DLP Improvement?

[Fife]

Are the next generation DLPs going to work out the kinks? Will it become the new standard? Is LCD the next standard?

 

[BMXTRIX]

What kinks are you referring to?

DLP has superior contrast, better color, faster response, and typically less screen door than LCD, though LCD is picking up the pace.

The big downfall is that some people have a problem with single chip DLPs with the rainbow effect and the price on DLP is typically higher than LCD.

We will continue to see prices fall though and hopefully more and more 3 chip DLP products will become available that won't cost 20-30 grand.

A $5,000 3 chip DLP sounds pretty close to my idea of a perfect display.

 

[Rob Babcock]

A $1000 three chip would be better! Hey, I can dream, can't I?

 

[RipperHoss]

The fact that a DLP is an entirely mechanical TV is a little menacing to me. Maybe it's the old saying that anything that is moving will eventually stop moving ... and 1.5 million microscopic mirrors/chip are an awful lot of options of ways to go wrong.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I suppose philosophically you may have a point, but thus far I've never even heard a rumor of a stuck mirror. Each one has extremely low mass, they're pretty well sealed, and you basically never muck around with it. They're rated for millions upon millions of cycles, and would probably be pretty easy to replace if service was needed. I've used one for quite awhile now with no maintainance save changing bulbs. My advice: don't sweat it.

 

[Engine Joe]

I'll also add that most people don't see the rainbow effect of the one v. three chip setup. I personally have only seen it when using specific calibration test screens that involve pixel-wide lines AND I move my head from side to side quickly. I haven't seen it when actually watching content.

And I believe the testing has shown a DLP's mechanics will be good for about 20 years of usage... and frankly, let's face it: most of us will upgrade our sets after 5-8 years of usage anyway (the average I think is 8 years; less for tech geeks).

YMMV.

 

[soundjunkie]

Supposedly the new xHD3 Chip in the new 1080p format TV's like from Samsung and LG will be a big improvement. They're supposed to start showing up in the market next month. There were examples at the CES show according to some releases I saw. They say they are quite impressive and a big leap forward in DLP technology.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Yes, better black levels, about twice the resolution of the 1280x720 chips... But, will the manufacturers make them so they accept 1080p native material? Probably not.

Should still look really good with 1080i native HD though.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Even 1080i looks very good properly scaled to a native 720P chipped DLP.

 

[soundjunkie]

Explain your comment a little more about "accepting 1080p"... I'm not an expert, so give me a little insight to what you're saying. I've learned more on this site than anywhere else. That's why I ask questions!

 

[Rob Babcock]

I'm sure that BMXTRIX can expand upon this, but progressive scan is more demanding on a set than interlaced display. Given the dearth of 1080P material (I haven't heard of any broadcast material at that standard) it's unclear whether or not it would be worth the expense of engineering it into the set.

 

[Duffinator]

Isn't the new HD/BD DVD standard 1080P? There are several sets due out this year with a native resolution of 1080P and I thought DLP was one of them. Are you saying the new TI chips will not do 1080P? Anybody have any links or articles to verify this?

 

[BMXTRIX]

Okay... Here we go.

All fixed pixel display devices are progressive. This means that a 1365x768 display (many plasmas) are 768p. Your computer LCD monitor may be over 1920x1200 - progressive. Alright, most people get that and you can ask, or search the forums, if you don't get it.

Now here is the kicker: HDTV is defined (poorly I might add) by the ATSC standards to include ONLY: 1080i and 720p. Any television that is ATSC compliant must be able to handle: 1080i, 720p, 480p, and 480i.

What is missing? Well - 1080p!

So, while a set... let's say the BRAND NEW Sharp 1920x1080 (1080p) LCD flat panel display everyone can go look at one at Best Buy, is a 1080p device, the processors on board this projector do not accept 1080p.

There is a new projector from Sony (or Barco?) that is also 1920x1080 that does not accept 1080p into it. While many computer video cards can output 1080p, nothing else that exists currently in production can.

So, for whatever reason, manufacturers don't build video processors into their equipment that accept 1080p native content. So, if your PC outputs 1080p directly to the new Sharp or to a 1080p DLP, it is not necessarily going to pass that video through the processor to the screen.

I have NO IDEA WHY! Really, don't ask me why it won't accept it. I know the newest top dollar Sanyo wide screen 1920x1080 projector DOES accept 1080p native material. But, it is simply not something manufacturers think is required of their products yet.

Now, does that mean that the new DLP projectors won't display 1080p?

No! The chip is 1920x1080 pixels... So ALL the projector will ever (EVER!) display is 1080p. It just means that you won't necessarily be able to feed the projector 1080p. Fixed pixel displays are not what goes in, comes out the same devices. They are - what goes in, then it gets processed to fit on the number of pixels that the display has, then it is put on the display devices. This is the same reason people see that a plasma is EDTV (480p) and go "No, I want HDTV." completely clueless that the plasma they looked at will accept all ATSC standard inputs.

