1080i -vs- 1080p

[mouettus]

Ok now... lets talk about comparison. Put two old fashioned tube televisions side by side. One is interlaced display and the other is progressive. We all have to agree that we can obviously see the difference since I don't think the resolution can achieve much higher than 480 horizontal lines.

But now let's put two 52 inches DLP HDTVs side by side. Still with the same source, are you sure you will be able to notice some visual improvement from interlaced to progressive since there are hella lotta lines (1080)!!??

If so, which one would be better? 720p or 1080i? (personnal question here since my toshiba can achieve at best 1080i)

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Popular topic if you do a search. 720p is better for fast moving shows - ie sports or gaming, compared to 1080i.

1080p will undoubtedly be better than 1080i as long as the source is true 1080p media. I wouldn't compare current "upscaling" 1080p versus 1080i, as most 1080p sets are right now. Wait for Blu-ray and true 1080p games/movies, then do the comparison. True 1080p will fill that gap where 1080i (somewhat) suffers on gaming and sporting events, and will "one up" 720p.

 

[BMXTRIX]

The bottom line is that there is no clear cut 'best' between 1080i and 720p. Since 1080i is interlaced it only shows 1920x540 lines every 1/60th of a second - about a million pixels. Compare that to 720p which shows 1280x720 pixels every 1/60th of a second... once again, about a million pixels.

The nature of interlaced video though tends to be a bit weaker with fast motion - specifically sports. This is why some networks have gone with 720p broadcasts - to optimize sports video. 1080i though is better with more static images. Perhaps more of what you see with dramas and sitcoms. This is what you get from other networks.

Should shows start being recorded at 1080p/60 then the only way we are likely to actually see that delivered to our homes is through HD disc players such as HD-DVD and Blu-ray. This is about as good as you are likely to see at home anytime soon, and it really only makes sense when you start getting to 50" in size - at a minimum - and are fairly close to the display for seating.

Personally, I want 1080/24p and 1080/60p from my next projector as native display rates. Should be killer at 24hz for movie playback and likewise at 60hz it should handle 1080i footage incredibly well.

 

[aarond]

when it comes to dlp there is really no difference between 1080p and 720p.
because they are both about 1 mega pixel. the 720p is 1280 x 720 and the 1080p is 960 x 1080 if it were a true 1920 x 1080p then it would have a big advantage. also 1080i is about 1 mega pixel also 1920 x 540

 

[runninkyle17]

when it comes to dlp there is really no difference between 1080p and 720p.
because they are both about 1 mega pixel. the 720p is 1280 x 720 and the 1080p is 960 x 1080 if it were a true 1920 x 1080p then it would have a big advantage. also 1080i is about 1 mega pixel also 1920 x 540

You do realize that 1080p is true 1920 x 1080. I am not sure where you got the 960 x 1080 b/c that is completely wrong. Also, 1080i is not 1920 x 540 at all. The image on 1080i is just interlaced so it is actually a 1920 x 1080 resolution but the vertical lines are not progressively displayed. On most 1080p displays all 1080i inputs are said to be at 540p, but the display actually puts out the image at 540p and upscales it so that it will output at 1080 vertical lines.

I have heard many mistakes regarding the actual resolution of HD content. Another thing is that it is very difficult to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p unless you have a screen that is larger than 70". I have the 42" Westinghouse 1080p set and I got it because of its ability to be used as a computer monitor and also the fact that it has a great image. I am perfectly happy watching TV at 720p, but I like being able to have my computer image at full 1920 x 1080.

So in conclusion, 720p is actually better than 1080i in my opinion, but 1080p is a great resolution and much better than 1080i.

 

[sokrman14]

He gets the 960x1080 because the DLP chips used in Rear projection use a chip with that resolution. To make in 1920x1080 it shifts the chip over every 1/100th of a second, obviously too fast for our eye to catch on.

 

[BMXTRIX]

...1080i is not 1920 x 540 at all. The image on 1080i is just interlaced so it is actually a 1920 x 1080 resolution but the vertical lines are not progressively displayed.

Not sure if you were referring to my post, but I was very specific about this:

1080i only shows 1920x540 every 1/60th of a second. It is the horizontal lines that are alternated from frame to frame. I personally hate the term 'field' as for many, this indicates that the two fields in an interlaced signal that make up one frame are the same - they are not.

In fact, 1080i shows 1920x540 60 times a second and each 1/60th of a second it alternates showing the odd, then the even lines of each frame. If you put the two frames together, if there is motion, you do not get one perfectly lines up image, you get stair stepping, jaggies, etc. This is why decent processing from true 1080i to 1080p should happen at the 1080p level, not at the 540p level and several frames should be stored to an image buffer to make this happen. Only about 50% of displays actually do this.

The 960x1080 thing is correct - but it isn't as well. DLP has always worked by turning mirrors on and off very quickly to produce an image. Likewise, a CRT television only uses ONE electron beam to produce an image. It doesn't use 2 million individual beams to create 1080i. So, making claims that DLP can't achieve true 1080p through wobulation (the technology behind having each mirror do double duty) is ridiculous. Other claims about DLP can be made though for sure - ie: RBE.

If I had to get 1080p today, then I would go LCoS. Both Sony and JVC have some excellent LCoS projectors on the market that are true 1080p and don't have rainbow issues.

Since I don't have to buy today, I will wait to see what LCD and DLP have to offer in 1-2 years. I really want a new front projector though.

 

[runninkyle17]

Has anyone even looked at the Westinghouse 42" 1080p set?

It is an LCD and it is also an amazing display. Westinghouse is set to come out with a 47" version very soon and I think it is going to be priced arounf $3299-3499. The LCD technology I think will survive longer than plasma because of the heat and power consumption issues with plasma. However, in the end I am going to side with the SED sect if they can evey figure out when to release the stupid things.

 

[j_garcia]

Don't look for SED or OLED anytime soon on the serious consumer market, as lifespan and possibly color shift over time is still an issue apparently for both.