counter
HDTV UK
Browse by:
Get daily news round-up

1080p HD questions answered

Search for more articles about 1080p TVs, high definition players, and broadcasting

Confused about HD formats? Yep, I know I am. After all it turns out that the TVs we were told were 'HD Ready' aren't apparently capable of displaying 1080p signals. Does this then make them HD lite? Well we put the questions about 1080p sets to bods from Toshiba, Sony and Philips. Here's what they had to say.

Are 1366x768 pixel sets true HD?

Ian Rea - Toshiba UK Product Manager - Flat Panel TV

True HD is not the best terminology to use. There are 2 types of HD broadcasting, 720p and 1080i. So, yes a 1366 x 768 panel is capable of displaying 720p HD signal. A 1920 x 1080 panel on the other hand is naturally capable of displaying a "Full" 1080 HD signal being broadcast.  I believe the best way to explain is the differences, is simply "HD ready", & "Full 1080 HD Ready" as there is no bigger HD signal than 1080 - hence the "Full" expression.

Danny Tack, Product Marketing & Strategy, Philips Flat TV

If they are HD ready, then yes they are true HD sets. Consumers in store are going to see a picture that is between three and four times sharper than their current set, so they will see high definition pictures. At Philips we do not believe that pixel count is the most important issue. Having enough picture processing power, and processing accuracy, is three times more important than just increasing the number of pixels. In fact, if the processing isn’t good enough, problems will be magnified by adding more pixels. In US, where HD is already more established, there has never been an issue in the trade and with consumers, that 768p panels would not be sufficient for HD sources.

Sony

Sony has a range of television sets in the UK market today with a resolution of 1366x768 (WXGA). Within the TV industry there is a common definition to describe a TV that can be called ‘HD Ready’.  All Sony BRAVIA TV’s 26inch and above have HDMI, Component inputs and 768 lines and are therefore referred to as ‘HD Ready’.

How will 1366x768 pixel sets work with 1080p signals from Blu-ray etc?

Toshiba


If Blu-ray is actually capable of 1080p (as it all seems a myth at present!!), or even if a 1080i signal is being received by the 1366x768 panel, then in simple terms the "scalers" in the back of the set will down-convert the image to fit to the panel resolution of 768 lines. By using a very complex algorithm sequence the scaler will systematically crop the image to fit the lower resolution panel. In the same way that "down conversion" happens, up-conversion also occurs, so if a 1080 panel is receiving a 720p image, the signal will be "oversampled" to fit the big screen resolution has to occupy - again all completed by very complex algorithm sequences.

Philips

There are two versions of 1080P – 1080P/50 for which it’s unlikely that there will be any native content available in the foreseeable future and 1080P/24 which is likely to be adopted by the movie industry for Blu-ray. Blu-ray will upconvert 1080 50i to 50p resulting twice the pixel rate of today’s 1080 50i, in this case we recommend that viewers not use the upconverted 1080 50p but install the output mode on the Blu-ray to 1080 50i and leave the PQ processing (including upscaling to 1080 50p) to the Flat TV. 1080/24p carries the same pixel rate as a 1080 50i source, which automatically means that today’s hardware can handle it, but this format (film) will add judder.

Sony

On a Sony BRAVIA TV a technology known as ‘BRAVIA Engine’, contains a suite of imaging processing technologies that acts as a total digital processing studio carrying out multiple enhancements on every frame of signal in real time to deliver the appropriate picture to the LCD panel from a variety of sources including Blu-Ray.

Is there a real benefit to consumers for buying a 1920x1080 set?

Toshiba

Yes !! Our Toshiba 42 & 47WLT66 have an "Exact Scan" mode that allows a 1080 broadcasted signal to be processed by the panel in the original broadcasted format, ie, no scaling of the original image occurs and no loss or cropping of picture and no loss of picture quality. I am lead to believe that BskyB will broadcast most if not all Nature programmes and discovery channels in 1080.

Philips

If the processing is good enough, then more pixels will mean a sharper picture. It’s important to understand that all pictures are scaled (because in reality we need to cope with all kind of tolerances on signals and support overscan in the picture ) and if scaling is applied it will be to all of the picture. Currently 95% of signals that are input require scaling because of overscan, this includes 1080i inputs for 1080 sets. So again the key factor remains, how good is your processing?

Will Sky's HD pictures look better on a 1366x768 pixel set?

Toshiba


In relation to the above, there will be advantages and disadvantages. If you are a keen sports watcher then a 768 panel is going to be ideal, as again, we are lead to believe that BskyB will broadcast all sporting events in 720p, so this resolution ideally matches the screens 768 resolution. The lower broadcasting format will occur as it will help reduce the bluring that is sometimes seen in fast moving images. If you are a keen lover of David Attenbourogh and History programes, then 1080 would be more suitable as they will be broadcast in 1080, and referring to my explanations above, if you have a Toshiba 1080 tv, then there will be no loss of picture using the Exact scan mode. If you have a 768 panel, down conversion will occur by the scalers in the chassis of the tv.

Philips

Again, we’d have to refer you to the quality of the sets picture processing as being the key issue rather than the screen’s pixel count. But generally, Sky images shouldn’t be any better on a 1366 x 768 set.

