[mythtv-users] OT: Why 1080p?

[Steven Adeff]

On 11/7/06, David Brodbeck <gull at gull.us> wrote:
> Steven Adeff wrote:
> > not if they use the low bitrates they do now... It really pisses me
> > off to watch NFL in HD on the 65" just to get annoyed with the huge
> > amount of compression artifacts. Its not as bad on my friends 50", but
> > its really noticeable at 65", then on top of that they do things like
> > CBS does with the overlays that seem like they just put them there to
> > make the MPEG compression chip go crazy.
> >
> > ARGH.
> >
> > Even ESPN does it. InHD and Discovery HD look pretty darn good though,
> > I'd love to get Discovery HD in 1080p
> >
>
> Yeah, count me as an HDTV skeptic.  Every time I go into a store that's
> demoing HDTV sets, all I see is MPEG artifacts.  By the time I back up
> far enough that the artifacts aren't noticeable on scenes with lots of
> movement, I might as well be watching standard resolution.  Just doesn't
> seem worth the money.

oh, don't get me wrong, HDTV is above and beyond SD! Don't take the
cruddy setup Best Buy has as what HDTV can do. Sit and watch
DiscoveryHD on a 65" 1080p display and you will be hooked. Or any of
the movie channels in HD. *wow*. Even most shows on networks look
great, since they're processed for better compression, they look
amazing (though, granted about as good as an upscaled DVD due to
compression), they still look amazing.

I have a feeling once h264 takes over at the cable companies and
they're able to use that for SD shows and free up space for HD that
things will get better. It won't reach HD-DVD quality on copper cable
necesarily, but thats fine, for the most part thats overkill anyway. I
have a feeling though IPTV will end up being the way to go for people
that want the best HD signal.

On 11/8/06, AWC Lists <maillists at awcconsulting.com> wrote:
> Out of curiousity what TV do you have?  I have never heard of a true
> 1080p screen that only accepts 720p and 1080i for inputs.  I'd be
> interested to know as that just seems so strange to be the case.

all the first gen 1080p screens were like this, some of the second
gens as well. third gen seems to be defined by 1080p inputs.


On 11/8/06, AWC Lists <maillists at awcconsulting.com> wrote:
> Ed Gatzke wrote:
> >     720p would look better on a 1080p display than 1080i display, but
> >     720p would also look better on a 720p display than a 1080p display
> >     since no scaling is required at all.
> >
> > Upscaling you usually don't lose a lot of quality, IMHO.  Similar to the
> > old TV line doublers, you may get a better picture with more resolution
> > even if you have to interpolate or extrapolate some.
> >
> > I think 1080i and 1080p scaled down to 720p would be a worse option than
> > upscaling 720p.  To me, it makes sense to upscale or deinterlace  to
> > 1080p than downgrade 1080i and 1080p to 720 lines.
> >
> > But back to mythtv topic,  has anyone tried running myth on a 30inch
> > Dell at 2650x1600?  I bet the quality is incredible when you upscale
> > 1080p video to 1600 lines of resolution... Maybe I will try it over Xmas.
>
> Do you realize that 1080i images are WORSE quality than 720p images?
> (1080i should really be called 540p...)  So when you are watching 1080i
> on a 720p screen is is being UPSCALED.  Not downscaled.
>
> The order of HD video quality.  480p -->  1080i --> 720p --> 1080p

wrong wrong wrong. 1080i is 1920x1080 not 540p, it may be displayed by
your 1080i TV as "540p", but the original image is 1080x1920i.



-- 
Steve
Before you ask, read the FAQ!
http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/Frequently_Asked_Questions
then search the Wiki, and this list,
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/
Mailinglist etiquette -
http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List_etiquette