Posted by MassiveProng on 02/02/07 03:28

On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 14:57:48 -0500, Rick Merrill
<rick0.merrill@NOSPAM.gmail.com> Gave us:

>SFTVratings_troy@yahoo.com wrote:
>> David wrote:
>>> "Andrew Rossmann" <andysnewsreply@no_junk.comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:MPG.202aceb5f9bbf0eb989892@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>>>> In article <D_6wh.832427$5R2.679581@pd7urf3no>, stuart_miller@shaw.ca
>>>> says...
>>>>> <SFTVratings_troy@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:1170274597.382084.36170@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> For comparison other standards are:
>>>>>> 240 - VHS (ditto Betamax)
>>>>>> 330 - NTSC broadcast
>>>>>> 425 - laserdisc (ditto S-VHS)
>>>>>> 540 - DVD
>>> Please note that the horizontal resolutions for all of these are not
>>> expressed in pixels, but expressed in "lines of resolution per picture
>>> height". ...
>>
>> "pixels per picture height" would also be a valid expression.
>>
>>> This is the standard method for defining analog resolutions in the
>>> 4:3 format. To get to pixels (approximately), these numbers have
>>> to be multiplied by 1.333.
>>
>>
>>
>>>From edge-to-edge of screen:
>> 321 - VHS (ditto Betamax)
>> 440 - NTSC broadcast
>> 565 - laserdisc (ditto S-VHS)
>> 720 - DVD
>>
>
>Hang on, 'resolution' is the number of tiny dots while 'pixel' is the
>smallest unit of, well, picture. On many displays the number of
>phosphor dots is several times the number of pixels. Now on a 1080i
>screen with HD TV they are about equal. Anyone have had data to clarify
>this?


Yeah. It's called 1 to 1.

All HD TVs are pixel for pixel at those rates, as we have not made
the LCD panel as finely resolved as that which you described for 4:3
realm displays.

OLED will likely change that eventually.

[Back to original message]