Sony

When Sky transmits in HD there will be a mix of content in both 720p and 1080i*. All Sky HD pictures will look better on a 1366x768 TV compared to a standard TV resolution panel because of the greater detail given by the number of pixels. A further benefit is offered to consumers deciding to purchase a 1920x1080 TV due to the increased number of pixels, which will deliver a higher resolution given the appropriate content being delivered to the TV.

What are the key issues for improving the quality of HD TV sets?


Toshiba

I dont believe there are any key issues to improving the quality of HD sets. As I am hoping you will agree at our show last week, we were displaying various HD formats (both 720p & 1080i) via different formats, and they all looked fantastic. If we break it down a little, a 1366x768 panel has 1,049,088 pixels to display any image, while a full 1080 panel has 2,073,600 pixels, just shy of double the amount of pixels. The additional pixels equates to greater depth and clarity in the picture.

Philips

At Philips the majority of our work has been based on LCD technology. For us, given all things being equal, LCD will always be sharper, brighter and whiter than an equivalent plasma set. So we have been working on LCDs problem areas of motion blurring and black levels. Our major innovation in 2006 will be the Clear LCD feature which adopts a new lamp technology – HCFL - that allows both a dimmable and scanning backlight. We believe this technology finally addresses the problems of LCD and means that we can categorically state that LCD now offers the best picture quality. Our other area of development has been on processing quality. In our latest sets – with Pixel Plus 3HD - processing is entirely in the digital domain and without any downscaling of the input signal.

Sony

Sony’s aim is to create products that let the consumer enjoy creating, editing and viewing HD content to its full potential. Within Sony BRAVIA HD TV’s we are constantly bringing to market improvements in picture quality. Sony BRAVIA HD TV’s employ the latest 7th Generation LCD Panel production combined with Sony’s unique technologies gained from years of experience producing broadcast equipment including broadcast HD cameras. A technology known as ‘Live Colour Creation’ is a feature of Sony’s new V Series range of BRAVIA TV’s launching in May. ‘Live Colour Creation’ combines circuitry, backlight and a colour filter to create a picture, which is more realistic, and a natural fit to the human eye, the result is deeper greens and deeper reds. The consumer benefits from seeing 30% more colour with this ‘Live Colour Creation’ feature. Sony would also recommend that consumers invest in good quality cabling including using an HDMI cable for their primary HD source. Of course HD is only really brought to life with Digital Surround Sound as the ideal backdrop to the stunning picture quality that HD delivers.

What we think

Well don't know about you, but I am still fairly confused. I think the key point has to be that the TV makers need to stop confusing punters. The US launch of HD was dogged by confusion over what was and wasn't a HD signal and/or screen. Personally I think that 720p images on a HD Ready 1366x768 pixels set look amazing, and if that is the baseline for HD it is going to be more than good enough for most people, especially if the sets they own are smaller than 37 inches.

Over to you...

Powermat: Revolutionary Gadget Charging

Posted by Shiny Media on April 19, 2006

Comments

What a load of marketing flannel (to put it mildly). What I'd like to know is how does a 1080 source displayed on a 720 display compare to a 720 source displayed on a 1080 display.

Posted by: Cardy | April 19, 2006 9:51 PM

Great news... I think.

I have been waiting for a 1080p panel for soooo long. From these interviews and searching and contacting Sony it appears that there is only 1 choice availble today for 1080p in the UK and that is the Toshiba 42WLT66 (or 47).

Am I right?

Are there any other 1080p panels on sale in the UK today?

I was interested in the Sony X series announced in March but having spoken to Sony, I was told they would "probably not be released until around Christmas time". If you guys could speak to sony, a definitive answer would be nice.

What are Philips plans for 1080p HD. Do they have any products on the horizon? If not it may well explain why the philips guy is keen to discuss processing rather than pixels!

Posted by: Carl | April 20, 2006 9:12 AM

It seems to me that the Corporations are fighting over themselves to screw the whole hi-def thing up. Or, more truthfully, to try to get us locked into their own screwed-up system, and right on the road to continual upgrades.

How the hell is Joe Punter who doesn't read around and just assumes that all those TVs with HD-Ready stickers on them is going to play all his HD content in "optimum" quality?

Your man-in-the-street who is used to buying a toaster that - hey! - JUST MAKES TOAST can reasonably expect that an HD Satellite system and an HD television and some sort of HD disc-based playback system will all work in tandem somehow. And all at top-notch "hi-def" quality.

Err, no. You might be better off setting your sports programmes to 1080i, your films to 720p and your blu-ray player to 1080p. Ah, wait your TV won't handle 1080p. Ah, better knock it back to 1080i then and let your TV handle that. All OK now sir? What do you mean you connected your SkyHD box with SCART? Didn't you *know* SCART won't transfer a hi-def signal? Oh, you only have one hdmi - well Sir, how can you expect to connect Sky and HDDVD to your TV then? Sir is a fool, isn't he Sir....?

What a joke.

