I won't defend someone who doesn't know what 1080p is if they are employed to sell HD hardware but the mentioned retailer is not in the same league as a dedicated AV dealer who would probably not look to confuse the average customer with 1080p since it has little relevance at this time.
In reality 1080p panels (Display AND input) are very rare even in the US and Japan as is 1080p content so any UK customer would need to know that they are not a factor in the UK market and be made to understand that 1080p source material is still a long way off and won't be cheap.
They're employeed to serve customers and do what they're told. Blame Sony for not training them enough but it's a bit much to blame them personally.
You know I actually thought I worded it in a way as not to put too much blame on the said individuals and make allowances for who they worked for.
I said that the SONY centre were not to be confused with a dedicated AV dealer so the level of knowledge of the staff won't be as great however I do expect someone who sells HD/AV kit for a respectable retailer such as the SONY center to have heard of 1080p and certainly know more than someone who works for a box shifting retailer.
Sanderton thank you. 1080p is the next big thing.
It will be the next standard.
So watch out all you non-tech heads.
720P is good; but then again you thought your first sexual experience was good.
Take it from me it gets better :rolleyes:
So keep your £3000 in ya pocket and wait for the definitive resolution people.
Well I don't know about that. I'd rather have 720p/1080i today than jam tomorrow, especially as there is no prospect of 1080p broadcasts for many many years, and for 24fps film content (which what you'll get on disc) there should be no difference whatsoever between 1080i and 1080p with a good deinterlacer (weave rather than bob).
By the time you have read this post things would have changed beyond all recognition Sanderton :sleep:
This hasnt happened yet! That hasnt happened yet!
TVs cost shit loads now days, even with a 1080p set you will be left behind by a Sony 1080p, 120 frames per second set.
However get the best thats out there right now, and thats 1080p.
Say it one more time. . . . OH YEAH BABY. . . .1080p.
In March/April I am due to come into a few grand. I will be using it all to buy a new TV. I want my new TV to serve me at least as long as my current 36" CRT has done (8-10 years). This kind of money is very hard for me to come by and unlikely to happen again for years.
In a few years time you will be able to pop into a shop and buy 1080p films on HD-DVD or BluRay. If my then 3-4 year old LCD TV could only accept 720p I would feel like I was missing out on something.
To the average joe in the street this might not be an issue - but to me it is. To all the people saying that there will be no 1080p broadcasts - we all know this - just the same as the fact that no UK broadcaster has/will be broadcasting DTS sound. It's not all about broadcast - I don't want to watch Celebrity X Brother Stars Cadets in 1080p.
When currently I play a DVD with DD5.1 & a DTS track I always play the DTS track - exactly the same as if when I get a BluRay DVD with 1080p encoding - I'll want to show the film in full 1080p.
When I bought my DTS decoder there was only a couple of films with a DTS soundtrack - now there are hundreds. Its not always about what is available now - its also about planning what you will want in the future.
For me in the future there will be two standards that I expect to have to choose between when deciding to watch a film on TV or to buy it-
Broadcast = 720p DD5.1
Retail = 1080p DTS ES 6.1/7.1
Both will be great - but the retail one of course needs to justify the extra cost by being just that bit better. The difference won't matter to many people - but to some it will.
So just because someone wants 1080p - it doesn't mean that they are wrong - and it doesn't mean that 720p is substandard - its just that each person buys what they want or can justify to themselves. No one should let other people dictate what they are allowed to buy.
So that being said - I want a 1080p LCD TV in approx 40"- 42" in the first half of 2006. The only one that I can see on the Horizon for the UK at the moment is the JVC LT40FH96 - this is already on sale in the US - anyone got a link to a review of it?
Solidstate - if it turns out that you are correct that broadcast will be 720p and retail will be 1080p then it doesn't necessarilly follow that everyone should buy a display with 1080 physical lines.
