1080P vs. 720P

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:29:44 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| No Way wrote:
|
| So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
| with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?
|
| What would they display?

What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

On 30 Jun 2007 15:49:58 GMT, wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:14:51 GMT No Way wrote:

| So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
| with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?

So, are there any plans by content producers to make content available
to consumers at these higher definitions than 1080p?

What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?

wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:29:44 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| No Way wrote:
|
| So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
| with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?
|
| What would they display?

What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?


720p and 1080i.

Matthew

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:15:58 GMT No Way wrote:
| On 30 Jun 2007 15:49:58 GMT, wrote:
|
|On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:14:51 GMT No Way wrote:
|
|| So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
|| with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?
|
|So, are there any plans by content producers to make content available
|to consumers at these higher definitions than 1080p?
|
| What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?

Exactly. That's why these things have to be done at the same time.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:05:24 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| wrote:
| On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:29:44 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| | No Way wrote:
| |
| | So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
| | with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?
| |
| | What would they display?
|
| What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?
|
|
| 720p and 1080i.

Then it would make sense that the first 1080p TVs would display 1080p.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:05:24 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| wrote:
| On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:29:44 -0400 Matthew L. Martin wrote:
| | No Way wrote:
| |
| | So, are there any plans by the manufacturers to start producing TVs
| | with some of these higher definitions than 1080p?
| |
| | What would they display?
|
| What did the first 720p and 1080i units display?
|
|
| 720p and 1080i.

Then it would make sense that the first 1080p TVs would display 1080p.


Yes, without any 1080p sources. That didn't slow the marketing folks
down any.

Matthew (Don't expect and 2k or 4K consumer releases in your lifetime)

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

On Jun 29, 7:36 pm, "Matthew L. Martin" wrote:
Leonard Caillouet wrote:
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote in message
...
Nah. Fish in a barrel.

I thought you were going to explain how he gets 480 to 1080 with no
resampling, just an abacus...guess neither of us have the intellect to
function on the same plane with him.

You have that right. I think that it would take more alcohol than would
be prudent.

Matthew

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

I think he's got enough to share, consider he feels most television
shows shot in HD are using 720p camera, which is complete ********.

"ninphan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I think he's got enough to share, consider he feels most television
shows shot in HD are using 720p camera, which is complete ********.

Just to be clear, my point is that much current HD production is using 720p
and that in the future there will be much more. The reason is that the
cameras are cheaper and the problems of interlace are becoming more apparent
to engineers and production people who are having to deal with it. I was
not talking about most television. I was talking about most HD production,
i.e. things that are produced from HD cameras.

Since you seem to not be able to deal with being corrected nor being poked
fun at, i'll leave you alone. Just understand that when you make posts here
that can either be easily construed to mean something that would be
confusing to novice readers or when you say something that is incorrect, you
will be corrected. I'll try to be sure not to mix it with sarcasm in the
future, since you seem unwilling or unable to handle it gracefully.

Leonard

Bob Miller wrote:
L Alpert wrote:
Bob Miller wrote:
Deke wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
.net...
Mikepier wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:22 pm, Mr_Fixit wrote:
For any display smaller than 65~70" go with 720P. In the smaller
displays you will not (can not) see the difference. This topic
was covered quite well recently in one of the major AV rags.
Their opinion was that you need 100" projection system to really
be able to tell the difference.
I believe anything higher than 50 inches, a 1080 TV would be
worth it. Most of the HDTV's above 50" are 1080 anyway.
Anything 42" or smaller , you should get away with 720 and still
have great picture.

If the original poster has an Xbox 360, you should definately
ante up and get a 1080P TV.

I think the only TV's above 50" that are 1080 are those that are
1080i rear projection or 1080P. The majority are 720P however.

I've heard that their may be a 1080i plasma or LCD but cannot find
one. Bob Miller
Bob Miller...resident idiot.....
a 15 second google search brought up 5 hits for 1080I plasma.


Maybe you could share one of those hits with me. They are a rare and
strange beast. Do you have a model number?

http://us.lge.com/fullhd/


All I see here is a 1080P plasma. Want to try again? Lots of 1080P
plasmas, we are talking about a native 1080i plasma.

Bob Miller

Why bother with 1080i if 1080p is available?

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 15:27:49 -0400, "L Alpert"
wrote:

Bob Miller wrote:
L Alpert wrote:
Bob Miller wrote:
Deke wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
.net...
Mikepier wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:22 pm, Mr_Fixit wrote:
....
Maybe you could share one of those hits with me. They are a rare and
strange beast. Do you have a model number?

http://us.lge.com/fullhd/


All I see here is a 1080P plasma. Want to try again? Lots of 1080P
plasmas, we are talking about a native 1080i plasma.

Bob Miller

Why bother with 1080i if 1080p is available?

I think you missed the point of this part of the discussion.
It is because the available broadcast signals are 1080i and not 1080p.
For truly interlaced material (e.g sports) it poses a deinterlacing
problem to display it on a progressive display.
It would be another matter with a truly native interlaced display with
1080i resolution (or somewhat fewer lines if cropping= overscan is
applied.)
/Jan