Posted by: Andrew W | April 20, 2006 11:11 AM

1080p is a next generation format, you might call it 'enhanced' HD and does not mean that current generation HDTV 1080i is anything like an HDTV Lite - quite rediculous. Of course we are looking forward to 1080p when it appears just like any improved version of an existing technology. One thing that is very confusing however is the different HD standard in the US and Europe - they are both actually incompatible just like PAL and NTSC, one being with 50hz and the other with 60hz with the resulting difference in quality appearing like dropped frams or juddery motion - a potentially very nast problem that at this point people are not aware of.

Posted by: Simon Harris | April 20, 2006 12:14 PM

The most important thing to take note on a HDTV is resolution. If the display has more than 720 horizontal lines of progressively shown picture information it is classified as HDTV. Progressive scanning displays all the lines or pixel elements of a frame in one pass.
Interlacing is a system where alternating (odd/even) horizontal lines are transmitted so that half a picture is displayed each time the scanning beam moves down the screen. An interlaced frame is made up of two fields (odd/even interlaced fields).
Both progressive (720p,1080p) and interlace (1080i) give fantastic picture quality (try going back to a normal broadcast!!). From my own experimenting I have to say that progressive gives a smoother picture, no judder, which can be experienced with interlace.
720p and 1080i has been adopted by broadcasting authorities around the world as the two standards to use. 1080p I assume will appear on Blu-ray and HD-DVD at some point in the future
For a true HDTV, the set must have HDMI or DVI inputs which must be compliant with HDCP content protection. Whats that I hear you cry!! High bandwidth Digital Content Protection, the digital encryption and content protection system that is applied to HDMI and DVI to protect the video content from being copied. If you think HDTV standards is confusing, HDCP is a can of worms just waiting to be opened.

Posted by: Chris | April 20, 2006 2:01 PM

Why are many panels 768, rather than 720 lines?

Surely that means that a 720p signal will have to be scaled, ever so slightly, which will result in a slightly blurred/fuzzy image - not as good as on a true 720-line panel which could show a native 720p picture 1:1, no scaling.

Posted by: Neil S | April 20, 2006 4:00 PM

I think we need to clear up the confusion about all these standards

One of the biggest bits of confusion is over the real difference between interlace and progressive, and what this means in terms of the frame rate and resolution you can acheive (please bear with me).

It's also important to specify the frame rate when you're dealing with things like this, so:

(US frame rates also apply with no change in picture size)

720p, 50 fps:
Every 1/50 of a second, and image 720*1280 pixels is captured.

1080i, 25 fps:
Every 1/50 of a second either the odd or even lines in a 1080*1920 image are captured. ie. 1/50 s in, the odd-numbered lines of the first frame are captured; 2/50 s in, the even-numbered lines of the first frame are captured; 3/50 second in, the odd lines of the second frame are captured.....etc.

1080p, 25 fps (or 24 fps)
every 1/25 (or 1/24) of second a 1080*1920 pixel image is captured
(Used for dramas and things, but might be transmitted in 1080i 25fps by chopping it up)

These three above are the ones that will be used in broadcast industry to record programmes. (See SMPTE standard 292M-1998 for more info). However...

1080p, 50 fps
every 1/50 of second a 1080*1920 pixel image is captured.

No video is currently being recorded in this standard, because there isn't any equipment that's capable of it. However, it's possible that a games console or a PC might be capable of generating a image in this standard, or a fancy HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player will be able to upconvert 720p 50 fps into 1080p 50 fps, or turn a 1080i 25fps signal into a 1080p 50 fps before it sends it to the display.

Now, any conversion between formats is best avoided, though if you try to view 720 signals on a 1080 display and vice-versa, some conversion will be needed, either in the TV itself. This basically means that the only advantage of a 1080p 50 fps input for TV/DVD use, is that you will be able to choose whether you want to use the upconverter in you tv or the upconverter in you DVD player/tuner when you watch 720p 50fps signals on a 1080 line display.

The quality of the conversion can't be predicted easily though, make sure you ask to see HD material in both formats on the TV before you buy, and make your decision based on that and the sort of material you want to watch. (see other comments)

Incidentally, on the 50Hz/60Hz thing, a modern tv set should be able to take any tv signal and display it - Just look at what your computer monitor can do - This is why Sky will be able to send some things in 720p 50fps and others in 1080i 25fps. They should equally easily be able to do the same with differnt frame rates, like 24 fps for films.

Even if the material is converted from 60 fps to 60fps, the broadcaster will (hopefully) use a proper converter that makes the conversion almost invisible.

Sandy Scott
-Working For Snell & Wilcox, specialists in Video standards converters for the broadcast industry

Posted by: Sandy Scott | April 20, 2006 5:04 PM

Ref Carl comments - The Toshiba 42WLT66 is 1080i ONLY not 1080p. I have ordered one regardless after this info was confirmed by Toshiba tech support.

Sky will broadcast in 720p and 1080i the PS3 in full 1080p but this should work on it anyway. I have a feeling the WLT68 models may have 1080P, though I can't find much on it.

