|
|
Posted by Jay G. on 06/05/07 04:11
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 20:40:37 -0000, Doug Jacobs wrote:
> Jay G. <Jay@tmbg.org> wrote:
>
>> People can distinguish between anamorphic and non-anamorphic DVDs, and
>> that's only a 20% increase in resolution. 1080p is *twice* the resolution
>> than 720p, so it's definitely noticeable.
>
> But that also assumes that the TV itself isn't upscaling. I have a 1080p
> set, however, it upscales everything to 1080p regardless of the source
> material and signal. So, on it, there's virtually no difference between
> 720p and 1080p.
Well, you're saying that because you're viewing it on a 1080p *set*. If
you put a 720p and 1080p set of the same size side-by side, the 720
*signal* is probably going to look better on the 1080p set than on the 720p
set with the same native resolution as the signal, due to the upconversion.
And a 1080 signal is *definitely* going to look better on the native
resolution 1080p set than it will look *downconverted* on the 720p set.
So 1080p is better no matter what HD resolution you're looking at.
> Most source material is going to be at 720p, unless you plan on heavily
> investing in Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.
Derek mentioned in his original post he was going to buy into BD in the
near future.
> So, even a 720p set which will downscale
> 1080i/1080p signals will still look great.
Oh, no question there. A 720p set is still 3x more resolution than a
standard definition set, and HD programming is going to look that much
better on it. If all you can afford is a 720p set, than buy one; just
don't expect yourself to not want to upgrade again before the set gives out
on you.
-Jay
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|