"1080i is better than 1080p"... - Blu-ray Forum

stockstar1138 · 11-06-2007, 05:42 PM

I can't find a link, but some guy told me last night that a 1080i signal is better than 1080p for plasmas and lcds that only support 60hz. He claimed that plasmas and lcds will not display an interlaced signal and will change it into a progressive scan, now since the signal is interlaced the tv will wait for all the lines to be fed to the display, not just every other line, and then scan it progressivly on the tv. since it is doing it this way viewers are seeing 1080p/30 which is closer to 1080p/24 than 1080p/60, thus a smooter looking picture.

juanleche · 11-06-2007, 05:44 PM

crack is whack

stockstar1138 · 11-06-2007, 05:47 PM

he didn't say what format he supported, but im pretty sure he was trying to feel good about his poor, low bit-rate, half pixaled, low capacity, lossy audio, hardly any studio support, $98 hd dvd a2.

bhampton · 11-06-2007, 05:50 PM

Yeah,

This is why 480i from DVD was better.

Good Luck finding a 480i only DVD player that's recent.

People will sing the praises of 1080i right up to the moment they can afford 1080p.

-Brian

Therickus · 11-06-2007, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhampton

Yeah,

This is why 480i from DVD was better.

Good Luck finding a 480i only DVD player that's recent.

People will sing the praises of 1080i right up to the moment they can afford 1080p.

-Brian

Explained....Perfectly.

Sling · 11-06-2007, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Therickus

Explained....Perfectly.

That why AVS Pi** me off.It seemed like 90% of there members pushed 720p to be the best..I could not believe it.
AVS PIO Kuro 720p paradise for idiots.

mikem471 · 11-07-2007, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhampton

People will sing the praises of 1080i right up to the moment they can afford 1080p.

-Brian

Give that man a prize!!!

DefTechPioElite · 11-06-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

he didn't say what format he supported, but im pretty sure he was trying to feel good about his poor, low bit-rate, half pixaled, low capacity, lossy audio, hardly any studio support, $98 hd dvd a2.

THAT'S WHAT IM TALKIN ABOUT! What a doucher, 1080p is grrrrrrrrreat like frosted flakes.

jedisinclair · 11-06-2007, 06:38 PM

I don't know... now I'm rethinking my position. I should sell my LCD TV and my PS3 and try to track down an old atari 2600 and a black and white TV. I mean, Atari 2600 football vs Madden, what was I thinking???

tron3 · 11-06-2007, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jedisinclair

I don't know... now I'm rethinking my position. I should sell my LCD TV and my PS3 and try to track down an old atari 2600 and a black and white TV. I mean, Atari 2600 football vs Madden, what was I thinking???

You became a victim of FUD.

Heck, I remember buying my Sega Genesis and was awed over the 16 bit power of it compared to my 8 bit Sega Master System. Much as with blu-ray, I repurchased most of the same games for the Genesis.

That was sold long ago and I have the plug-n-play Genesis hand held. Not the mind blowing experience I remember.

In keeping with this thread, I fail to see the difference in even 480i vs 480p. Yet, I prefer 480p for some mental complacency reason.

Mystique · 11-06-2007, 07:35 PM

That guy is crazy in the head.

SDG · 11-06-2007, 07:47 PM

This artical explaines it good. More to it than this.

http://techdigs.net/content/view/53/42
The problem with interlacing technology is this alternating line drawing tends to cause the eyes to see a flicker. Unfortunately, interlacing reared its ugly head again in the 1990s when established HDTV standards included both 720p and 1080i options. Some broadcast networks use 1280x720p (720 lines progressively displayed) and some use 1920x1080i (540 even lines drawn, then 540 odd lines drawn). As of 2006, no U.S. broadcast network uses 1080p, or 'full HD' (1920x1080p).
The problem with 1080i is that despite having more total lines, it generally doesn't look as good as 720p. This is especially true for high-motion video such as sports. If you have a large (over 46") HDTV hooked up properly and want to see an example of this, watch a punt return on HDTV NBC Sunday Night Football, and then watch a punt return on HDTV Monday Night ESPN Football. The difference is significant. With far less aliasing (visible chunky pixels), ESPN's 1280x720p looks substantially better than NBC's 1920x1080i. While some of this may be due to the compression used by NBC or the cable outlet, most of it is due to interlacing.

The hd dvd that some are so proud of due to its low low price is 1080i. Sub-standard.

Neo65 · 11-07-2007, 11:22 PM

1080i to most TVs is treated as 540P upscaled to 720/768/1080 depending on native resolution.

