|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Phil Smith wrote: | Dave, sometimes you crack me up. 
Don't be pushing that plate of crow away. Dig in! |
OK, did my 2 seconds of research and I stand partially corrected. 
It seems to be able to make a cheaper set Hitachi has released a "pseudo-interlaced" plasma. It is not truly interlaced, but basically a progressive display that updates ever other line each duty cycle. This allows for lower bandwidth and cheaper components. But, it causes horrible black levels and very low CR. So, it is "sort of" interlaced and the cost of a very crappy picture.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Angus_rg
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
Posts: 339
Location: A planet far, far away..... Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: |
Morons wrote those--and they are incorrect. A CRT is the only display technology that can display an interlaced signal. All others (including plasmas) only display progressive. |
That's what iritates me. 1080i is being slapped on anything that can handle the signal. It's nothing more then a marketing bait and switch. Marketers know the truth, but they realize there are too many people who can't tell the difference, believe everything they here, and regurgitate it as if it was an epiphany they had.
The other day a guy in my office was talking about how his 1080i DLP projector showed the full 1920x1080. People don't realize bandwidth is cheap. If your screen can display the pixels, for a few bucks more and a bigger mark up, it will. If it can't there's probably a 1080p model with 99% of the same guts that will.
_________________
It's good to be the king.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
...
Last edited by Phil Smith on Tue May 20, 2008 2:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Phil Smith wrote: | Dave, sometimes you crack me up.
Don't be pushing that plate of crow away. Dig in! |
OK, did my 2 seconds of research and I stand partially corrected.
It seems to be able to make a cheaper set Hitachi has released a "pseudo-interlaced" plasma. It is not truly interlaced, but basically a progressive display that updates ever other line each duty cycle. This allows for lower bandwidth and cheaper components. But, it causes horrible black levels and very low CR. So, it is "sort of" interlaced and the cost of a very crappy picture. |
Knowing that the display panel had the pixel count to do 1080p, I figured it had to be a bandwidth thing.
Why is it pseudo-interlaced? If each frame is displaying every other line, it's full blown interlaced.
You seem to be choking on the crow, but thanks for "sorta" trying to eat it. 
Just say it Dave. It won't kill you. "Phil, I was wrong and you were right."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Angus_rg
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
Posts: 339
Location: A planet far, far away..... Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Phil Smith wrote: | Dave, sometimes you crack me up.
Don't be pushing that plate of crow away. Dig in! |
OK, did my 2 seconds of research and I stand partially corrected.
It seems to be able to make a cheaper set Hitachi has released a "pseudo-interlaced" plasma. It is not truly interlaced, but basically a progressive display that updates ever other line each duty cycle. This allows for lower bandwidth and cheaper components. But, it causes horrible black levels and very low CR. So, it is "sort of" interlaced and the cost of a very crappy picture. |
Maybe, but a Hitachi 1080p TV was one I compared to over the weekend. Price range, it was a very, very nice picture at one store, but when it was next to the 720p Panasonic the softness jumped off the screen. If they were showing a BR disk, probably different.
Is it me or does it seem like brick and mortar stores don't try and sell TVs, or at least show off the capability?
If I had a store, I'd have signals switchable between 480i->1080p so you can actually see what the TV will do to all signals. That and I'd have seperate rooms and TV's on carts so you could wheel your TV candidates in and test it in varying lights.
I think that's why so Plasma sales suck in comparison to LCDs. You walk into walmart, you see a bright colorful LCD and have no idea to pay attention to subtle details that may not be immediately apparent, and you gravitate right to the LCDs, and ignore the Plasmas. I know I kept having to point out things like smoother gradiance and 3d appearance on the screens. Had I not, my parents would have bought a 50" Sanyo that looked like it had a screen door in front at the viewing distance they'd have sat.
Then again, if I had a store I'd probably eat up all my profits buying stuff; much like I'd drink them up if I had a bar.
_________________
It's good to be the king.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Angus_rg wrote: | | Person99 wrote: |
Morons wrote those--and they are incorrect. A CRT is the only display technology that can display an interlaced signal. All others (including plasmas) only display progressive. |
That's what iritates me. 1080i is being slapped on anything that can handle the signal. It's nothing more then a marketing bait and switch. Marketers know the truth, but they realize there are too many people who can't tell the difference, believe everything they here, and regurgitate it as if it was an epiphany they had.
