|
|
Posted by M.I.5 on 01/15/07 08:06
"WinField" <doghouse@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:VFQph.62028$9S6.42080@newsfe15.phx...
>
> M.I.5 wrote:
>> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:i0s9q29nj6pn0c4po1f3r89hsjlij3rnid@4ax.com...
>>
>>>M.I.5 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Then try it for yourself. The difference is unmistakable. It may fly
>>>>in
>>>>the face of what you may think should be the case, but it happens to be
>>>>true.
>>>
>>>It would be expected that many displays rated at 576x720 do not
>>>display this much information with perfection, and that a
>>>higher-performace display would do a better job of it.
>>>
>>>But, no, your claim that you need a a 1440x1152 display to fully
>>>resolve DVD, is NOT true.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Have you actually tried it. Thought not.
>
>
> Have you actually tried it? Where? What was the model/manufacturer of
> the 1440x1152 display you tested? Against what consumer displays did you
> test? What testing methodology was used?
I didn't test, I viewed it. It flies in the face of what you would expect,
but it's true, the image is noticeably better. Our AV people regularly use
such displays for customer presentations. Don't know what make they are as
they are not here at the moment, but I expect all of the big manufacturers
make them. They are, of course, high end professional displays, not
available on the consumer market. I would be very surprised if there wasn't
a version optimised for the NTSC TV system.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|