For me 90% of what I watch is broadcast. So I would chose a display with as close to 720 lines as possible. I would rather have 10% of my viewing downscaled from 1080 to 720 than 90% upscaled from 720 to 1080. Of course if most of what you watch is retail then you would be better off choosing a display with 1080 physical lines.
That statement assumes that you can wait until some date in the future when TVs that accept 1080P over HDMI become more widely available. If you can't wait, then it might be worth buying a stop-gap TV, one that's not too expensive and can handle 720P. That's the decision I took, to buy a DLP RPTV that can handle 1280x720, costs £1300, knowing that I will probably replace it within 3-5 years. I'm confident that the £1300 I've spent now is probably less than the additional cost I would have to pay next year to get 1080P TV.
There is no "right" answer, it all depends how early an adopter you are, and how long you can wait for the perfect HDTV, rather than enjoying a less-than-perfect HDTV now.
Broadcast = 720p DD5.1
Retail = 1080p DTS ES 6.1/7.1
Broadcast will be a mix of 720p and 1080i.
Retail doesn't exist yet so who knows. My guess is that they produce will HD discs which will be compatible with the largest number of HD TVs (anything else would be bizarre commercially) so will be 720p/1080i compatible.
If the thought of the lost pixels appalls you, then getting a 1080 native display could be worth the extra cost as there will be plenty of 1080i content. However I suspect that paying extra now for one which accepts 1080p (as opposed to 1080i) could be money wasted.
I do know that broadcast will be mixing 1080i & 720p - its just that the majority of it will be in 720p (Sky's own channels) and I can imagine that it will end up standardising in the 720p format with the odd bit of 1080i for nature programs. I would also imagine that any BluRay or HD-DVD player could scale a 1080p disc to 720p or even down to SD if required. Its just that if I bought a disc that did 1080p (Its likely that only a select few discs will be 1080p) and my TV would only show it at 720p then I would feel like I was paying for something I couldn't fully appreciate. A bit like watching a DVD containing a DTS track on a mono sound TV - it works fine but not to its fullest potential.
Just out of interest - do you think that a 720p signal upscaled to a 1080 line TV will look better or worse than a 720p signal upscaled to a 768 line TV.
As mentioned before I only think that I can blow one lot of 4 grand in the next 10 years and I definitely want to watch HD TV in 2006. If I spend 2K on a Sony V40 (my current 720p compatible TV of choice) then that would only leave 2K to spend on a 1080p TV in a couple of years and that seems a bit low. Also I have the same problem as a lot of people, the missus wouldn't understand why I was upgrading my perfectly good 2 year old TV for a newer model.
For me I've only got one bite at the cherry - its got to be 1080p in 2K6.
Anyone got any more info on that JVC I mentioned above - looks just the ticket for me.
Just out of interest - do you think that a 720p signal upscaled to a 1080 line TV will look better or worse than a 720p signal upscaled to a 768 line TV.
.
It will look worse as you are taking a 1 megapixel image and trying to blow it up to a two megapixel image.
I think there should be just one HD resolution as you are greatly degrading a 720P picture by viewing it upscaled to a 1080P display.
So to me it looks like its probably best to get a panel with a native 720p resolution for TV watching and a 1080p projector for those occasional movie nights when you are playing a 1080p disc.
Looks like instead of waiting for a 1080p LCD TV I'm now instead waiting for a 720p LCD TV -with the proper 720 lines resolution rather than 768.
Or should I just say sod it and get the Philips 42pf9830 when it comes out. Now I'm really lost.
I do know that broadcast will be mixing 1080i & 720p - its just that the majority of it will be in 720p (Sky's own channels)
Source? Sky One's Fox originated stuff will be 720p I expect, but I think the assumption is that Sky Movies will be 1080i.
Just out of interest - do you think that a 720p signal upscaled to a 1080 line TV will look better or worse than a 720p signal upscaled to a 768 line TV.