The other day a guy in my office was talking about how his 1080i DLP projector showed the full 1920x1080. People don't realize bandwidth is cheap. If your screen can display the pixels, for a few bucks more and a bigger mark up, it will. If it can't there's probably a 1080p model with 99% of the same guts that will. |
Hey, if it makes the product cost less, then 1080i serves a purpose. I was price shopping, so the "1080i is cheaper" strategy worked on me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Angus_rg wrote: | | Maybe, but a Hitachi 1080p TV was one I compared to over the weekend. |
If you extensively read the AVS threads I linked to, you'll find pretty some convincing arguments that *ALL* Hitachi plasmas are 1080i.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Angus_rg
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
Posts: 339
Location: A planet far, far away..... Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Phil Smith wrote: | | Angus_rg wrote: | | Maybe, but a Hitachi 1080p TV was one I compared to over the weekend. |
If you extensively read the AVS threads I linked to, you'll find pretty some convincing arguments that *ALL* Hitachi plasmas are 1080i. |
Really? Is that 1080i input with 1080p output, or display 1080i? I'd think that the latter would be false advertising. I didn't look the native res up, but it had 1080p marked on it.
I've seen the 1080p out 1080i in on some cheaper 1080p sets in the past. That probably blows my cheaper bandwidth theory out of the water.
_________________
It's good to be the king.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Angus_rg
Joined: 16 Dec 2007
Posts: 339
Location: A planet far, far away..... Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Phil Smith"][quote="Angus_rg"] | Person99 wrote: |
Hey, if it makes the product cost less, then 1080i serves a purpose. I was price shopping, so the "1080i is cheaper" strategy worked on me. |
I won't argue with that. I said that about Toshiba's 1080i HD-DVD players. I just think they way they market 1080i is crap, which was a big reason why so many condemned the HD-A[1-3].
I'd say if your on budget, a cheaper 720p TV may look better then a similarly priced 1080p one when displaying a 1080i signal, so money may not be the only reason to get a "1080i" TV.
_________________
It's good to be the king.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not eating any crow, yet. I don't see anything anywhere that conclusively proves to me that the display is in any way, shape or form 1080i. I don't give a sh*t what a Circuit City specs page says, and I don't give a sh*t about what some guys of unknown technical ability on AVS SAY they HEARD from some Hitachi technical or sales reps. Sounds like a bunch of bull**** to me.
A) The panel simply IS 1920x1080 pixels - the specs plainly state that along with the 2.07 megapixel figure. So, the panel is progressive. Period. So, we know it's not actually DISPLAYING 1080i. Either the combing would be hideous, or the picture would be so soft that it would look WORSE than a 720p set. Assuming neither of those conditions exist, then it AIN'T 1080i.
B) Next, the set will accept a 1080p signal over HDMI. Specs plainly state that.
Given those two things, the only way there could be anything 1080i about this set is if they were INTERLACING a 1080p input with an internal processor, then DEINTERLACING it again for display on the panel. That could certainly be possible - just like how the early HD DVD and Blu-ray players ran. In practice, there was nothing wrong with it, and there would be nothing wrong with it in this plasma set if it was implemented correctly.
I think this set probably accepts 1080p, and display 1080p - it just processes internally at some point in 1080i. Hanlon's razor says "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." To me, the likely scenario is that the marketing department didn't fully understand what the technical guys were talking about and just haven't conveyed the correct technical specifications.
If it isn't just oversight or ignorance on the part of the Hitachi marketing department, then I also wouldn't put it past them to simply SAY the lower-end displays are 1080i, and that you have buy the higher-end displays "to get that hot-stuff 1080p". Upsell, baby!
Testing to find out which way it is would take all of 5 minutes with a BD player and a copy of DVE on BD. Throw up the resolution chart or the 1-on/1-off pattern. Are all the horizontal lines there or not? Mystery solved. I can't believe somebody in that AVS thread hasn't had the brains to do that - which is why I'm suspect of every one of those guys that's ranting "it's 1080i, it's 1080i".
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Angus_rg wrote: | | Phil Smith wrote: | | Angus_rg wrote: | | Maybe, but a Hitachi 1080p TV was one I compared to over the weekend. |
If you extensively read the AVS threads I linked to, you'll find pretty some convincing arguments that *ALL* Hitachi plasmas are 1080i. |
Really? Is that 1080i input with 1080p output, or display 1080i? I'd think that the latter would be false advertising. I didn't look the native res up, but it had 1080p marked on it.
I've seen the 1080p out 1080i in on some cheaper 1080p sets in the past. That probably blows my cheaper bandwidth theory out of the water. |
The Hitachi are a resolution of 1920x1080. So, they have a fixed pixel array of that resolution. It is just they are refreshing the rows like an interlaced display.