Posted by: Erwin | April 21, 2006 5:52 PM

'For true HDTV the set must have HDMI or DVI inputs'?? what utter nonsense! HDTV has beena standard for many years already using Component cables. Also you will find that there is no 'true HDTV' plasma set yet on sale (they were only just introduced at this year's CES show' - current Plasma sets can display HD (scaling) but are Not true HDTV, even if they claim to be 'HD Ready' and have an HDMI connector - Not enough Pixels!

Posted by: Simon Harris | April 22, 2006 3:58 PM

The point of all this is that finally HD is almost here - Sky HD is going to be the most exciting thing to hit our screens since the introduction of VHS - or even DVD - nobody in their right mind should hesitate to get Sky HD, for me it is more exciting than HD-DVD and Blue ray combined (until one format seriously wins and matures) - My SKY HD is being installed in one month and I am very much looking forward to it, of course it won't be perfect at first and Sky may take some time to get it right but at least we will have real HD in the UK finally! I have been to Japan many times and used to stare enviously at the HD sets on show in the shops, then I went to the US and was so frustrated thatthey had it and we had nothing on the horizon and then I thought 'typical' when Murdoch's son got the job only to be amazed and blown away when he made the first item on his agenda the announcement for Sky HD, he should be congratulated for bringing the UK out of the BBC dinosaur stone age hell and into the 21st century - this is an event of tremedous magnitude and I am counting down the days until I can choose whether I want to watch Discovery HD or a movie in HD - Well Done Mr Murdoch.

Posted by: simon harris | April 22, 2006 4:10 PM

The simplest solution is just to have 1920x1080p.

Does this mean that during either an HD: -
1) Programme or
2) Film people will have to keep switching the mode between 720P and 1080i for the best picture for example when a speeding object occurs in the scene.

Which stupid cretin decided on having two modes insteadf of just one: 1920x1080p?

Or there should be a mathematical table, which can convert exactly alll resolutions between; 760P and 1080P.

What happens if the next generation of LCDs probably called SED is marketed in 2007?

What is the highest resolution, which can be created by professional cameras?

If 1920x1080P games can be created on the Xbox, then why can't programmes and films be created for cable and satelite?

If, 'Neuneo' actually can convert DVDs to 1080p
then why can't existing films be converted to at least 540x2 = 1080p standard?

This is because existing professional cameras'resolutions must be at least 540 in the UK and if doubled should be at least 1080p, hopefully?

See Website URL (cut and paste the following to Internet Explorer or another browser: http://www.neodigits.com/body/product/default-dvd.asp

When can we get get DVD players in the UK, which can scale-up ordinary DVDs to 1080P and how much will it cost?

The main point is that it looks as though in England we are probably being con into thinking that 720P and 1080i is the highest standard. The advantages of 1080P is being quoted, whilst implying that they relate to the inferior 760P or 1080i standard.

Posted by: Barrington D. Thompson | April 24, 2006 4:58 AM

As I said in my previous post, no footage is being recorded in 1080p (50 fps) because there are no cameras available to do this, and even if you did record in that format there's no prefessional interface to let you route it through all the various gear you need to get it on air.

You have to remember that even the newest version of the profesional HD standards were drawn up 10 years ago, and the 1.5 Gbps bit rate of 720p 50 and 1080i 25 was more than enough.

Also can work it out and see that both formats give almost the exactly the same number of "pixels per second", which means that the bit rate of the resulting uncompressed video streams will exactly the same. This means you can use the same tapes (which, being professional store uncompressed data) for 720p 50 and 1080i 25, and the same equipment which handles the same bitrate.

Finally, all old TV stations are a messy tangle of miles upon miles of extremely expensive high quality co-axial cable, terminating in BNC connectors. BNC connectors and the diameter of cable they usually require can only just handle 1.5 Gbps, and changing it would have required huge investement, and it would probably be another 5 years until we got HD! Moving to 1080p 50 would be impossible without changing the cable and connector (BNC's just aren't good enough), as well as having to buy even more all-new equipment which they've been steadily obtaining to get to broadcasting HD now.

On the whole 1080p 25 front - this is definitely doable and it doesn't look too jerky (it doesn't look that bad in the cinema does it?) Though I'm not sure whether the consumer standards are there to allow a tv to display it correctly (it might come out as 1080i 25)

Sandy Scott
-Working For Snell & Wilcox, specialists in Video standards converters for the broadcast industry

Posted by: Sandy Scott | April 24, 2006 10:02 AM

I have got to ask the reverse question. How will 576i broadcasts look on a 1080p set. Are the scaler engines that powerful that they will clean up the rubbish that is currently broadcast as MPEG2?

Posted by: Matthew Richards | April 24, 2006 3:33 PM

Well, i think everyone who will be coming to these forums will be ok...The average (hd wannabe) joe on the otherhand (making up the vast majority) will go out and buy a "HD ready" tv thinking he is now on the forefront of home viewing pleasure. Also, you know the salesmen will blag as hard as they can, to say that the hd ready tv is the boy to get, without ever saying...get the 1080 so you dont feel like you need an upgrade in 3 years time after the major rush for the lower format has subsided and the adverts become crystal clear (excuse the pun) about the difference between 720p and 1080p...all a gimmick if you ask me....
The only reason people buy a new replacement tv is because the last one now feels outdated....what better way to outdate a tv by selling 720i hd readies till sales drop and then go mad about the higher format...

