogy: consider 800x600 or 800x600 w/4x AA. Which would you rather play?

I forgot about colour reproduction. Still, for me I don't think I'd be willing to pony up the extra cash (both up front and monthly) that HD demands just for this.

Don't see the graphics card analogy. How is NTSC any more aliased? A better analogy may be Voodoo2 "22"-bit colour vs. real 32-bit colour, though I'm just guessing. I wouldn't say the 480p image from a DVD player "spanks" the S-Video output, but that opinion I guess. I also find the benefits of upscaling DVD players rather limited except for clearer menu text, but that's another topic.