DS Forums

 
 

1080p wow, why didnt i do this sooner


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-01-2013, 21:25
frankie_baby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,077

Got my first HDTV about 5 years ago, a fairly nice Samsung 32inch 720p LCD, fairly good (though silly me should have shopped around a bit more could probably have got a 1080p for barely any more)

Well finally got myself a new one the other day, a 40inch samsung 3d 1080p led/lcd, oh wow I really didn't expect the difference in picture quality to be so huge, its stunning, really seems like a bigger leap over 720p than 720p was over sdtv, really feel like an idiot for not doing this sooner
frankie_baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 13-01-2013, 00:27
alternate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,928
sounds more like your 720p set was just crap. The difference should be noticable, with a decent source like blu-ray, but hardly startling.

Could be the bump in size that is making you notice the detail. Unless you treated yourself to a new pair of specs at the same time
alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 00:27
tim1964
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 806
What have you got plugged into it?

Blu Ray, Sky HD, Virgin etc.

I'm shocked by the number of people who buy a HD TV but still have SD equipment feeding it.
tim1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 00:45
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,747
Got my first HDTV about 5 years ago, a fairly nice Samsung 32inch 720p LCD, fairly good (though silly me should have shopped around a bit more could probably have got a 1080p for barely any more)

Well finally got myself a new one the other day, a 40inch samsung 3d 1080p led/lcd, oh wow I really didn't expect the difference in picture quality to be so huge, its stunning, really seems like a bigger leap over 720p than 720p was over sdtv, really feel like an idiot for not doing this sooner
As others have said, there's really not much difference in general - even if you sit 4 feet from the screen. Yes you'd see the dots on a 720p set but oddly, that doesn't bother me at all! The biggest improvement is probably the fact that it's a newer or higher quality model and the technology has moved on.

I have a 5 year old Panasonic plasma '720p' set and a new 1080p 27 inch monitor, the latter is marvellous sat close up as I do, but I am equally at home watching my 720p plasma. It's not all about the spatial resolution.
d'@ve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 01:43
frankie_baby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,077
What have you got plugged into it?

Blu Ray, Sky HD, Virgin etc.

I'm shocked by the number of people who buy a HD TV but still have SD equipment feeding it.
I've got sky HD and a blu ray player
frankie_baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 01:48
frankie_baby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,077
sounds more like your 720p set was just crap. The difference should be noticable, with a decent source like blu-ray, but hardly startling.

Could be the bump in size that is making you notice the detail. Unless you treated yourself to a new pair of specs at the same time
I don't think my old set was particularly crap maybe it was though and yeah the size bump probably helps a bit but its hardly a massive leap in size, it just does seem to me (especially on my blu rays) a bigger improvement than going HD in the first place was
frankie_baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 01:50
grps3
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,735
i pretty sure skytv doesn't broadcast 1080p ....could be wrong

if u want a newer tv u best start saving now

sonys new 4k resolution tv is a steal at $25,000 ...no one has bought one yet ...wonder why...surely not the price
http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/sto...=S_4KTV#navTop
grps3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 01:56
frankie_baby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,077
i pretty sure skytv doesn't broadcast 1080p ....could be wrong

if u want a newer tv u best start saving now

sonys new 4k resolution tv is a steal at $25,000 ...no one has bought one yet ...wonder why...surely not the price
http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/sto...=S_4KTV#navTop
You are correct sky don't broadcast in 1080p, they broadcast in 1080i though so obviously it'll look a lot better (and to me it certainly does) on a 1080 screen, i do also have a blu ray player so i can finally see them in their full glory and wow


Don't think I'll bother with a 4k TV til they're under 600 squid, think I might be waiting a while
frankie_baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 11:58
mlayzell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Luton
Posts: 441
What have you got plugged into it?

Blu Ray, Sky HD, Virgin etc.

