Question about 1080i v 1080p

[emperoredals11]

I found this article, and was wondering how truthful it is.

1080iv1080p/

From the Article:

Short Version
What this all means is this:

• When it comes to movies (as in HD DVD and Blu-ray) there will be no visible difference between the 1080i signal and the 1080p signal, as long as your TV correctly de-interlaces 1080i. So even if you could input 1080p, you wouldn't see a difference (because there is none).

• There is no additional or new information in a 1080p signal from movie based content.

• The only time you would see a difference is if you have native 1080p/60 content, which at this point would only come from a PC and maybe the PS3. 1080p/60 does have more information than 1080i/30, but unless you're a gamer you will probably never see native 1080p/60 content. It is incredibly unlikely that they will ever broadcast 1080p (too much bandwidth) or that 1080p/60 content will show up on discs (too much storage space and no one is using it to record/film).

[Sonny]

good stuff I have 2 50'' Pannys 1 720p/1080i & 1 1080p the Blu-ray's look the same but with the 65''flat boy I would like to think I see a diff of course everybody with a 1080p set is going to see a diff cause they spent that $$$$ baby, you no how it works.

[Sonny]

good stuff

[mikesoba]

I was just disputing this point with an HD DVD fan who said the 1080i cheap Toshiba player was no different than the 1080p Blu players since both would give you the same picture. It seems he's right???

[partridge]

But surely if a tv, such as mine, natively supports 720p then a 1080p set HAS to look better simply because there are more pixels available to show the image? So a 1080p movie is scaled down to some extent to show on a 720p tv - even one that supports 1080i?

I saw two Toshiba HD sets recently, showing the same video source, one was 1080i the other was 1080p and in my humble opinon the 1080p looked sharper, the detail just looked that little bitter better defined, etc.

Well,that's how it looked to me and my next HD set will definitely support 1080p

[lildon24]

It not a big deal but what is really the real thing u need is if you got an 1080i with 720p native will look almost like 1080p. If you got a 1080i without 720p but 480p, it looks like craps... not even high definition, it just standard definition with many lines.

1080p is just the latest HD signal since 720p which does the same but has more pixel lines than 720p. But hey, there is an 1440p tv out there but it is way too expensive.

Smaller HDTV with 720p from 17" to 32" looks great but Bigger tv will looks best if it was 34" and up with 1080p signal.

So, you dont have to have an 1080p tv if u cant afford it, you can buy an 720p hdtv and the best size is from 26" inch and up.

[MouseRider]

Originally Posted by partridge

But surely if a tv, such as mine, natively supports 720p then a 1080p set HAS to look better simply because there are more pixels available to show the image? So a 1080p movie is scaled down to some extent to show on a 720p tv - even one that supports 1080i?

I saw two Toshiba HD sets recently, showing the same video source, one was 1080i the other was 1080p and in my humble opinon the 1080p looked sharper, the detail just looked that little bitter better defined, etc.

Well,that's how it looked to me and my next HD set will definitely support 1080p

Well, mathematically, there is definitely a difference and depending on how good your display's de-interlacer is, that difference may not be that great when displaying 1080i or 1080p on a 1080 native display.

If you subscribe to the "purity of signal" method, then you want as little post-processing of the original signal as possible, that means, no scaling, no de-interlacing, so in that aspect, you can say that a 1080p encoded disc sending out a 1080p digital signal to a 1080p display that has a native 1080p resolution going to give you the purest presentation of the data.

If you compare a native 720p display to a 1080p display with a 1080p signal, technically, the 1080p display is going to win out, technically.

The real question is, can you perceive the difference when watching a program and can you perceive the difference on the displays that you're considering to buy, and finally, is that difference worth the difference in price, if any. Then there is personal taste...

There are lots of variables here that include how far you are sitting away, what type of picture you're looking at, how acute your sight is, and on and on.

And always remember, the lighting conditions at the store and the angles that you're looking at the display isn't going to be the same ones you'll experience at home, so remember to take that into consideration.

Ever wonder why they always place the models that they are highlighting and want to sell in mock-ups of living rooms while the other stuff is up on shelves?

As said before by many others, not all displays are created equal and manufacturers like to put their "distinction" into their products which adds to the variance.

[Deciazulado]

How discernable is 1080p over 1080i

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

How discernable is 1080p over 1080i

Quite a bit if your TV is an older CRT type doing interlaced video. If there is motion, the vert. resolution is cut in half to 540 becasue the two fields may not match up. If your set is 1080p and does inverse 3:2 puldown correctly, then it is likely to less of an issue. Blu's native 1080p/24 is a plus over HD-DVD because it uses 1080i de-interlaced to 1080p with added notational overhead. This works, so they say. For me, it another reason HD-DVD is the clunker of the two formats.

