To get Full HD or not! Hmm

mathias

That's the same quality as 720p.

In this country its not !

Where this idea comes from is America , where HD CRT televisions are commonly available and you watch 1080i as its transmitted , and what you see is an interlaced picture. In which case 720p and 1080i can look similar.

Edit : " look similar " is all they do in the above case , because a 1080 signal has more resolution , being 1920 x 1080 whereas 720p is 1280 x 720 .
So the 1080 signal always has more detail , if your set can show it.

Over here all you can get is flat screens , and flat screens do not show 1080i as interlaced , they cannot show an interlaced picture , all they can show is progressive.
What this means is that any 1080i signal is de-interlaced , and shown as 1080p , so with a full HD set and a good de-interlacer you will be looking at a picture that is indistinguishable from 1080p.

Providing your set is big enough , there will be a noticable difference between that and 720p.

Zonda999

mathias wrote: »

In this country its not !

Where this idea comes from is America , where HD CRT televisions are commonly available and you watch 1080i as its transmitted , and what you see is an interlaced picture. In which case 720p and 1080i can look similar.

Edit : " look similar " is all they do in the above case , because a 1080 signal has more resolution , being 1920 x 1080 whereas 720p is 1280 x 720 .
So the 1080 signal always has more detail , if your set can show it.

Over here all you can get is flat screens , and flat screens do not show 1080i as interlaced , they cannot show an interlaced picture , all they can show is progressive.
What this means is that any 1080i signal is de-interlaced , and shown as 1080p , so with a full HD set and a good de-interlacer you will be looking at a picture that is indistinguishable from 1080p.

Providing your set is big enough , there will be a noticable difference between that and 720p.

So does that mean if you get sky hd ouputting 1080i into a full hd tv, it will look as good as a full hd source??

mathias

It depends on the set , but in general , yes !

Niall1234

mathias wrote: »

It depends on the set , but in general , yes !

But considering its a interlaced signal, won't the Hertz really only be half of what the Progressive scan hertz would be ?

mathias

But considering its a interlaced signal, won't the Hertz really only be half of what the Progressive scan hertz would be ?

No because Interlaced is typically double progressive because of its nature , so when de-interlaced it comes out the same as progressive. ( most 1080i = 60 , most 1080p = 30 )

Some more info here , second link is the most straightfoward explanation ,
http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/

http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/0807061080iv1080p/

Now most HD content available over sky , like movies for instance , is originally 1080p@24fps , and interlaced ( converted to 1080i) purely to save on tranmission bandwidth , so if de-interlaced properly , will be indistinguishable from 1080p.

I will point out , that cheaper TV's can have de-interlacers that are not so good , but Im not going into the details of that here , just to say that once the signal is handled properly its indistinguishable from 1080p.

Zonda999

Definately.Most 1080p tvs though are from well-known brands.You do see the odd one from a no-body brand but you ought to get a good brand because whats the point of a 1080p tv if it does'nt have amazing picture quality

stevenmu

Niall1234 wrote: »

But considering its a interlaced signal, won't the Hertz really only be half of what the Progressive scan hertz would be ?

That used to be an issue with CRT TVs, they need a high refresh rate because after they draw the picture on screen it dissapears until the next refresh so a low rate leads to visible flickering. My old CRT could deinterlace the picture to display a progressive scan image but the flicker was unbearable (deinterlacing a PAL 50hz signal gave a 25hz reresh rate). With flat screens though (afaik) they keep the image onscreen untill the next refresh meaning you won't see any flicker at a low rate. Watching 1080p video a 24fps is super smooth.

mathias

With flat screens though (afaik) they keep the image onscreen untill the next refresh meaning you won't see any flicker at a low rate. Watching 1080p video a 24fps is super smooth.

Absolutely correct , which is why if you see a flatscreen advertised as " 100hz " flicker free , you know its BS , because that issue only affects CRT's , it has nothing to do with flatscreens ,

Sony are the biggest offenders at the moment when it comes to that particular con !

rogue.goofball

Hi there,
I've read through this thread and reckon there are a couple of knowledgable people knocking around... so can you advise;
What is the difference with the following LCD's:

LE37A556
LE37A557
LE37A558
LE37A656
LE37M86BD
LE37M87BD

All are 1080p. The M86 and M87 are the same internally. I think these two are the oldest of the bunch, because they are cheaper (€930) and have a lower contrast ratio (8000 vs 15000 for all the rest).
I believe this is important...is this to do with non-hd signals?

The first 3 are series 5, LE37A656 is series 6, which should mean it is newer - right? It is available for €1125. So is it worth the extra.
I cant see any proces for the series 5 sets in Ireland, in the UK they range from £899 to £725stg - but oddly the 556 is the dearest and the 558 is the cheapest. Can someone explain, as the technical specifications for all are almost identical.
Cheers.