I think I am going with this one:

On 01/09/2012 02:25, Les Cargill wrote:



in general ( I'd be open to a counterexample ), anything
that will play 720p will also play 1080i.



it might play it but you won't see it.
a 720p set will turn the 1080i to 720p for display.
to see 1080i at it's full resolution you need a 1080p set - that's not
to say that it will look as good as 1080p but better than on the other.


--
Gareth.
That fly.... Is your magic wand.

On Friday, August 31, 2012 12:38:02 PM UTC-7, Metspitzer wrote:
I think I am going with this one:

http://www.sears.com/panasonic-42inc...2&blockType=G2



Anyone think this is a bad choice?

1024x768? Really? The price is good but that severely limited resolution is troubling.

G²

"Metspitzer" wrote in message
...

I think I am going with this one:
http://www.sears.com/panasonic-42inc...2&blockType=G2

Anyone think this is a bad choice?

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't plasma still have very high energy use
(especially 1080p). LED LCD has the lowest, with LCD in the middle. Be
sure to turn off completely when not in use.


--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 15:37:28 -0400, Metspitzer wrote:

I think I am going with this one:
http://www.sears.com/panasonic-42inc...2&blockType=G2

Anyone think this is a bad choice?

FUTUREPROOF!!

Get a 1080p. Even if you don't have any 1080p source material right now,
there is a good chance that you will during the life of the set.

On 8/31/2012 7:42 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 21:43:51 -0500, Les Cargill
wrote:

Metspitzer wrote:
On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 00:54:08 +0000 (UTC),
(Alan) wrote:

In article Metspitzer writes:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 20:23:22 GMT, hing wrote:

I think I am going with this one:
http://www.sears.com/panasonic-42inc...2&blockType=G2

Anyone think this is a bad choice?

Depends on what content you will be wiewing. With a 42", I would want 1080P if I were going to watch blu-ray
or any other 1080P content on it.

The only 1080P content I would get would be from Usenet. Since my ISP
has bandwidth caps, that doesn't happen too often.'


Do you never watch anything that is 1080i ?

The comment was about the set being only 720p.


Alan
I do have a couple of video files that are 1080i. That prompts
another question.

I am told that 720p is a better quality picture than 1080i. Should a
1080i recording display as good as 720P if you choose 720P?



The recording will dictate the format. If the TV can't handle it,
it'll dump the extra data.

And I would say that 720p and 1080i are probably close to the same
in terms of absolute bandwidth, since 1080i is supported on most 720p
machines.

Yeah, but if 720P is better quality, would there be extra data or not
as much?

I'd be more concerned with the resolution of your chosen TV. AFAIAC,
720 should be 1280 wide and 1080 should be 1920 wide. If anything, the
set you choose s/b one of those resolutions or larger i.e. 1360x768 or
1440x900 are two quite frequently used.
As to PQ, a 720x1280 field contains about 12% fewer pixels than a
1920x540 field. Since we're probably talking about viewing a broadcast
or cablecast picture, there's no requirement of the broadcaster to
transmit at the full bandwidth of the channel used, so in that
consideration either may have more pixel data than the other. It's the
p that gives 720 the edge for sports events, chase scenes, or rapid
pans, because the entire picture changes 60 times per second, whereas
the 1080i field only contains half the screen height's image. In the
latter case, motion that transverses pixels between fields (the distance
between two pixels covered in less than 1/30 second) appears blurred or
streaked to our eyes. Higher refresh rate TV sets, of 120 or 240 Hz,
employ algorithms to offset this and other problems when altering frame
rates of source material to suit TV standards.

All things being equal, which they never are, a 1080x1920 frame should
look better on a 1280x720 screen than a 1280x720 frame would on a
1080x1920 screen, since the smaller frame has to be upscaled to the
larger screen. I doubt than any of us would know just by looking though.

Here are some measurements in pixels per diagonal inch for a 42" set:
1024x768 = 30.5, 1280x720 = 35, 1920x1080 = 52

the dog from that film you saw wrote:
On 01/09/2012 02:25, Les Cargill wrote:



in general ( I'd be open to a counterexample ), anything
that will play 720p will also play 1080i.



it might play it but you won't see it.
a 720p set will turn the 1080i to 720p for display.
to see 1080i at it's full resolution you need a 1080p set - that's not
to say that it will look as good as 1080p but better than on the other.



Makers don't publish a DPI spec much for TVs so it's hard to say how
many actual picture elements there are. I get the feeling that the
difference between 720p and 1080p is the guts of the TV, not the screen
per se.