Posted by: Adrian | April 25, 2006 1:51 AM

Good post from Sandy Scott - very informative - thanks.

I'm currently using a Philips 37PF9830 - it has a native 1920x1080 panel - but only accepts 1080i signals (as well as 720p etc)

What I get irriated is by the need to do overscan on HD 1080i signals - why mess around with the picture in this way - by all means enhance pixels - but DON'T scale - as soon as you start upscaling/downscaling you're degrading the source.

Anyone notice how the person from philips actually knoew what they were talking about (although I disagree with their approach) whilst Toshiba and Sony seemed more comfortable with the marketing hype... :)

Posted by: Bill | May 17, 2006 10:29 AM

To answer the question: why 768 not 720... 768 = 3 x 256.

Posted by: martin | May 17, 2006 10:29 AM

I spoke to Toshiba tech support and was told that they will not be producing a 1080p panel until theyintroduce their SED technology. The good news is they wait will not be that long as they plan to bring a SED panel to the consumer market in the UK sometime in 2007.

Posted by: Philip | May 17, 2006 11:01 AM

I spoke to Toshiba tech support and was told that they will not be producing a 1080p panel until they introduce their SED technology. The good news is they wait will not be that long as they plan to bring a SED panel to the consumer market in the UK sometime in 2007.

Posted by: Philip | May 17, 2006 11:01 AM

Only yesterday I had a `heated` debate with my lovely other half. I wanted to rent the Samsung LE32R74 for a min 1 year (min 12 month contract) she thought I should buy it. I pointed out that it would only cost 1/2 the amount to rent for a year, she pointed out "but you wouldn't own it would you". I then pointed out that the way technology is advancing, chances are after a year I wouldn't want to own it (or to put it another way, would want to get something else)

Have shown her this page and she has now agreed :)

Posted by: Phil Joseph | May 17, 2006 12:13 PM

no one has mentioned bitrate. This is far far more important than 720p vs 1080i/p imho.

One can make a mathematical argument that there is the same amount of information transferred with 720p as 1080i (or over p) if they use the same bitrate.

Typically (e.g. with MPEG2 digital tv and also with DAB), the industry bamboosals customers with how great it 'can' all be, but they cram so many channels in that the quality is terrible.

Look at the crappy birate sky use just now on most of there channels.... artifacts everywhere. terrible picture compared to DVD, and yet the technology 'could' give you DVD quality.....

The same thing will happen with HDTV, they will reduce the bitrate as much as they can get away with because joe public doesn't understand compression artifacts.

Q) if sky was to broadcast a 720p HDTV programme using the same bitrate as an existing 575i MPEG2 broadcast would they still be claiming it was 4x the resolution ?

A) I think the would...

Posted by: stu | May 17, 2006 1:20 PM

A bit of technical background (I design the controller chips for HDTV's / Monitors for a large consumer electronics components manufacturer).

If you had an ideal source a 1080x1920 line panel would, of course, produce far nicer pictures than a 768x1280 or 768x1366 line panel. It would, probably, with good processing even do a visually better job showing 720p sources! However, real-world, sources are far from ideal.

Firstly: 1080 material is mostly going to be delivered to the panel as 1080i. This means de quality of the deinterlacer used to combine odd and even sets of lines to produce whole pictures is crucial. No deinterlacer is perfect. A 768 line panel with a spot-on deinterlacer will produce nicer results than a 1080 panel with a ho-hum deinterlacer.

Secondly: the incoming video isn't studio-master stuff but video compressed to fit the available disk space/transmitter chanel data-rate. As a result 1080 material is likely to be somewhat more compressed (and thus further from its ideal 'sharpness') than 720 material.

Thus in practice, a 768 line display is probably nearer 95% of the quality of a 1080 display than the 50% a comparison of the number of dots would suggest. The quality of processing hardware (and even the quality of the tuning applied to it) really is very important too. So there are bound to be 1080 Turkeys and some really Golden 768 sets out there.


As ever, the only real test is to go out and *look* at what you want to buy. There are way to many variables to reduce the issue to a simple dot count or feature list.

Posted by: Andrew Stevens | May 17, 2006 1:22 PM

Top posts by Sandy.

I have personally seen HD movies, presented without any form of pixel scaling, in 1080p @ 24fps, 1080i @ 60pfs and 720p @ 60fps (I don’t have anything at 48/50fps). If everything is slow or still then 1080i/p is the obvious winner. The subsequent horizontal lines for 1080i from moving subjects can be really nasty. If subjects/backgrounds move quickly then 720p is the clear winner – it is soooo fluid. 720p @ 50/60fps retains the visible detail whereas it can be utterly lost when viewing at 24/25fps (regardless of resolution). I think the reason is that your eye will smoothly track any moving subject while the subject itself is stepping, resulting with the image sweeping across the retina; the greater the frame rate the less the image will sweep across the retina. I look forward to when all films are recorded/played at xxxP @ 48/50/60fps.