I would expect much worse; one is just "rounding errors", the other a major interpolation. But I've not seen it.
As mentioned before I only think that I can blow one lot of 4 grand in the next 10 years and I definitely want to watch HD TV in 2006.
For me I've only got one bite at the cherry - its got to be 1080p in 2K6..
Given the likely price falls over the next few years I would be amazed if buying a top of the range TV now would save you money over buying a cheaper set now and then a 1080 set in a couple of years time. In five years they'll be giveing 1080 sets away with packets of cornflakes.
I was looking at one of the AV mags yesterday that had a review of 37" LCDS. The Panasonic 37??500 was rated as having the best picture even though it had the lowest physical resolution - exactly 720 lines - a perfect match for 720p. On the other hand it needed to downscale the vertical resolution from 1280 to 1024.
There was also a Philips 37" that was the only one of the batch that could display true 1080p.
Unfortunately we appear to be coming to a situation where no single display will have the best picture quality for all resolutions 576i, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.
You will need to decide which is most important to you before chosing a display. For me I would concentrate on the displays ability to display SD and 720p. 1080p just seems too far away to worry about for now - even if I did
How do displays with 768 lines generally handle a 720p signal. Do they upscale it slightly or give small black bars at the top and bottom. Do any displays give you the choice?
Comments
In reality 1080p panels (Display AND input) are very rare even in the US and Japan as is 1080p content so any UK customer would need to know that they are not a factor in the UK market and be made to understand that 1080p source material is still a long way off and won't be cheap.
They're employeed to serve customers and do what they're told. Blame Sony for not training them enough but it's a bit much to blame them personally.
You know I actually thought I worded it in a way as not to put too much blame on the said individuals and make allowances for who they worked for.
I said that the SONY centre were not to be confused with a dedicated AV dealer so the level of knowledge of the staff won't be as great however I do expect someone who sells HD/AV kit for a respectable retailer such as the SONY center to have heard of 1080p and certainly know more than someone who works for a box shifting retailer.
It will be the next standard.
So watch out all you non-tech heads.
720P is good; but then again you thought your first sexual experience was good.
Take it from me it gets better :rolleyes:
So keep your £3000 in ya pocket and wait for the definitive resolution people.
This hasnt happened yet! That hasnt happened yet!
TVs cost shit loads now days, even with a 1080p set you will be left behind by a Sony 1080p, 120 frames per second set.
However get the best thats out there right now, and thats 1080p.
Say it one more time. . . . OH YEAH BABY. . . .1080p.
Go on. . . .
Just one more time. .
Ok then. .
promise this is the last time. . . .
O.K
1080p
One more time. . .
Your just being silly now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In a few years time you will be able to pop into a shop and buy 1080p films on HD-DVD or BluRay. If my then 3-4 year old LCD TV could only accept 720p I would feel like I was missing out on something.
To the average joe in the street this might not be an issue - but to me it is. To all the people saying that there will be no 1080p broadcasts - we all know this - just the same as the fact that no UK broadcaster has/will be broadcasting DTS sound. It's not all about broadcast - I don't want to watch Celebrity X Brother Stars Cadets in 1080p.
When currently I play a DVD with DD5.1 & a DTS track I always play the DTS track - exactly the same as if when I get a BluRay DVD with 1080p encoding - I'll want to show the film in full 1080p.
When I bought my DTS decoder there was only a couple of films with a DTS soundtrack - now there are hundreds. Its not always about what is available now - its also about planning what you will want in the future.
For me in the future there will be two standards that I expect to have to choose between when deciding to watch a film on TV or to buy it-
Broadcast = 720p DD5.1
Retail = 1080p DTS ES 6.1/7.1
Both will be great - but the retail one of course needs to justify the extra cost by being just that bit better. The difference won't matter to many people - but to some it will.
So just because someone wants 1080p - it doesn't mean that they are wrong - and it doesn't mean that 720p is substandard - its just that each person buys what they want or can justify to themselves. No one should let other people dictate what they are allowed to buy.
