1080p retail stitch up

11 of 11

davidweller

07-10-2008

Originally Posted by Matt Quinn:
“All sets designed to display a 'normal' TV picture will overscan in the way you suggest. Camera operators, directors and TV graphics people are all trained to work within what's called the 'TV safe' zone of the raster. It's a hangover from the days of tubed cameras and CRT sets and is essentially a zone set aside to account for variations in target size between different pieces of equipment. A 'tolerance' zone effectively....

Although it could be reduced nowadays there are still quite marked differences in the outputs from various types of camera.

Monitors designed for broadcast use often have an underscan function to allow the full raster to be viewed; useful for preventing mic booms coming into shot (among other things) And theoretically any 1080 set that DID offer 1:1 mapping should have the edges of the panel physically masked off to account for the TV safe area.

...a '768' set should also be overscanned so as the very edges of the raster are NOT visible!”

My new Panny has a feature in the set up menu that allows you to turn off the overscan.

MAW

07-10-2008

Originally Posted by davidweller:
“My new Panny has a feature in the set up menu that allows you to turn off the overscan.”

Exactly, and if you use it, and view skyHD upscaled channels, you can see why overscan has a place. Which, as I say, is another reason why 1080p screens are not necessarily the be all and end all. Used with a video processor, go for it. Otherwise, leave the overscan on, you even get the odd Blu Ray with tatty edges.

Matt Quinn

07-10-2008

Originally Posted by davidweller:
“My new Panny has a feature in the set up menu that allows you to turn off the overscan.”

It's useful in a studio where you might want to establish if a boom or something is creeping into shot. But even in our edit suites the programme monitor is set to overscan as normal.....

It's a moot point in the 768/1080 debate though. The higher res screen WILL produce better results. Whether they're worth the price difference between a 768 screen and a 1080 is where the debate lies.....

I have two 37" Hitachi panels.... One is a 1080 the other an older 768. Fed with a 1080 signal both produce excellent pictures. But there's a clear difference between them when you see the two sets side by side..... The 1080 panel definitely IS better.

Thing is though when the older panel was retired from the edit suite and put into the house that difference became less obvious.... You'd hardly be aware of it.

bobcar

07-10-2008

Originally Posted by Matt Quinn:
“I have two 37" Hitachi panels.... One is a 1080 the other an older 768. Fed with a 1080 signal both produce excellent pictures. But there's a clear difference between them when you see the two sets side by side..... The 1080 panel definitely IS better.”

You're not really comparing like with like though because the 1080 panel is a newer design, the video processing is very likely to have been updated and improved for one thing let alone the panel itself.

Matt Quinn

07-10-2008

Originally Posted by bobcar:
“You're not really comparing like with like though because the 1080 panel is a newer design, the video processing is very likely to have been updated and improved for one thing let alone the panel itself.”

Quite so, but there's only ten months between them (in fact the older one is still on sale) and apart from the panels they are visually and operationally almost identical... And on SD almost indistinguishable...

11 of 11