PanaSung Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 Then, they'd probably be reading a different thread!! About 6 months subscription to Foxtel... LOLOLOLOL. Actually, why not answer the question properly....hmmm? Here let me do it. 42in HDTV Plasma with built in HD tuner=$2600 PVR capable of recording in HD=$700+ SDTV plasma=$1400. 2600 700 ----- 3300 1400 ----- $1900.....ouchhh!!......1900 more to HD.
Mining Man Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 ~Actually, why not answer the question properly....hmmm? Here let me do it. ~ You might want to try again, if you think that's answering it properly. Sheesh, you ask a very specific question, and then roll out your own rehearsed answer. Your agenda is plainly obvious for all to see. It's just a shame that you can't be a little less obviously biased. Why do you need a HD PVR if the display has a built in HD tuner? Does the SD display you refer to have a built in SD tuner, or does it only have an analogue tuner? Why not compare the cheapest HD panel, coupled with the cheapest HD STB? It doesn't matter what your agenda is, to the unbiased individual, the comparison you talk about can be reduced to well under $1k these days.
jakes Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 Actually, why not answer the question properly....hmmm?Here let me do it. 42in HDTV Plasma with built in HD tuner=$2600 PVR capable of recording in HD=$700+ SDTV plasma=$1400. Seriously, why do you need a HD PVR if your panel has a HD tuner already built in. That doesn't really make sense. Edit: What Mining Man said.
50mxe20 Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 Actually, why not answer the question properly....hmmm? 1. Because it's drifting off topic; and2. Because it's yet again the old Foxtel chestnut that we are all sick of. Take it back to the relevant Foxtel forum and discuss it there with anyone who wants to. Or think of something new that is relevant to this thread.
sam2can Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 Why add the cost of a HD PVR to the equation but not an SD one? Is SD that bad that no one wants to record it? Disclaimer: I own a SD TV and PVR
MikeAusDTV Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 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... Nah, it's so easy to do, I don't find it satisfying anymore. Mike
MikeAusDTV Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 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 An Analogue TV or Digital SD is broken down into 576 very distinct lines - it's not a resolution of about 576 lines - it is very definite lines that are displayed. If you are going to display it on a display with 480 lines - whether CRT, LCD or plasma then the original signal will have to be resampled to map the 576 lines onto the 480 available. The drop in resolution may not be noticeable with average content that's moving, but whenever you subsample you will get aliasing - a moire pattern if the original signal contains vertical spatial frequencies around the scan line frequency. Since no-one ever made large 576 horiz line dispays, we don't have a chance to compare SD signals on 480 line and 576 line displays. Mike
MikeAusDTV Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 yep, that pretty much just says what I've already tried to say at least twice in this thread ...Andrew. QUOTE "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 QUOTE 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! this is a very good post: and so is this: marketing hype vs reality Andrew. Ever wondered why current HDTV standards only allow for 1080i transmission - because 1080p contains TWICE as much information as 1080i and it just can't handle that much info. In every frame (1/24 sec) a 1080i signal contains 540 lines but a 1080p signal contains 1080 lines. If you have a display that can only display a 1080i signal, then it won't matter if you feed it with a 1080p or 1080i signal - it will just sub-sample the 1080p signal and update every second line in every frame - because the display just can't be updated faster. Mike
Owen Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 An Analogue TV or Digital SD is broken down into 576 very distinct lines - it's not a resolution of about 576 lines - it is very definite lines that are displayed.If you are going to display it on a display with 480 lines - whether CRT, LCD or plasma then the original signal will have to be resampled to map the 576 lines onto the 480 available. The drop in resolution may not be noticeable with average content that's moving, but whenever you subsample you will get aliasing - a moire pattern if the original signal contains vertical spatial frequencies around the scan line frequency. Since no-one ever made large 576 horiz line dispays, we don't have a chance to compare SD signals on 480 line and 576 line displays. Mike Ill informed post number one. Ever wondered why current HDTV standards only allow for 1080i transmission - because 1080p contains TWICE as much information as 1080i and it just can't handle that much info.In every frame (1/24 sec) a 1080i signal contains 540 lines but a 1080p signal contains 1080 lines. If you have a display that can only display a 1080i signal, then it won't matter if you feed it with a 1080p or 1080i signal - it will just sub-sample the 1080p signal and update every second line in every frame - because the display just can't be updated faster. Mike Ill informed post number 2 Want to go for three?
MikeAusDTV Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p#720p_versus_1080i "While 720p presents a complete 720 line frame to the viewer between 24 to 60 times each second (depending on the format), 1080i presents the picture as 50 or 60 partial 540 line "fields" per second (24 complete 1080-line fields"
50mxe20 Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 How does one record a HD signal without a PVR? PC.And I believe I saw in another thread a DVD recorder that could deal with HD. ---------------- Wondered where you were Owen. I almost grabbed one of your posts but then thought "No, leave it for Owen" he'll deal with it when he's ready.