[Aaron]

Originally Posted by Craig Ruchman

Quite a bit if your TV is an older CRT type doing interlaced video. If there is motion, the vert. resolution is cut in half to 540 becasue the two fields may not match up. If your set is 1080P and does inverse 3:2 puldown 'correctly', and that is a big if, then this is not an issue. Another plus for blu is that its video is native 1080p/24. HD-DVD uses 1080i de-interlaced to 1080p with added notational overhead. This works, so they say. For me, it another reason HD-DVD is the clunker of the two formats - go BLU!

Hehe, he was linking to similar thread.

[Semp1]

I have a Sony kdl40xbr2/3 1080p LCD I am telling you 1080p and 1080i are the exact same they use the exact amount of pixels and the difference is not recognizable if you have a 1080p display and it deinterlaces 1080i well that means the PQ will most likely be the same and possibly better than something set to 1080p, depending on whether the electornic you are using or the set deinterllaces better.

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by Semp1

I have a Sony kdl40xbr2/3 1080p LCD I am telling you 1080p and 1080i are the exact same they use the exact amount of pixels and the difference is not recognizable if you have a 1080p display and it deinterlaces 1080i well that means the PQ will most likely be the same and possibly better than something set to 1080p, depending on whether the electornic you are using or the set deinterllaces better.

Careful on 1080i vs 1080p sorced from 24fps film. Spatial resolution, yes, temperal, no. 1080i has more overhead then native 1080p/24. 1080i is 30fps @ 2 fields per frame. The 6 extra frames is wasted space. Sadly, the broadcast world is slow to get out of an analogue interlaced mind set in a progressive digital one. We would get a better PQ and have some extra bandwith left over.

At the beginning of HD, 1080i/60 was a digital signal for analogue CRT's timed to 60 cycle AC. The new system back then has become legacy next to our 1080p 120Hz progressive scan TVs.

[gand41f]

Originally Posted by Semp1

I have a Sony kdl40xbr2/3 1080p LCD I am telling you 1080p and 1080i are the exact same they use the exact amount of pixels and the difference is not recognizable if you have a 1080p display and it deinterlaces 1080i well that means the PQ will most likely be the same and possibly better than something set to 1080p, depending on whether the electornic you are using or the set deinterllaces better.

Nope, not the same for film-based content. Your LCD fails the 3:2 cadence test:

http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1106hook/

You should be feeding 1080p for film-based content.

Looks like it can deinterlace non-film based content fine as long as you don't leave it at the factory default, though.

enjoy
gandalf

[becomingwater]

Originally Posted by emperoredals11

I found this article, and was wondering how truthful it is.

1080iv1080p/

From the Article:

There is a difference! If you watch a movie in 1080i, on fast pan and scan scenes there will be jumping, as in tearing in the picture, but with 1080p you will notice this is mostly missing. For the most part, he is right you wont see a difference, but you will see one on fast action scenes.

Wait until 1440i/1440p are released. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the PS3 can have a firmware upgrade to display this resolution.

[JoeKickass]

Originally Posted by becomingwater

There is a difference! If you watch a movie in 1080i, on fast pan and scan scenes there will be jumping, as in tearing in the picture, but with 1080p you will notice this is mostly missing. For the most part, he is right you wont see a difference, but you will see one on fast action scenes.

Wait until 1440i/1440p are released. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the PS3 can have a firmware upgrade to display this resolution.

This is very true. There is a big difference between 1080i and 1080p.

Beware of those that claim they can't see the difference, for they are simple and slow like those gentle people who can't see the image in the 3D Stereograms.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by JoeKickass

This is very true. There is a big difference between 1080i and 1080p.

Beware of those that claim they can't see the difference, for they are simple and slow like those gentle people who can't see the image in the 3D Stereograms.

lol dumb a$$

[Copywriter]

Originally Posted by becomingwater

Wait until 1440i/1440p are released. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the PS3 can have a firmware upgrade to display this resolution.

What? Damn I'm lagging in info.

So, if I were thinking of buying another TV next year, I should wait for 1440p?

Of course, will it even matter?

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by emperoredals11

I found this article, and was wondering how truthful it is.

1080iv1080p/

From the Article:

We are in a digital world and interlaced sould be replced by progressive formats. It was a cludge for 1930's B&W and 1954 color TV to work timed to 60 cycle AC.

1080p/24 (24fps) uses less space then 1080i/60 (30fps).

There is talk on using mpeg4 for broadcast to allow for 1080p/60 - upping the bar over video based 720p/60.

Film based 1080p/24 and 1080p/6O from a 60fps video camera ends the debate over 1080i/60 vs 720p/60 for good.