So that being said - I want a 1080p LCD TV in approx 40"- 42" in the first half of 2006. The only one that I can see on the Horizon for the UK at the moment is the JVC LT40FH96 - this is already on sale in the US - anyone got a link to a review of it?
For me 90% of what I watch is broadcast. So I would chose a display with as close to 720 lines as possible. I would rather have 10% of my viewing downscaled from 1080 to 720 than 90% upscaled from 720 to 1080. Of course if most of what you watch is retail then you would be better off choosing a display with 1080 physical lines.
To quote - "Of course, it's probably a good idea to buy--or wait for--a set that can accept a 1080p signal"
That statement assumes that you can wait until some date in the future when TVs that accept 1080P over HDMI become more widely available. If you can't wait, then it might be worth buying a stop-gap TV, one that's not too expensive and can handle 720P. That's the decision I took, to buy a DLP RPTV that can handle 1280x720, costs £1300, knowing that I will probably replace it within 3-5 years. I'm confident that the £1300 I've spent now is probably less than the additional cost I would have to pay next year to get 1080P TV.
There is no "right" answer, it all depends how early an adopter you are, and how long you can wait for the perfect HDTV, rather than enjoying a less-than-perfect HDTV now.
Broadcast will be a mix of 720p and 1080i.
Retail doesn't exist yet so who knows. My guess is that they produce will HD discs which will be compatible with the largest number of HD TVs (anything else would be bizarre commercially) so will be 720p/1080i compatible.
If the thought of the lost pixels appalls you, then getting a 1080 native display could be worth the extra cost as there will be plenty of 1080i content. However I suspect that paying extra now for one which accepts 1080p (as opposed to 1080i) could be money wasted.
Just out of interest - do you think that a 720p signal upscaled to a 1080 line TV will look better or worse than a 720p signal upscaled to a 768 line TV.
As mentioned before I only think that I can blow one lot of 4 grand in the next 10 years and I definitely want to watch HD TV in 2006. If I spend 2K on a Sony V40 (my current 720p compatible TV of choice) then that would only leave 2K to spend on a 1080p TV in a couple of years and that seems a bit low. Also I have the same problem as a lot of people, the missus wouldn't understand why I was upgrading my perfectly good 2 year old TV for a newer model.
For me I've only got one bite at the cherry - its got to be 1080p in 2K6.
Anyone got any more info on that JVC I mentioned above - looks just the ticket for me.
It will look worse as you are taking a 1 megapixel image and trying to blow it up to a two megapixel image.
I think there should be just one HD resolution as you are greatly degrading a 720P picture by viewing it upscaled to a 1080P display.
Looks like instead of waiting for a 1080p LCD TV I'm now instead waiting for a 720p LCD TV -with the proper 720 lines resolution rather than 768.
Or should I just say sod it and get the Philips 42pf9830 when it comes out. Now I'm really lost.
Source? Sky One's Fox originated stuff will be 720p I expect, but I think the assumption is that Sky Movies will be 1080i.
I would expect much worse; one is just "rounding errors", the other a major interpolation. But I've not seen it.
Given the likely price falls over the next few years I would be amazed if buying a top of the range TV now would save you money over buying a cheaper set now and then a 1080 set in a couple of years time. In five years they'll be giveing 1080 sets away with packets of cornflakes.
There was also a Philips 37" that was the only one of the batch that could display true 1080p.
Unfortunately we appear to be coming to a situation where no single display will have the best picture quality for all resolutions 576i, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.
You will need to decide which is most important to you before chosing a display. For me I would concentrate on the displays ability to display SD and 720p. 1080p just seems too far away to worry about for now - even if I did
How do displays with 768 lines generally handle a 720p signal. Do they upscale it slightly or give small black bars at the top and bottom. Do any displays give you the choice?