Only the more expensive TVs have the logic to weave the lines from 2 fields and display them as progressive the proper way, most just scale each field. If you have a mass market TV and not a top of the line sony or panasonic that costs a lot, you're most likely going to get the 540 upsampled. There's almost no TV that will do the inverse 3:2 pull down correctly to revert to the original 24P if you send in 1080i60.

From what I can tell, a lot of TVs upscale progressive content reasonably well (hence a player that sends 480P from DVD will look good, while a 480i will likely not do well).

Some TVs can deinterlace 480i to 480P and then upscale, but very few know how to deinterlace 1080i and combine the two fields into a single 1080P and then displaying it. You can blame sports programming for that. The 1080i@60 sports programming means that any TV that tries the simple weaving trick that would have worked well for HDM is going to create feathering effects as two alternating fields 16.67 milliseconds apart are displayed as one frame at the same time --- rendering the game unwatchable.

Hence the reason why the TVs just treat 1080i as 540P. Most people don't even realize this and believe everything looks "good enough". Lots of things are like that, cheaper toys with lead paint, cheaper food made with bleached wheat, cheaper pet food made with cheaper wheat gluten laced with cheaper melanine, 128kbps mp3s... They're sort of good enough until you get a chance to really see what's going on.

U4K61 · 11-08-2007, 12:18 AM

The average consumer can't tell the difference between 1080p and 1080i. 1080i has a temporal resolution of only 540p when there is motion in the image and/or when it is not deinterlaced correctly to 1080p. Most can't tell the difference between 540p and 480p from where they are sitting on the living room couch. The difference between 480p or 480i from your DVD player does not matter much when many are still using composite video. The analogue color signal has less detail then the luminance signal. I knew I should have kept that B&W TV.

MouseRider · 11-06-2007, 05:51 PM

Typical armchair science.

People do realize that LCD, DLP and Plasma displays don't scan like CRTs right?

sj001 · 11-06-2007, 05:54 PM

1080i is better than 1080p.

Right, whatever... and my Atari 2600 has better graphics than my Playstation did.

Where do these people get this s&^%???

T-Town Oil · 11-06-2007, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sj001

1080i is better than 1080p.

Right, whatever... and my Atari 2600 has better graphics than my Playstation did.

Where do these people get this s&^%???

hehehe....atari basketball did look pretty sweet

buckshot · 11-06-2007, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-Town Oil

hehehe....atari basketball did look pretty sweet

burgertime man, burgertime.

Blu-Ray Buckeye · 11-06-2007, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckshot

burgertime man, burgertime.

Burgertime is light years better than the original Atari 2600 basketball. BTW my son plays the Spongebob equivalent of Burgertime on Nick.com.

sardaukar1977 · 11-07-2007, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buckshot

burgertime man, burgertime.

Well I personally liked Missile Command, and to the post about 1080i being better then 1080p, lol.

11-06-2007, 05:42 PM	#1
stockstar1138 Banned Member since:Apr 2007	"1080i is better than 1080p"... I can't find a link, but some guy told me last night that a 1080i signal is better than 1080p for plasmas and lcds that only support 60hz. He claimed that plasmas and lcds will not display an interlaced signal and will change it into a progressive scan, now since the signal is interlaced the tv will wait for all the lines to be fed to the display, not just every other line, and then scan it progressivly on the tv. since it is doing it this way viewers are seeing 1080p/30 which is closer to 1080p/24 than 1080p/60, thus a smooter looking picture.

11-08-2007, 12:18 AM	#14
U4K61 Special Member Member since:Mar 2007 Location:Connecticut Blu-ray collection:40 Blu-ray reviews:4	1080P = 480i The average consumer can't tell the difference between 1080p and 1080i. 1080i has a temporal resolution of only 540p when there is motion in the image and/or when it is not deinterlaced correctly to 1080p. Most can't tell the difference between 540p and 480p from where they are sitting on the living room couch. The difference between 480p or 480i from your DVD player does not matter much when many are still using composite video. The analogue color signal has less detail then the luminance signal. I knew I should have kept that B&W TV. Last edited by U4K61; 01-12-2010 at 02:00 AM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Panasonic 42" 1080p VS Panasonic 52" 720p/1080i	Plasma TVs	Omix	13	09-17-2009 09:07 PM
Sony 55" (1080i rear projection) vs. new Sammy 58" PN58A (plasma)	Display Theory and Discussion	nicholas01	3	09-24-2008 08:30 PM
PS3 DTS-HD MA + 1080i deinterlacing "please look forward to them."	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Jimboc	77	04-10-2008 01:33 PM
Anyone go from 42" 1080I to 46" 1080p?	Home Theater General Discussion	sudbury78	21	02-04-2008 03:09 AM
UK gets "Kill Bill" 1&2, "Pulp Fiction", "Beowulf", "Jesse James", and more in March?	Blu-ray Movies - North America	JBlacklow	21	12-07-2007 11:05 AM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-06-2007, 05:44 PM	#2
juanleche Active Member Member since:Oct 2007	crack is whack

11-06-2007, 05:47 PM	#3
stockstar1138 Banned Member since:Apr 2007	he didn't say what format he supported, but im pretty sure he was trying to feel good about his poor, low bit-rate, half pixaled, low capacity, lossy audio, hardly any studio support, $98 hd dvd a2.

