bigdonk Posted April 12, 2007 Posted April 12, 2007 7 HD melb now 1920x1080i, was previously 1440x1080i. Has this always been the case, or just started today ?
bigdonk Posted April 12, 2007 Author Posted April 12, 2007 Already a thread here hhmm, 1920x1080i seems to have started today, lets hope it stays this way but 1080p would be even better
digitalj Posted April 12, 2007 Posted April 12, 2007 hhmm, 1920x1080i seems to have started today, lets hope it stays this way but 1080p would be even better There's not enough bandwidth to do 1080p, and there aren't any or at least not enough decoders that can decode 1080p, although they could do 960x1080p, but who'd want that?
bigdonk Posted April 12, 2007 Author Posted April 12, 2007 There's not enough bandwidth to do 1080p, and there aren't any or at least not enough decoders that can decode 1080p, although they could do 960x1080p, but who'd want that? who knows, one day this may ( more like, likely to ) change, the only current limitation would be finding a DVB-T card that could handle 1080p, as far as the MP2 decoding goes, there are already a number of HDMI/HDCP/1080p PC components that does this in hardware. I've seen them in action...
Dave_L Posted April 18, 2007 Posted April 18, 2007 hhmm, 1920x1080i seems to have started today, lets hope it stays this way but 1080p would be even better Forgive me if I am incorrect (I am far from an expert), however isn't 1080i just as good as 1080p, as long as the 1080i content is de-interlaced correctly, to form a 1080p image ?
DrP Posted April 18, 2007 Posted April 18, 2007 Thats about it. A lot of shows are effectively progressive, just transmitted as interlaced (50i instead of 25p). Ignoring the interlace flags and playing as progressive gives excellent results with almost no effort.
Dave_L Posted April 18, 2007 Posted April 18, 2007 Thats about it. A lot of shows are effectively progressive, just transmitted as interlaced (50i instead of 25p). Ignoring the interlace flags and playing as progressive gives excellent results with almost no effort. So with this being the case, why is there a fuss over 1080p transmission, if 1080i/50 can give the same thing now ? Isn't it just a smarter or efficient way of transmitting the content ?
Dave_L Posted April 18, 2007 Posted April 18, 2007 Possibly. I start to get a bit lost when it comes to refresh rates. I'm assuming 50p is the preferred because it is similar to the 50Hz refresh rate of PAL ?
Recommended Posts