|
|
Posted by Jay G. on 06/05/07 04:02
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 20:32:18 -0000, Doug Jacobs wrote:
> I wouldn't worry about the 720p vs. 1080p thing. For one thing, there
> really isn't much difference between 720p and 1080p,
The difference between 720p and 1080p is 200%, much more than the 20%
difference that anamorphic enhancement on DVDs provide.
> ...on a smaller screen (45" or smaller), the difference is going to
> be even less apparent.
This is really the only thing you got (half-way) right. Screen size,
relative to viewing distance, is going to affect whether or not the
increase in resolution anyway.
> Furthermore, most TV/cable stations are only in 720p anyways, with only a
> few using 1080i. It'll be quite a while before everyone switches to 1080p.
There's plenty of stuff being shown in 1080i now. And again, I was
speaking in terms of "future-proofing" his purchase, as Derek was looking
for a TV that would be able to serve him well past 2009.
> I think 720p should be fine - just make sure it's really 720p, and not
> something odd like 768..
Most "720p" LCD TV sets are really 768, or to be more technical, 1366x768.
It's a compromise resolution between the 1280x720 of HD and the 1024x768 of
the XGA monitor resolution. Thus the screen has enough pixels to display
both resolutions, and in the correct aspect ratio for each.
It's not really a problem, since the TV just upconverts the 1280x720 HD
signal slightly.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/04/21/whats-the-deal-with-1366-x-768/
> [768] tries to do a fakey 1080i...
This is just wrong on so many levels.
-Jay
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|