Posted by: smeggy | May 17, 2006 1:33 PM

I have a DLP Axium "HD" TV, got it about a year ago, before i had heard of HDCP, Now it seems the model is not HDCP complient and SKY HD boxes demand such a thing to be in use on the TV's. Is there anyway round this with some sort of passthru box to the DVI port or componant out from the HD box to tv. I also read anything not going thru HDCP from a SKYHD box would be downscaled!

Posted by: Jim | May 18, 2006 8:25 PM

Hi

Great posts by Sandy

I have been wondering about the US/UK differences for a while now as I had been looking at possibly buying a TV from the US and using it here, (there cheaper and there's more of them). My beginners view was that the whole HD thing was going to get rid if the PAL/NTSC problems and make everything a bit more compatible.

I wondered what peoples veiws were on buying for example a Westinghouse 42" 1080p TV in the US and shipping it here - will it work with for example a SkyHD box? If it didn't - why?

Thanks in advance for any help or advice.

Posted by: Steve Craig | September 24, 2006 12:58 AM

i read in a mag that toshiba 42wlt66 can not handle 1080p signal is that true????

Posted by: zahid kahn | September 29, 2006 8:54 PM

pioneer have produced both a 1080p blue ray DVD and 1080p 50" plasma i have seen both working and already have both on order. along with pre order on a PS3.

Posted by: J - luis - P | October 17, 2006 3:21 PM

How come every post is so subjective?
There is no simple answer as to whether 1080i is better than 720p or whether 1080 displayed on a 720 TV will look good or bad - it all depends on how the manufacturer has developed the end product.
Another common misconception is to assume that it is the display that determins the final resolution. This is partially the case as if a TV's native resolution was 1366 x 768 then it would never be capable of displaying a 1920 x 1080 resolution. However, any screen capable of displaying 1920 x 1080 pixels is capable of displaying a 1080p signal (as the refresh rate will certainly be 50Hz or above). The problem here lies with connections; HDMI and component connections are capable of displaying 1080p resolutions but only if designed to. The 1080p is an optional resolution of the HDMI standard is doesn't have to be supported. This makes it increasingly difficult trying to discover whether the TV you have just bought that has HDMI 1.2 port and a native resolution of 1920 x 1080 will actually display a 1080p stream. Everything suggests it should do but have the TV manufacturers implemented everything? Your guess is as good as mine!

Posted by: Phil | October 17, 2006 6:52 PM

My gogglebox resolution is stated as 1366 x 768 (WXGA).

What does the (WXGA) bit mean?

Also, the spec's state that:
Broadcast Format Displayed is 576i, 576p, 768p, whilst
Broadcast Format Supported is 1080i (HDTV), 576i and 576p.

Am I right in assuming this means that programmes, DVDs etc can / are or will be recorded / broadcast in different formats and my telly will support only those stated? If so, will it automatically display them in all their glory even though it doesn't have a HDTV built in tuner?