Owen Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p#720p_versus_1080i"While 720p presents a complete 720 line frame to the viewer between 24 to 60 times each second (depending on the format), 1080i presents the picture as 50 or 60 partial 540 line "fields" per second (24 complete 1080-line fields" What has any of that to do with a comparison between 1080i and 1080p as video formats? The highest frame rate for 1080p video sources is 24 frames per second. 1080i in Australia is 50 fields per second, which can carry 25 progressive frames per second or true field based 50 field per second interlaced video, which deinterlaces to 1080p 50. 1080i 50 requires MORE bandwidth then 1080p 24 and US 1080i 60 even more again. True interlaced 1080i from an interlaced video camera has the same resolution as 1080p in still or low motion scenes but sacrifices some vertical resolution in motion, depending on the quality of the deinterlacing. However the advantage of true 1080i is MUCH better motion smoothness then 1080p 24, which has poor motion portrayal.
cummo Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 An Analogue TV or Digital SD is broken down into 576 very distinct lines - it's not a resolution of about 576 lines - it is very definite lines that are displayed.If you are going to display it on a display with 480 lines - whether CRT, LCD or plasma then the original signal will have to be resampled to map the 576 lines onto the 480 available. The drop in resolution may not be noticeable with average content that's moving, but whenever you subsample you will get aliasing - a moire pattern if the original signal contains vertical spatial frequencies around the scan line frequency. Since no-one ever made large 576 horiz line dispays, we don't have a chance to compare SD signals on 480 line and 576 line displays. Mike Loewe had a 102cm SD crt around the same time that the first of the plasma panels were brought into Aus. I seriously considered this model against the SD plasma panel that I eventually bought. Picture quality was very similar and there was no noticeable difference in resolution or sharpness of picture on each. For the benefit of this thread, the plasma was 'hd ready' and the Loewe wasn't. Despite the plasma only being a 480p display, it was able to receive a picture from an HD source. The Loewe couldn't. The importance of this is the more information that can be provided in the source material, the higher the quality of the resulting picture on the plasma The term 'HD ready' probably no longer applies as all new displays now have that capability.
PanaSung Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 PC.And I believe I saw in another thread a DVD recorder that could deal with HD. ---------------- Wondered where you were Owen. I almost grabbed one of your posts but then thought "No, leave it for Owen" he'll deal with it when he's ready. I'm interested in that DVD recorder....which model is it? Also, don't forget, I have HDTV on my PC{and my PC only just cuts the mustard...18 months old}....so that's another cost to consider. Not sure why you think buying a SD plasma would be such a bad idea for a 4-5yr period....at which point Blueray will be as cheap as chips, as compatible as DVD, and PC's will have 10 000x the grunt they do now, and will run HDTV/blueray no worries cobber. I'm here on behalf of those who simply want to watch HDTV, DVD, pay TV.....you ethusiasts can dl all the HD junk off the web and whatever else you do. Personally, I don't have any desire to search the www looking for stuff/junk that one would use on a HD panel....I just want to watch TV and a few movies now and then. I also use my HDTV card to supply my overseas net buddies with aussie media, and they do the reverse. As I said before, the best pay TV service in the world is the PC.....but I often like stuff that's either not aired in OZ, or aired yrs later.
drsmith Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 I also use my HDTV card to supply my overseas net buddies with aussie media, and they do the reverse.As I said before, the best pay TV service in the world is the PC.....but I often like stuff that's either not aired in OZ, or aired yrs later. Do you hammer the pisser out of them with your own particular views like you do here ? Live and let live.
PanaSung Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 Do you hammer the pisser out of them with your own particular views like you do here ?Live and let live. I'm the admin/owner of the forum, LOL. Anyway, the TRUTH is, most of what I've been saying has been supported by other knowledgeable members in various threads, ....it's just that as HD enthusiast's, you didn't appreciate anyone exploring/detailing both the positive and the negative of HD......... .....remember, there's no downside to the truth unless you have a specific agenda.
drsmith Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 I'm the admin/owner of the forum, LOL. That does explain a lot. Anyway, the TRUTH is, most of what I've been saying has been supported by other knowledgeable members in various threads, ....it's just that as HD enthusiast's, you didn't appreciate anyone exploring/detailing both the positive and the negative of HD..............remember, there's no downside to the truth unless you have a specific agenda. So, what is your agenda ?
50mxe20 Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 .....remember, there's no downside to the truth unless you have a specific agenda. That has got to be the funniest thing I've seen today, or even this week. The kettle calling the pot black. Geez.
drsmith Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 SNIP:The kettle calling the pot black. Did you forget to put water in it ?
Grunter1503560097 Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 ...Also, don't forget, I have HDTV on my PC What sort of TV do you have connected to your PC?
PanaSung Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 What sort of TV do you have connected to your PC? 19 in PC monitor.
GaryCook Posted March 20, 2007 Posted March 20, 2007 I'm the admin/owner of the forum, LOL.Anyway, the TRUTH is, most of what I've been saying has been supported by other knowledgeable members in various threads, ....it's just that as HD enthusiast's, you didn't appreciate anyone exploring/detailing both the positive and the negative of HD......... .....remember, there's no downside to the truth unless you have a specific agenda. The problem is selectivity, tell the truth but not the whole truth. It is easy to pick out a truth that supports an argument and at the same time leave out a truth that doesn't. The truth is still being told, but it isn't all that is necessary to make a true judgement. cheers
Recommended Posts