I'm shocked by the number of people who buy a HD TV but still have SD equipment feeding it.
I am shocked that 13,000 people still have B&W TV licences!
mlayzell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 12:19
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
You are correct sky don't broadcast in 1080p, they broadcast in 1080i though so obviously it'll look a lot better (and to me it certainly does) on a 1080 screen, i do also have a blu ray player so i can finally see them in their full glory and wow
1080i and 1080P are both the exact same resolution - the advantage of BD is that it's less compressed, and also not compressed in real time - this is what makes it better, not that it's capable of 1080P.

Unfortunately the far higher compression ratios used on broadcast HD (particularly by the BBC) mean the picture quality is only a fraction of what it could be (and was in the early days).

As far as your set goes, if you're seeing any kind of massive difference from HD Ready (NOT 720P) to Full HD there's something seriously poor about your old TV.

It might just be of course that you're comparing a really old set to a brand new one? - technology has moved on greatly in that time.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 13:01
captainkremmen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: DAVEVILLE, Daveshire DA1 1VE
Posts: 33,621
BBC have been experimenting with 1080p broadcasts on the BBC HD channel on Freeview for over a year, often even during the same programme. The last series of Top Gear had some segments that were in 1080p/50 for example..

But at normal viewing distances of 6-10 feet you'd be pretty hard pushed to notice the difference on standard sized TVs of 32 to 50 inches or thereabouts anyway.

As Nigel says it's more likely the display technology has improved in that time. That's especially true with midrange/top end LCD sets. 4 or 5 years ago (even just 2/3years ago) pretty much no LCD sets could give a decent Plasma a run for the money in the picture quality stakes. To me LCD always looked ever so slightly flat and a bit cartoonish compared to a Plasma TV, even the top end LCD sets. However, today the difference isn't as marked and I've seen some LCD sets that I'd happily replace my Plasma with if it failed and I had to. Personally I still think Plasma has the edge, but there's aren't an awful lot to choose from these days and I guess it's only a matter of time before Plasma TVs disappear off the market entirely, especially with new technologies such as OLED appearing.
captainkremmen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 13:33
howardl
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,909
I am shocked that 13,000 people still have B&W TV licences!

I'm quite surprised...not shocked though.
howardl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 14:16
grahamlthompson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,296
BBC have been experimenting with 1080p broadcasts on the BBC HD channel on Freeview for over a year, often even during the same programme. The last series of Top Gear had some segments that were in 1080p/50 for example..
Freeview is not capable of 1080p50, which requires MPEG4 AVC Level 4.2 , the spec requires boxes with MPEG4 AVC Level 4.0, it's 1080p25 and all 4 HD channels have some 1080p25 content.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/researcha...bc-hd-on.shtml
grahamlthompson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 14:36
d'@ve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,747
As Nigel says it's more likely the display technology has improved in that time....
I think you'll find that was said in this thread some time before "Nigel says"...
d'@ve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 15:33
ProDave
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Northern Scottish Highlands
Posts: 11,307
I am shocked that 13,000 people still have B&W TV licences!
But how do you know they ONLY have a b&w tv?
ProDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 15:56
mlayzell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Luton
Posts: 441
But how do you know they ONLY have a b&w tv?
If they are they are breaking the law, can you detect if someone is watching either a colour or B&W version of a tv channel in their household?
mlayzell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 16:15
anthony david
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,470
The improvements people are seeing are mainly down to the huge improvements in LCD panels and picture proccessing used by the upmarket manufacturers over the last 5 years. Black levels and lag are very much improved making everything look much better SD as well as HD. Having said that, some older sets are quite good if carefully set up.
anthony david is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 16:32
Spider Rico
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,176
I noticed a significant difference in quality when upgrading from a Samsung 720 to a Panasonic Viera 1080 a couple of years ago, but a lot of that was down to switching from LCD to Plasma.
Spider Rico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 19:47
bobcar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 14,718
1080i and 1080P are both the exact same resolution -
Not actually correct for a true interlaced source. By the time you've deinterlaced the resolution of 1080i will be less especially for a fast moving picture where it can be as low as half.