Bear in mind, that in my research, the Hitachi is the ONLY fixed pixel device that does this. Most of the time when they say "1080i" they are wrong. With the Hitachi, they are close to accurate.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRT_Ben
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 1684
Location: Northern Virginia
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Even if it does turn out to be displaying 1080i (on a 1080p panel..what a waste!), why would you want to brag about that, Phil? Even guys that champion 1080i (Dave) as a better fit for many CRTs know that 1080p, properly resolved, gives a better picture...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think Phil is bragging as much as he was just pointing out that he bought a 1080i display at a cheap price. Everyone else decided to make an issue of the 1080i. At the end of the day, who cares? It is still a flat panel with a picture that would put it around the bottom of the ratings list.
ecrabb,
Do you always have to write a book for every post? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Angus_rg wrote: | | Phil Smith wrote: | | Angus_rg wrote: | | Maybe, but a Hitachi 1080p TV was one I compared to over the weekend. |
If you extensively read the AVS threads I linked to, you'll find pretty some convincing arguments that *ALL* Hitachi plasmas are 1080i. |
Really? Is that 1080i input with 1080p output, or display 1080i? I'd think that the latter would be false advertising. I didn't look the native res up, but it had 1080p marked on it.
I've seen the 1080p out 1080i in on some cheaper 1080p sets in the past. That probably blows my cheaper bandwidth theory out of the water. |
Hitachi states "HD1080" on their sets. They intentionally avoid specifying 1080i or 1080p. At a glance, it's easy to assume their TVs are 1080p. I did until I read the AVS threads. Very misleading advertising.
Check the Hitachi website. No mention of 1080p anywhere: http://www.hitachi.us/Apps/hitachicom/content.jsp?page=products/plasma_tvs/index.html&level=2§ion=products&parent=plasma_tvs&nav=left&path=jsp/hitachi/forhome/ubcg/&nId=iD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SC, you didn't read my post. Phil is essentially right (happy Phil? )
To make a cheap set, they do a "pseudo-interlacing". The panel is 1080p. But it is not updated progressively. To update progressively, EACH line is updated EACH duty cycle. So
Duty cycle 1:
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
...
Duty cycle 2:
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
...
The Hitachi DOES NOT do this. It does:
Duty cycle 1:
line 1
line 3
line 5
line 7
...
Duty cycle 2:
line 2
line 4
line 6
line 8
...
Because it does this, it relies on the persistence of the pixels to work, so, it has to have their output jacked up. This is why it has one of the worst black levels of any display made in the last couple years. As an extension it has fairly bad CRs too. But, it lets them cut the required bandwidth in half (from 165 MHz to about 83MHz). Thus it is cheaper to build the display.
Actually, it is a fairly innovative idea to make a cheap display for consumers that don't care about image quality. Now, I'm not ragging on you Phil (cause your my buddy), but coming from the G70, I'm surprised that you were willing to go with one of the worst flat panel images available! That is quite a big step. You could have spent a little more and got a much better image!
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | I don't think Phil is bragging as much as he was just pointing out that he bought a 1080i display at a cheap price. Everyone else decided to make an issue of the 1080i. At the end of the day, who cares? It is still a flat panel with a picture that would put it around the bottom of the ratings list. |
Exactly Eric! I'm not at all proud of my new TV, nor ashamed of it for that matter. It was strictly a "what's cheapest" choice.
It's not even about being right. I really don't care about that. What it's really about is Dave being wrong and rubbing his nose in it!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | SC, you didn't read my post. Phil is essentially right (happy Phil? ) |
No fair Dave! You're spoiling my fun!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: |
Actually, it is a fairly innovative idea to make a cheap display for consumers that don't care about image quality. Now, I'm not ragging on you Phil (cause your my buddy), but coming from the G70, I'm surprised that you were willing to go with one of the worst flat panel images available! That is quite a big step. You could have spent a little more and got a much better image! |
Like the Sony LCOS RPTV for $1200.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To address why I didn't buy a 720p Kuro: They don't make them anymore.
As to why I didn't buy a used RP CRT TV. I considered doing that, but my new living is too small to accommodate such a large TV. I really wouldn't to move one of those giant, heavy bastards anyway. I'm too old and fat for that sh*t. 
Also, DLP and LCD RP TVs didn't look very good to me. Maybe I didn't see any good ones.
And, I looked at plasmas and LCD flat panels at Walmart yesterday. They looked much better! Still not what I would call good, but a lot better than what I saw at Circuit City and Best Buy. Best Buy was particularly bad. They both should be ashamed that Walmart (of all stores) out-demoed them.
So I may need to reevaluate my opinion of flat panel displays. Unfortunately, I don't have a very good example to go by.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phil Smith
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 7717
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | Person99 wrote: |
Actually, it is a fairly innovative idea to make a cheap display for consumers that don't care about image quality. Now, I'm not ragging on you Phil (cause your my buddy), but coming from the G70, I'm surprised that you were willing to go with one of the worst flat panel images available! That is quite a big step. You could have spent a little more and got a much better image! |
Like the Sony LCOS RPTV for $1200. |
Dave, like I said, my was to get out cheap. I decided I really don't like flat panel very much, so I changed my goal to spending as little as possible for a 50" plasma TV. Quality was not my goal. Once I see something I actually LIKE, then my goals will change.
Eric, Not that I think I would want one, but the cheapest 50" RP Sony I can find is $2K.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