--
Les Cargill

In article Les Cargill writes:
the dog from that film you saw wrote:
On 01/09/2012 02:25, Les Cargill wrote:



in general ( I'd be open to a counterexample ), anything
that will play 720p will also play 1080i.



it might play it but you won't see it.
a 720p set will turn the 1080i to 720p for display.
to see 1080i at it's full resolution you need a 1080p set - that's not
to say that it will look as good as 1080p but better than on the other.



Makers don't publish a DPI spec much for TVs so it's hard to say how
many actual picture elements there are. I get the feeling that the
difference between 720p and 1080p is the guts of the TV, not the screen
per se.

Well, generally, the 1080p (or i) sets will have 1080 rows of pixels
on the screen, with each row having 1920 pixels. The 720p sets will
have 720 rows of pixels with 1280 pixels per line. In this sense, the
difference is in the physical layout of the display panel.

In any of the cases, the electronics will convert the signal to match
the physical panel. When converting to a lower number of scan lines,
some information will be lost, so a 1080 line set is going to give a better
result.

Much as I love Panasonic, I have never been particularly satisfied with
their scan conversion. The conversion from 480i to their 768 line plasma
displays was particularly horrible. In general, the conversions to 1080
look better on all maker's equipment.

As for size of LCD vs Plasma, mentioned in another message of this
thread, some very large LCD sets are out now, and they look pretty
good.

Alan

Alan wrote:
In article Les Cargill writes:
the dog from that film you saw wrote:
On 01/09/2012 02:25, Les Cargill wrote:



in general ( I'd be open to a counterexample ), anything
that will play 720p will also play 1080i.



it might play it but you won't see it.
a 720p set will turn the 1080i to 720p for display.
to see 1080i at it's full resolution you need a 1080p set - that's not
to say that it will look as good as 1080p but better than on the other.



Makers don't publish a DPI spec much for TVs so it's hard to say how
many actual picture elements there are. I get the feeling that the
difference between 720p and 1080p is the guts of the TV, not the screen
per se.

Well, generally, the 1080p (or i) sets will have 1080 rows of pixels
on the screen, with each row having 1920 pixels. The 720p sets will
have 720 rows of pixels with 1280 pixels per line. In this sense, the
difference is in the physical layout of the display panel.


I kinda figured that, but wasn't prepared to assert it. Still, there
are 32" 1080p sets, so...

In any of the cases, the electronics will convert the signal to match
the physical panel. When converting to a lower number of scan lines,
some information will be lost, so a 1080 line set is going to give a better
result.


Right.

Much as I love Panasonic, I have never been particularly satisfied with
their scan conversion. The conversion from 480i to their 768 line plasma
displays was particularly horrible. In general, the conversions to 1080
look better on all maker's equipment.

As for size of LCD vs Plasma, mentioned in another message of this
thread, some very large LCD sets are out now, and they look pretty
good.


This is true. I have no idea what I'd do with an 80 inch TV. Make
a heck of a computer monitor, though...

Alan


--
Les Cargill

On 02/09/2012 00:45, Les Cargill wrote:


Makers don't publish a DPI spec much for TVs so it's hard to say how
many actual picture elements there are. I get the feeling that the
difference between 720p and 1080p is the guts of the TV, not the screen
per se.


it's simple - one has 720 pixels, the other 1080.
it's not like with CRTs where some have a clearer picture than others -
the lcd and plasma sets contain specific numbers of pixels.


--
Gareth.
That fly.... Is your magic wand.

the dog from that film you saw wrote:
On 02/09/2012 00:45, Les Cargill wrote:


Makers don't publish a DPI spec much for TVs so it's hard to say how
many actual picture elements there are. I get the feeling that the
difference between 720p and 1080p is the guts of the TV, not the screen
per se.


it's simple - one has 720 pixels, the other 1080.
it's not like with CRTs where some have a clearer picture than others -
the lcd and plasma sets contain specific numbers of pixels.




So you *could* have a 720p TV that has less than 720 pixels up and
down and 1280 pixels across. I don't think the published spec is a
contract to have that many little boxes on the screen.

I think 720p, 1080i and 1080p are classifications, not physically
descriptive. I think they are about the bandwidth over media, not
necessarily the number of little boxes on the screen.

If you know of a good source that proves me wrong, I'd be grateful.
I haven't found anything by Googling.

I do have one of these:

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...961&CatId=3649

It's 1366 X 768, so 720X1280 program material is "dithered up" to
that resolution even if the 1366x768 describes the physical layout
of the screen. There are not 186/2 - 93 dark pixels on the edges -
I looked.

I could figure out the actual expected value of the dot pitch and
then take a measuring tape to the thing, but that would be ...
weird

--
Les Cargill