Hd Ready,true Hd,full Hd.....

[drsmith]

SNIP:

Here's an exercise. Look at any show on TV, especially filmed outdoor material like, say CSI or Third Watch. Blacks Blacks Blacks. Right?

Now sit in your lounge room and look around you. What blacks do you see? Well, in my case there's my black leather business shoes as I just got home from work. There's the black bezel around my computer monitor, there's my torch in case of power cuts (QLD) - erm, there's a set of dumbells in the corner with black disks on a chrome rod... that's about it.

Sit out in your yard... you probably won't see a black anywhere.

The point I'm making is that apart from coal and a few bird and animal species , the only black you will ever see in real life is some object that has been deliberately coloured black by a human.

If all we saw on the telly was only what we see in real life, there would not be much point in turning it on.

[PanaSung]

Despite what Owen says about the black level's of Plasma, I think the latest models are okay.

Btw, feed any large HDTV a pay TV signal at your peril.

[MikeAusDTV]

These are pretty much for broadcasting, whereas we were talking about 1080p in the context of screen resolution.

If you were to buy a 1080p screen, take it home & find out it's only 1440x1080 pixels I'm sure you'd cry foul

Exactly the point I'm trying to make in my first reply. It's dangerous to believe that a TV advertised as "1080" means it MUST be capable of displaying 1920 pixels horizontally. i.e 1080 does NOT mean 1920 horizontally.

That's one reason I always download the Manual of any device before buying it - I want to know its limitations in detail !

[BribieG]

If all we saw on the telly was only what we see in real life, there would not be much point in turning it on.

Fair point, what you are saying is that a TV presentation or a Movie is a form of art and, in our culture, we expect it to have a certain 'look'. However there are a lot of shows that look better and better, the closer to 'real' visual information they are. Example Planet Earth. Back in the days of silent movies it was expected that people would walk and gesture in a very stylised way that looks very odd today. The current black and white Clooney Film (forgotten title) had to be shot using lenses and methods used in the 40s and the actors spoke in the careful and beautifully enunciated "hollywood" english of the time, giving the correct look and feel of the era.

However this doesn't mean that manufacturers like Sony or whoever should not be constantly striving to produce displays with more 'life like' pictures.

Interesting link at CNET on this point "reinventing the colour TV" covering the subject raised by Anton-p

http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,339272520,00.htm

[Owen]

Despite what Owen says about the black level's of Plasma, I think the latest models are okay.

Ok for you and many others I have no doubt, but no where near good enough for me.

I have been spoiled by a display that provided real black and nothing else is the same after that.

In a dim or dark environment used for viewing movies, grey blacks create a milky haze over the picture which is very unsatisfying.

There is nothing quite like objects appearing out of the black abyss of a totally black screen, the effect is holographic.

Btw, feed any large HDTV a pay TV signal at your peril.

How wrong you are there.

I am finding Austar very enjoyable on a really big screen.

Austar actually looks better on my 70” SXRD then on my 86cm (34”) CRT or my 57” CRT RPTV, I’m impressed.

The picture is a little soft as one would expect from the low res and heavy filtering used on Foxtel - Austar, but it is also almost totally free of compression artifacts or any other digital nasties on the channels I watch.

Free to air often looks noisy and dirty in comparison, but is more detailed.

[PanaSung]

Ok for you and many others I have no doubt, but no where near good enough for me.

I have been spoiled by a display that provided real black and nothing else is the same after that.

I'll have to make a point of trying to audition one.

Plasma still have the advantage of cost and size, ie, you can throw a 42 in the bedroom.

[drsmith]

I'll have to make a point of trying to audition one.

Plasma still have the advantage of cost and size, ie, you can throw a 42 in the bedroom.

How will you go about performing such an audition ?

I tried two LCD's last year and had the Dell 24" LCD to compare them against. One of them had the same brightness and contrast ratio specs as the Dell, but it's black level was considerably worse.

[PanaSung]

How will you go about performing such an audition ?

I tried two LCD's last year and had the Dell 24" LCD to compare them against. One of them had the same brightness and contrast ratio specs as the Dell, but it's black level was considerably worse.

Find a showroom that has them on display{just for curiosity's sake}.

Thing that has me curious is why DLP's look awesome{on display}, but all 3LCD's look like horsekaka......they're obviously extremely sensitive to feeds+ require tinkering.

[alfalfa]

Find a showroom that has them on display{just for curiosity's sake}.

Do you think they will agree to turn off all the lights ... you wont be able to see any difference in black levels with the lights on.

[excalibur]

I have a 1080p projector and I would like to hook up a HD STB. I've heard that it would be better to use component (RGB) rather than HDMI for a better picture.

How can this be? I thought that a straight digital signal would be better than a converted digitital to analogue signal? Can anyone help me?

[AndrewW]

I have a 1080p projector and I would like to hook up a HD STB. I've heard that it would be better to use component (RGB) rather than HDMI for a better picture.

How can this be? I thought that a straight digital signal would be better than a converted digitital to analogue signal? Can anyone help me?

Bollocks.