Posted by: a bit confused | October 18, 2006 3:40 PM

http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362790.htm 女生豪放毕业照
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362788.htm 女星出浴
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362769.htm 香闺秘事
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362787.htm 女明星野外更衣
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362789.htm 老房东偷窥美少妇
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362779.htm 范冰冰初吻照片曝光
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362756.htm 范冰冰自拍
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362755.htm av女交警
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362757.htm 女生宿舍反偷窥
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362764.htm 成人网站
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362784.htm 三级片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362763.htm 色情网站
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362765.htm 黄色网站
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362767.htm 黄色论坛
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362761.htm 成人电影
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362781.htm 成人图片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362771.htm 巩俐露点
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362783.htm 色情图片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362780.htm 黄色图片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362785.htm A片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362759.htm 色情电影
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362782.htm 激情图片
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362770.htm 女星胸部百年起伏史
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362762.htm 激情电影
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362768.htm 成人论坛
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362766.htm 色情论坛
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362786.htm 走光
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362760.htm 黄色电影
http://hometown.aol.com/wo36f/m362758.htm 芙蓉姐姐坐台
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2788.htm 女星出浴
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2787.htm 女明星野外更衣
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2779.htm 范冰冰初吻照片曝光
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2769.htm 香闺秘事
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2757.htm 女生宿舍反偷窥
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2756.htm 范冰冰自拍
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2755.htm av女交警
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2768.htm 成人论坛
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2785.htm A片
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2760.htm 黄色电影
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2762.htm 激情电影
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2759.htm 色情电影
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2761.htm 成人电影
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2783.htm 色情图片
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2766.htm 色情论坛
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2782.htm 激情图片
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2780.htm 黄色图片
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2770.htm 女星胸部百年起伏史
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2763.htm 色情网站
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2771.htm 巩俐露点
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2764.htm 成人网站
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2758.htm 芙蓉姐姐坐台
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2786.htm 走光
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2765.htm 黄色网站
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2767.htm 黄色论坛
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2781.htm 成人图片
http://site.voila.fr/5i36f/5i36f2784.htm 三级片
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2778.htm 我想更懂你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2777.htm 离歌
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2776.htm 菊花台
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2775.htm 羽毛
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2774.htm 退后
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2773.htm 夜的第七章
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2772.htm 听妈妈的话
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2754.htm 我们怎么了
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2753.htm 如果没有你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2752.htm 紫藤花
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2751.htm 认真的雪
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2750.htm 我们的纪念日
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2749.htm 只剩我一个
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2748.htm 爱回来
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2747.htm 张开眼睛
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2743.htm 香水百合
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2742.htm 披着羊皮的狼
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2741.htm 不怕不怕
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2740.htm 求佛
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2739.htm 香水有毒
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2738.htm 老婆老婆我爱你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2737.htm 老公老公我爱你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2736.htm 反转地球
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2735.htm 触电
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2734.htm 我要的世界
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2733.htm 飞行部落
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2732.htm 爱比雪更冷
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2731.htm 忘不了
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2730.htm 灵药
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2729.htm 永远有多远
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2728.htm 宝贝
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2727.htm 心肝宝贝
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2726.htm 天天夜夜
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2725.htm 七夕
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2724.htm 仓皇失措的想着你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2723.htm 你的肩膀
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2722.htm 你的味道
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2721.htm 做你的男人
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2720.htm 放生
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2719.htm 一个人
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2718.htm 戒不掉
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2717.htm 爱哭鬼
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2716.htm 快d快乐
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2715.htm 银色公路
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2714.htm 一把伞
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2713.htm 千里之外
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2712.htm 小眼睛的姑娘
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2711.htm 田径之歌
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2710.htm 老了十岁
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2709.htm 接招
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2708.htm E时代桃园
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2707.htm tell me
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2706.htm 说一声感谢
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2705.htm 约定
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2704.htm 我们的歌
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2703.htm 一千个轮回
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2702.htm 来自不同星球
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2701.htm 娘子写
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2700.htm 号码
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2699.htm 放飞美丽
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2698.htm 我的果汁分你一半
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2697.htm 冰菊物语
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2696.htm 兄弟
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2695.htm 可惜我是处女座
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2694.htm 不夜
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2693.htm 从开始到现在
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2692.htm 最想念的季节
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2691.htm 爱情十二元素
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2690.htm 一个人流浪
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2689.htm 秋天不回来
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2688.htm 红颜
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2687.htm 独唱情歌
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2686.htm 我们都是好孩子
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2685.htm 恋着多喜欢
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2684.htm 相爱多年
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2683.htm 水中央
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2682.htm 80块环游世界
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2681.htm 白色羽毛
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2680.htm 平行线
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2679.htm 我就是爱你
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2678.htm 香飘飘
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2677.htm 锉冰进行曲
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2676.htm 马德里不思议
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2675.htm 乖乖牌
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2674.htm 爱如空气
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2673.htm 潘朵拉
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2672.htm 发如雪
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2671.htm 生日礼物
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2670.htm 那一夜
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2669.htm 夜曲
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2668.htm 寂寞沙洲冷
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2667.htm 在梅边
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2666.htm 不得不爱
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2665.htm 一万个理由
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2664.htm 狼爱上羊
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2663.htm 大城小爱
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2662.htm 不要再来伤害我
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2661.htm 童话
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2660.htm 情人
http://hometown.aol.com/yr33f/dmm2659.htm 暧昧
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2788.htm 女星出浴
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2787.htm 女明星野外更衣
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2769.htm 香闺秘事
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2779.htm 范冰冰初吻照片曝光
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2756.htm 范冰冰自拍
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2786.htm 走光
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2757.htm 女生宿舍反偷窥
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2765.htm 黄色网站
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2768.htm 成人论坛
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2784.htm 三级片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2782.htm 激情图片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2755.htm av女交警
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2781.htm 成人图片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2785.htm A片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2780.htm 黄色图片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2758.htm 芙蓉姐姐坐台
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2761.htm 成人电影
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2783.htm 色情图片
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2760.htm 黄色电影
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2771.htm 巩俐露点
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2763.htm 色情网站
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2767.htm 黄色论坛
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2759.htm 色情电影
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2762.htm 激情电影
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2770.htm 女星胸部百年起伏史
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2766.htm 色情论坛
http://www.blogstudio.com/36mm/dmm2764.htm 成人网站
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2790.htm 女生豪放毕业照
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2788.htm 女星出浴
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2769.htm 香闺秘事
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2787.htm 女明星野外更衣
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2789.htm 老房东偷窥美少妇
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2779.htm 范冰冰初吻照片曝光
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2756.htm 范冰冰自拍
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2755.htm av女交警
http://hometown.aol.com/wm36f/m36f2757.htm 女生宿舍反偷窥

Posted by: yyy222 | October 30, 2006 9:39 AM

If you really want the best pictures possible despite multiple input formats / sources, you might want one of DVDO's products:

http://www.dvdo.com/pro/index.php

Posted by: Jon Herbert | November 3, 2006 4:22 PM

Here's a simple experiment you can do if you're interested in the effect of resolution on picture quality (as opposed to interlaced vs progressive scan, which is a different matter).

Take a good quality, high resolution (4 or 5 megapixel say) digital camera still image, and resample it so it's 720, 768 or 1080 pixels high in Photoshop, saving 3 separate files.

