Posted by Joshua Zyber on 01/22/07 13:08

"M.I.5�" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45b46b89$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
>> All LCD displays are inherently progressive scan. There is no such
>> thing as an LCD that can display interlaced fields. When you feed an
>> interlaced signal into an LCD display, a deinterlacing chip inside
>> the set will recombine the fields and display them as progressive
>> frames. The lag time you speak of (which has been greatly reduced in
>> recent years to the point where decent sets are barely a couple of
>> milliseconds) is from one FRAME to the next, not one FIELD to the
>> next. It is impossible for an LCD to display interlaced fields
>> individually.
>
> You are right that in all current production LCDs, the panel is driven
> progressively. But it is quite possible to drive LCDs interlaced (and
> the older little portable TVs were (like the 2-3 inch Casio jobs)).
> The upshot for current LCDs is that it doesn't matter whether the
> driving video signal is interlaced or progressive - it gets converted
> anyway (which was the point).

I fail to see the revelance of you trying to make a distinction between
LCD and plasma or progressive CRT.

[Back to original message]