I can't think of any reason why that would be true.

Hooking up my HD DVD player to my 720p projector, I noticed the component output gave a slightly softer picture than the HDMI. HDMI was better, not a quantum leap, but definitely better.

Of course the best test is to try out both options yourself

Andrew.

[PanaSung]

Do you think they will agree to turn off all the lights ... you wont be able to see any difference in black levels with the lights on.

I'd be happy if they looked as good as the LG 56in DLP with the lights on.....the 3LCD's don't.

[excalibur]

Bollocks.

I can't think of any reason why that would be true.

Hooking up my HD DVD player to my 720p projector, I noticed the component output gave a slightly softer picture than the HDMI. HDMI was better, not a quantum leap, but definitely better.

Of course the best test is to try out both options yourself

Andrew.

I guess I should do that,

I should tell you that this advise was given to me by a very reputable av store in inner melb.

Bit of a worry isnt it! Keep you posted on my demo

Thanks Andrew.

David.

[AndrewW]

I should tell you that this advise was given to me by a very reputable av store in inner melb.

I mean I guess its possible if the particular STB or display has a known problem with HDMI, but then why would they be selling it if that was the case ?

Andrew.

[Struggo]

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=698612

[orrelljet]

HD Ready - Wikipedia does have "a" definition of this term at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_ready.

" The term has had official use in Europe since January 2005 when, EICTA (European Information, Communications and Consumer Electronics Technology Industry Associations) announced the requirements for the label.

EICTA introduced the label as a quality sign for the differentiation of display equipment, capable of processing and displaying high-definition signals."

"The fact that a product bears the label "HD ready" does not necessarily mean that it can display the full picture resolution possible from a HD source. Most HD-ready sets do not have enough pixels to give true pixel-for-pixel representation without interpolation of the higher HD resolution (1920x1080) - or even the lower HD resolution (1280x720) horizontally (CRT based sets, or the plasma based sets with 1024x768 resolution)."

"HD ready requirements

In order to be awarded the label “HD ready” a display device has to cover the following requirements:

Display, display engine

The minimum native resolution of the display (e.g. LCD, PDP) or display engine (e.g. DLP) is 720 physical lines in wide aspect ratio.

Video Interfaces

The display device accepts HD input via:

Analog YPbPr. “HD ready” displays support analog YPbPr as a HD input format to allow full compatibility with today's HD video sources in the market. Support of the YPbPr signal should be through common industry standard connectors directly on the HD ready display or through an adaptor easily accessible to the consumer; and:

DVI or HDMI

HD capable inputs accept the following HD video formats:

1280x720 @ 50 and 60Hz progressive scan (“720p”), and

1920x1080 @ 50 and 60Hz interlaced (“1080i”)

The DVI or HDMI input supports copy protection (HDCP) "

I assume Consumer Protection laws in Australia don't require sets labelled "HD Ready" to comply with these requirements.

Mike

Interesting to see someone's picked up on the cultural differences. I've been browsing this forum for a while now, as I'm hoping to move to Australia later this year. As an enthusiast, the quality of broadcast TV is, naturally, high on my list of priorities; HD FTA? You guys don't know just how lucky you are! Having said that, consumers in the UK seem to be better protected when it comes to this whole HD Ready debate.

As wikipedia states, in order for a TV to be HD Ready (in Europe) it must have a minimum of 720 horizontal scan lines and have an HD input. There are very few HD Capable sets left on the market, other than those found at retailers who're having problems shifting old stock; I believe Panasonic may still make one but I'm not sure.

So, the UK is full of HD ready and Full HD sets but has little (free) content available and you chaps are spoilt for choice, in comparison, but still have spotty shop assistants (found the world over) trying to flog you SD-res panels?? Something doesn't make sense...

[MikeAusDTV]

trying to flog you SD-res panels?? Something doesn't make sense...

Not only are they flogging SD panels succesfully, they have been flogging 480 line SD panels that can't even display our 576 line SD and Analogue Tv at full resolution !!

[AndrewW]

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=698612

yep, that pretty much just says what I've already tried to say at least twice in this thread ...

Andrew.

note: not having a go, just pointing out that we seem to be going around in circles ...

this is a very good post:

"The truth is this: The Toshiba HD-DVD player outputs 1080i, and the Samsung Blu-ray player outputs both 1080i and 1080p. What they fail to mention is that it makes absolutely no difference which transmission format you use—feeding 1080i or 1080p into your projector or HDTV will give you the exact same picture. Why? Both disc formats encode film material in progressive scan 1080p at 24 frames per second. It does not matter whether you output this data in 1080i or 1080p since all 1080 lines of information on the disc are fed into your video display either way. The only difference is the order in which they are transmitted. If they are fed in progressive order (1080p), the video display will process them in that order. If they are fed in interlaced format (1080i), the video display simply reassembles them into their original progressive scan order. Either way all 1080 lines per frame that are on the disc make it into the projector or TV. The fact is, if you happen to have the Samsung Blu-ray player and a video display that takes both 1080i and 1080p, you can switch the player back and forth between 1080i and 1080p output and see absolutely no difference in the picture. So this notion that the Blu-ray player is worth more money due to 1080p output is nonsense."

and so is this: marketing hype vs reality

In fact, the 1080i output of the Toshiba HD-DVD is significantly better than the 1080p output of the Samsung BD-DVD.