Yes if the TV correctly identifies a progressive source and uses weave deinterlacing then they have the same resolution but otherwise not - in that circumstance it's effectively a progressive picture anyway.
bobcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 21:15
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
If they are they are breaking the law, can you detect if someone is watching either a colour or B&W version of a tv channel in their household?
They could back in the 70's, but I'm dubious they have any detector vans any more, or any staff capable of using them

But as long as you've only ever had a a B&W licence, and you've never been reported as purchasing something requiring a colour licence, then they won't be chasing you anyway.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 22:21
Kodaz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,006
[720p to 1080p] really seems like a bigger leap over 720p than 720p was over sdtv
In terms of ratio, it *is*... 576 lines to 720 lines was only a modest 25% better (in terms of vertical resolution), whereas going from 720 to 1080 is a 50% improvement.

I guess one might consider 720p "High" Definition if they were an American used to 480-line NTSC transmissions, but I'm not.

Not actually correct for a true interlaced source. By the time you've deinterlaced the resolution of 1080i will be less especially for a fast moving picture where it can be as low as half.
My understanding of SD interlaced video is that the eye is less likely to notice loss of detail on fast-moving objects (*) so the theoretical loss of quality isn't as big a deal as it might be. I assume the same principle would apply to a 1080i source.

(*) The theoretical loss of quality being due to the fact that on fast-moving objects, if an object is drawn at one position for the even-numbered lines, by the time we're recording/displaying the odd-numbered lines required to form a "complete" full-resolution image (1/50 second later), the object will have moved to a new position and thus will never be rendered at full resolution in any given position.
Kodaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2013, 22:49
grahamlthompson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,296
In terms of ratio, it *is*... 576 lines to 720 lines was only a modest 25% better (in terms of vertical resolution), whereas going from 720 to 1080 is a 50% improvement.

I guess one might consider 720p "High" Definition if they were an American used to 480-line NTSC transmissions, but I'm not.



.
The comparison is 720p at 50 frames/second and 1080i at 25 frames per second (similar bitrate is required for both). In fact 720p50 can easily look better than 1080i (the doubled framerate more than compensates for the lower spacial resolution and progressive footage is easier to compress). A minimum resolution of 720 lines was part of the original HD Ready spec as was the capability to display 720p50 and a 1080i source. Of course combining the two to get 1080p50 combines the improved motion tracking of 50fps with the higher resolution of 1080 lines.
grahamlthompson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-01-2013, 09:08
Nigel Goodwin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
In terms of ratio, it *is*... 576 lines to 720 lines was only a modest 25% better (in terms of vertical resolution), whereas going from 720 to 1080 is a 50% improvement.
Except almost no sets have ever been 720P - almost all HD Ready ones are 768 pixels - so the difference is less than using the incorrect value implies.

As I've said many times, we have a Sony 'wall' at work of all their TV's - and while there aren't many HD Ready ones any more, it was never possible to pick out which ones were HD Ready and which ones were Full HD (all fed from the same HD source).

It really makes VERY, VERY little difference for TV or BD viewing, but obviously does if you use it as a computer monitor.
Nigel Goodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-01-2013, 13:15
2Bdecided
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 4,391
In terms of ratio, it *is*... 576 lines to 720 lines was only a modest 25% better (in terms of vertical resolution)
That's utterly misleading - one is interlaced, the other is progressive; one has 720 horizontal pixels, the other has 1280.

Cheers,
David.
2Bdecided is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-01-2013, 13:28
grahamlthompson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,296
720p50 delivers 46.08 megapixels in 1 second, 576i 10.36. (that's for the best 720 x 576, 544 x 576 is less)

That's a picture content increase of nearly 450%.
grahamlthompson is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:51.