OR - In summary:
The output resolution of a display has nothing to do with what it accepts or is required to accept on the input side and a display to be badged HDTV or ATSC compliant has no need to accept an input of 1080p. So, if you see a new DLP with the new chip, and 1080p is important to you (it should be with BD on the way!) then don't assume that the TV can handle 1080p on the input.

 

[hopjohn]

Before anyone gets too concerned about their set being able to handle 1080p, remember that the improvement from 480p to 720p/1080i with movies will be pretty considerable. It will be better than 95% or more of all movie theaters out there. Besides. it is something to look forward to and enjoy while you are saving up for that next generation 1080p capable set. I just hope your HD set now has DVI-D or HDMI, if not then well.... I feel for you.

 

[soundjunkie]

Okay!

BM'r, thanks for the explanation. I'm confused, but now I'm at least in the gray, not the black hole. That is why I love this forum!

So, at the risk of sounding like a complete idiot, do I summize that even though these new sets with the xHD3 chip are a step in the right direction, that they aren't as big of a deal as they are made out to be? I guess the question is if the new sets don't "accept" 1080p, but display it, can they be "upgraded" to accept it when it becomes more standard fare?

Thanks, as always to the group!

 

[BMXTRIX]

Probably can't be upgraded... But, some manufacturers will make a point to include 1080p in their xHD3 designs, while others will not. I imagine that both will be available at the same time and it may be as much as a 50/50 split on whether your 1080p display actually accepts 1080p. Just something to double check prior to your purchase. I imagine that the specs will be pretty easy to find when the sets start becoming available and any smart manufacturer will include 1080p as an acceptable resolution with more HD technologies pushing through the door.

 

[docferdie]

I don't even think that we are even ready for 1080 p yet. At current bitrates used by broadcasters, 1080i still shows motion artifacts in very fast moving scenes. If high def content gets bumped up to about 25 to 30 Mbps then maybe I will get excited about the 1080p display. Even computer games are far from running at 1920x1080p at 60 fps--add to that, the fact that not all graphics cards are cable of such a high resolution over the DVI port.
To me a 1080p display is nothing more than a slightly better way of viewing 1080i content with worse performance for 720p content and currently available real world video gaming situations.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I went to blu-ray.com and searched on 1080p and one thing led me to this pretty good article: http://www.cedmagazine.com/ced/2004/0604/06e.htm

I think the last line says it best: "Such unification is “not could be, but will be. 720p will almost certainly give way to 1080p and so will 1080i–ultimately, in the long run."

That is coming from the BROADCAST point of view. The Blu-Ray camp is almost definitely going to be putting out 1080p players within a few years. If the first generation BD players don't support 1080p, then the next generation will. Just like a current DVD player... All DVDs are put on the disc as 480p material, and then are decoded (now by upconverting players) to 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i. Imagine the quality if the original disc always was 1080p? Imagine if that was a 24hz, matching the original frame rate of the motion picture camera exactly with that resolution?

Now, forget broadcasting, which according to the article is eventually inevitable... Blu-Ray Disc within just a few years will likely allow all your movies to be displayed at 1080p Likely meaning that the technology is there, but hasn't been finalized. Broadcasts occur using MPEG2 encoding. BD can use MPEG4, which is a much better compression scheme producing high video quality at the same data rate. But, BD isn't stuck with the data rates offerred by cable or dvd. It has available about twice the cable rate and 3 times the dvd data rate. Or, when you think about it: They have twice as much bandwidth available as current 1080i broadcast HDTV, and better compressors for the video. This all results in a 1080p image that would blow away 1080i and 720p with relatively zero artifacts.

Okay, all that said, I still wouldn't go overboard spending money on a native 1080p set... but if I got a TV that was 1080p native, then I might spend a few hundred extra to make sure it actually accepts 1080p.

 

[soundjunkie]

BMX & Rob,
This has been a great thread and will definitely help as I move ahead on my future HT room. It makes perfect sense to ensure the display will accept 1080p if it is the standard for that set. I guess in the mean time, if you're ahead of the curve by a year, will the current standard of 720p/1080i still look good, worse, or better, on the 1080p display. I know the conversion step to the resolution of the set can't help but degrade the signal, but does the extra resolution pay off in the end? When 1080p becomes more standard fare, as I think it will as the year progresses, then has it been worth the time?

I will definitely check them out as soon as I see they are on the market. The Sammy is a pedestal display, which I'm not a fan of, but at least if the tech is there for it, the other TT models will incorporate it too.

 

[docferdie]

BMX & Rob,
, will the current standard of 720p/1080i still look good, worse, or better, on the 1080p display.

720p will definitely look worse when scaled to a 1080p display. Just look at any flat panel computer monitor and set the display resolution to any value below native. 1080i can in theory look the same if you can somehow force weave the picture. If bob deinterlacing comes into play then you would get picture degradation on 1080i images as well--this is a controversial point as well as some people believe that the change from interlaced to progressive scan results in a better picture--I am still of the belief that if an image was shot interlaced then the best way to view it is interlaced; ditto with progressive images. For the foreseeable future a 1080p display--even one that accepts 1080p natively and displays it correctly will probably be nothing more than an expensive conversation piece.