This is because the Samsung actually converts 1080p stored on the disc to 1080i and then using a very cheap and inexpensive chip, converts it back to 1080p (also with some additional filtering which destroys the image). This was done because when the player was first designed, it was designed to output 1080i. MARKETING showed them that people did not understand and 1080p was a BIG selling point (even though it makes little difference). Well, instead of properly taking the signal from the disc, they simply threw another part into the mix to output 1080p.

Try it - if you use the Samsung BDP-1000 and a good set, change the output to 1080i and the picture will improve!!! This is why some early reports mentioned that the image looked better over component than HDMI - this is only because the component outputs only go to 1080i!

Andrew.

[orrelljet]

Not only are they flogging SD panels succesfully, they have been flogging 480 line SD panels that can't even display our 576 line SD and Analogue Tv at full resolution !!

Problem is, most consumers stroll into their local Comet (or Aus equivalent) and some very helpful chap in a bright blue/orange/red shirt (delete as appropriate) proceeds to baffle them with technology. Most buyers haven't a clue what they actually want, let alone what they're actually paying for, which is why this post was started in the first place.

As most others have already stated, look at the type of stuff you watch, or would like to watch, and pick a display that best suits your needs and remember this phrase when you're instore... "No thanks, I'm just looking". Make a note of what you see on display, go home and do your homework. There's nothing more satisfying that making a shop-bod look like an idiot, when they try it on with a customer who already has all the answers...

[alfalfa]

Not only are they flogging SD panels succesfully, they have been flogging 480 line SD panels that can't even display our 576 line SD and Analogue Tv at full resolution !!

Wrong! A 480p plasma has enough resolution to resolve all the detail in a 576i source. Please read this comprehensive post by Adam-o to understand why

http://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?showtop...5612&st=71# *EDIT link no longer valid*

"The point most people seem to miss, however, is that although a PAL SD signal is comprised of 576 active lines, the actual detail contained within is significantly less than what a 576-line image could optimally contain. SD is interlaced. Television networks must apply filtering to the signal in order to prevent/reduce interline flicker. This filtering blurs the image vertically. 480 horizontal lines is sufficient to resolve the true detail contained within a PAL SD-encoded 720 x 576 raster.

Even a film source that has 25 motion updates per second (and therefore does not have to be de-interlaced upon display), when broadcast as SD, requires the same vertical filtering otherwise fine details will flicker annoyingly on CRT displays such that you probably wouldn't be able to stand watching. The bottom line is that you never get 576 lines of "actual resolution" out of a standard* PAL SD signal, even though the format explicitly contains 576 active lines per frame.

Now I'm not saying that a 1024 x 576 plasma panel would not be better -- clearly it would. But not because it would be able to resolve any additional detail -- there isn't any! It would be better for much the same reasons as why a HD panel is better. Less obvious pixel structure, ability to better resolve HD signals, etc. Another reason that some may point to is the absence altogether of any required scaling when viewing an SD signal. This wouldn't be the case, however. Why, you ask? Well, there's two reasons. First, the transmitted raster is 720 x 576, whereas the panel is 1024 x 576 (square pixel). Second, it is standard for consumer displays to "overscan" the signal, meaning that less than the full 576 lines of received signal are actually mapped onto the panel. So even if the panel is 576 lines, scaling is required to map say, only 540, of those lines onto the panel. Yes, even 480-line SD panels scale NTSC SD 480-line signals.

So let's stop perpetuating this myth that 480-line SD panels are not fit for the PAL market. More pixels is better, but not because you are going to resolve any additional detail out of a standard* PAL SD signal.

[PanaSung]

So let's stop perpetuating this myth that 480-line SD panels are not fit for the PAL market. More pixels is better, but not because you are going to resolve any additional detail out of a standard* PAL SD signal.

Yep...and one only need view a good DVD being played on a Panasonic SD plasma to witness excellent PQ.

[50mxe20]

Yep...and one only need view a good DVD being played on a Panasonic SD plasma to witness excellent PQ.

And even better on a "insert brand name" HD plasma.

[PanaSung]

And even better on a "insert brand name" HD plasma.

What if someone was moreso interested in Fox/SDTV and DVD?

What's the total cost difference between a useable HDTV set up and a SDTV?

[50mxe20]

What if someone was moreso interested in Fox/SDTV and DVD?

What's the total cost difference between a useable HDTV set up and a SDTV?

Not interested in Fox and have no wish to talk about it. Talking DVD (and of course it can be upscaled).

How long is a piece of string.

[Mining Man]

What if someone was moreso interested in Fox/SDTV and DVD?

~

Then, they'd probably be reading a different thread!!

~

What's the total cost difference between a useable HDTV set up and a SDTV?

About 6 months subscription to Foxtel...