Make a copy of the 720 high image and scale it up to 768 pixels, then compare it side by side on a computer monitor with the original 720 high image. Obviously one is slightly bigger than the other, but the scaled up one isn't noticeably blurry compared to the 720 original. So, there should be no problem displaying a 720p signal on a 1366x768 panel rather than 1280x720, despite the scaling the TV will have to do.

Next, take the original 768 high image and scale it up to 1080 pixels. Compare it side by the side with the original 1080 image. The 1080 image is sharper, but not earth-shatteringly so. Displaying a 1080i image on a 1920x1080 "true HDTV" panel is obviously going to be better than displaying it on a 1366x768 panel, but whether you can tell much of a difference is going to depend on the quality of the source. In any case, the vast bulk of HD material, at least initially, will only be 720p, so having a higher resolution panel won't make any difference.

Third experiment, make a copy of the 1080 image and save it as a highly compressed (ie. low quality) JPEG, to simulate the compression that HDV cameras apply when they record to tape and that also occurs during transmission as an MPEG-2 stream.(HDV is where most HD material will probably come from initially because of its low cost.) Compare the compressed 1080 image to the uncompressed, scaled up 768 image, and the latter is actually significantly better quality, despite the lower resolution.

Fourth experiment, repeat the above using nearest neighbour instead of bicubic interpolation, to simulate the effect of bad signal processing in the television set. One assumes (or at least hopes) the manufacturers will get their act together and do it properly, but clearly there is scope for a lot of quality differences between different sets, which you can only tell by comparing them in the flesh, not just looking at the specs.

Final experiment, repeat all the above with a crummy image scanned from an old 6x4 print, rather than originally shot digitally :-)

If we disregard signal processing differences, by FAR and away the biggest factor affecting picture quality is not the LCD resolution but the quality of the source - how it was originally recorded, how it was edited, and how it was compressed during transmission.

Or put it another way, DVDs were introduced in 1996. Now, 10 years later, I have a collection of 100+ discs. How long will it be before I replace them all with BluRay or HD-DVDs? Quite a while I suspect, especially if you consider that the advantage of DVDs over VHS was as much to do with convenience (smaller packaging, ease of navigation, no more jammed tapes) as quality.

I for one am not worried that I just bought a 1366x768 LCD TV. I think it's going to be quite future proof enough to keep me happy for the next few years, even if "true" HDTV sets do start appearing in that time.

Posted by: Rolf Howarth | November 7, 2006 12:32 AM

Full 1080p displays are much better than any 720p one and of those capable of reaching downscaled 1080i on a lower 1366x768 matrix.
1920x1080 progressive has much higher spatial resolution and hence details than any 1366x768 display and HDTV H.264 streams will shine at 1920x1080.
Interlacing is the plague still left in HDTV standard for pretty unknown legacy reasons, they shouldn't have included interlacing in HDTV at all. However, any interlacing format even if you got 4096 vertical scan lines it would and it does look ugly compared to progressive scan.
Interlacing technology was invented in the '40s to save on needed analog bandwidth because at the time it would have been to expensive to deliver the 40+fps progressive format that was originally proposed for television broadcasting.

Posted by: aredo | November 15, 2006 4:04 PM

I bought a 960x540 Sharp set and, frankly, it produces a better PAL picture than ANY "WXGA" panel set I've seen. It's a real shame that issues of interlace, overscan and picture size are so baffling when taken together, particularly when such a good solution to PAL/HD compatibility for us PAL users was available in the form of 1920x1080/960x540.

Oh well, as I continue to look on in amazement at the debate over 768 line displays, I can only hope that Sharp keeps the flame of rational though burning and makes sure that their 1920x1080 sets handle PAL in the same elegant way that their 960x540 ones do (or did, sadly).

Just remeber, kids - INTERLACE MESSES SCALING UP - this doesn't matter if you're dealing with 720p content, but matters a great deal for PAL and 1080i, so design your panel to fit those.

Posted by: Adrian | November 15, 2006 5:25 PM

Hi does anyone know how much difference in quality there is between native 1024 by 768 vs 1280 by 720 resolution

Posted by: Shehzad | November 15, 2006 6:13 PM

hi, just a quick question. Ihave a tv that says "HD ready" on the side However i do not have skyHD so obviosly i cannot veiw in HD. however, i am hopfull of getting a playstaion 3 soon, so will this be shown in HD? or do i have to get skyHD first? or is there a addon i have to get somewhere? Thank you.

Posted by: Andy | March 21, 2007 4:09 PM

Why oh why are the vast majority of panels 1024x768 when the "basic" HD format is 1280x720?
I can never get an answer to this, from anyone or anywhere. Surely it must be better having 720 pixels rather than 768, thus no image processing (or messing up, in reality) would be required. So we would have 720 input and 720 output - simple and perfect. But the industry is in complete disarray with formats and resolution and the consumer suffers. So, can anyone say why the panels are predominately 1024x768 (4:3) rather than 1280x720 (16:9)?????

Posted by: CL | October 1, 2007 2:22 PM

can anyone help me? my son has an xbox360 we have wired it up using an hdmi converter to dvi lead for his hd tv but when we use this lead there is no sound, on his other lead he gets 1080i is this hd or must it be 1080p?

Posted by: David Hansford | November 25, 2007 12:00 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.