Full HD versus HD Ready?

wrmwit

Hi all,

I'm on the look out for a 32 inch tv. I'm aware that full HD is better than HD Ready but I've been told that it doesn't matter for a 32 inch tv. Is this true?

Willby

wrmwit wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm on the look out for a 32 inch tv. I'm aware that full HD is better than HD Ready but I've been told that it doesn't matter for a 32 inch tv. Is this true?

Yes what you say is true......the difference would only be noticeable on 40 inch+ tv's.

NIMAN

Don't pay extra for it, the difference will not be noticeable.

watty

Neither phrase is very meaningful unfortunately.

If you plan to use the screen also with a Notebook, PC, laptop, phone, tablet, raspberry pi or games console, or if you watch the TV from less than 1m away, then get a screen with at least 1920 x 1080 pixels (this should be what so called "full HD" means).

What ever number of pixels it MUST be able
1) Tuner compatible with Saorview, certified is the way to be sure.
2) Able to resample 576i25 720p50, 1080i25, 1080p50 at the least to the native pixels and have at least 1366 x 768 pixels for 32" (this should be what so called "HD Ready" means)

Note even 1920 x 1080 (so called Full HD) was a LOW resolution for 15" visible computer screens more than 10 years ago.

Make sure at least 2 x HDMI and a SCART input sockets.
,

homer911

Open to correction, but I thought Full HD was 1080p (progressive scan), anything less than that is HD Ready, so 1080i (interlaced) is only HD ready, yet the only 1080p source is usually from a blue ray player

Certainly on a 1080i 32" screen you wont notice any difference, but I would recommend getting at least a 100Hz screen - some of the smaller screens are only 50Hz, and the lag can be noticed, depending on what you are watching

watty

Full HD is meaningless. A set doing ONLY 1080p or 1080i30 & 1080p60 is useless here.

It's not a term with any proper meaning. Converting Interlace to Progressive ALWAYS reduces quality.

ALL screens with 1920 x 1080 pixels do 1080p. In fact very few do 1080i natively too, they convert 1080i25 50Hz to 1080p50. Which gives POORER quality than a 1080p screen that can do 1080i natively.

Also some "HD Ready" sets simply use one field, (540 lines of 1080i) and repeat it every 50p frame rescaled to 768 pixels high.

100Hz ALSO always degrades the quality and adds artefacts, it just reduces flicker. Best turned off if you can't see 50p flicker.

No LCD actually really reaches true sub 20ms speeds without artefacts, they overdrive to create apparent faster response.

The apparent lag on cheaper screens is actually poor de-interlacing, De-interlacing without comb artefacts will introduce "lag" (Blend) on moving scenes. How visible visible it is depends on how good the de-interlacer is. The lowest "lag" for 1080i or 576i broadcast is a screen able to to native interlace display. Almost none do. This is why sideways movement with sharp edges on many LCDs looks worse than a good CRT.

It gets worse.

You don't get a proper 1080 line picture on a Full HD TV from the built in tuner ever! Almost all will deinterlace and then resample the 1440 or 1920 x 1080 to about 2122 x 1188 and then crop to 1920 x 1080 p 50.
This blurs the image TWICE! I doubt you can buy ANY HD TV that doesn't do this. Usually only HDMI in there is a "Just Scan" option. Again though hardly any display 1080i, most de-interlace to 1080p