11-06-2007, 05:50 PM	#4
bhampton Blu-ray Count Member since:Aug 2007 4K collection:989 Blu-ray collection:2545 DVD collection:67 Blu-ray reviews: 6 Trading Score:18	Yeah, This is why 480i from DVD was better. Good Luck finding a 480i only DVD player that's recent. People will sing the praises of 1080i right up to the moment they can afford 1080p. -Brian

11-06-2007, 06:38 PM	#9
jedisinclair Senior Member Member since:Nov 2006 Blu-ray collection:42 Trading Score:3	I don't know... now I'm rethinking my position. I should sell my LCD TV and my PS3 and try to track down an old atari 2600 and a black and white TV. I mean, Atari 2600 football vs Madden, what was I thinking???

11-06-2007, 07:35 PM	#11
Mystique Expert Member Member since:Apr 2007 Location:Newark, CA Blu-ray collection:240 Blu-ray reviews:5 Trading Score:1	That guy is crazy in the head.

11-06-2007, 07:47 PM	#12
SDG Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Sep 2007 Location:Arkansas	This artical explaines it good. More to it than this. http://techdigs.net/content/view/53/42 The problem with interlacing technology is this alternating line drawing tends to cause the eyes to see a flicker. Unfortunately, interlacing reared its ugly head again in the 1990s when established HDTV standards included both 720p and 1080i options. Some broadcast networks use 1280x720p (720 lines progressively displayed) and some use 1920x1080i (540 even lines drawn, then 540 odd lines drawn). As of 2006, no U.S. broadcast network uses 1080p, or 'full HD' (1920x1080p). The problem with 1080i is that despite having more total lines, it generally doesn't look as good as 720p. This is especially true for high-motion video such as sports. If you have a large (over 46") HDTV hooked up properly and want to see an example of this, watch a punt return on HDTV NBC Sunday Night Football, and then watch a punt return on HDTV Monday Night ESPN Football. The difference is significant. With far less aliasing (visible chunky pixels), ESPN's 1280x720p looks substantially better than NBC's 1920x1080i. While some of this may be due to the compression used by NBC or the cable outlet, most of it is due to interlacing. The hd dvd that some are so proud of due to its low low price is 1080i. Sub-standard.

11-07-2007, 11:22 PM	#13
Neo65 Senior Member Member since:Sep 2007	1080i to most TVs is treated as 540P upscaled to 720/768/1080 depending on native resolution. Only the more expensive TVs have the logic to weave the lines from 2 fields and display them as progressive the proper way, most just scale each field. If you have a mass market TV and not a top of the line sony or panasonic that costs a lot, you're most likely going to get the 540 upsampled. There's almost no TV that will do the inverse 3:2 pull down correctly to revert to the original 24P if you send in 1080i60. From what I can tell, a lot of TVs upscale progressive content reasonably well (hence a player that sends 480P from DVD will look good, while a 480i will likely not do well). Some TVs can deinterlace 480i to 480P and then upscale, but very few know how to deinterlace 1080i and combine the two fields into a single 1080P and then displaying it. You can blame sports programming for that. The 1080i@60 sports programming means that any TV that tries the simple weaving trick that would have worked well for HDM is going to create feathering effects as two alternating fields 16.67 milliseconds apart are displayed as one frame at the same time --- rendering the game unwatchable. Hence the reason why the TVs just treat 1080i as 540P. Most people don't even realize this and believe everything looks "good enough". Lots of things are like that, cheaper toys with lead paint, cheaper food made with bleached wheat, cheaper pet food made with cheaper wheat gluten laced with cheaper melanine, 128kbps mp3s... They're sort of good enough until you get a chance to really see what's going on.

11-06-2007, 05:51 PM	#15
MouseRider Active Member Member since:Aug 2007	Typical armchair science. People do realize that LCD, DLP and Plasma displays don't scan like CRTs right?

11-06-2007, 05:54 PM	#16
sj001 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Rochester, NY Blu-ray collection:317 DVD collection:17 Trading Score:5	1080i is better than 1080p. Right, whatever... and my Atari 2600 has better graphics than my Playstation did. Where do these people get this s&^%???

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals