Printable View
Daniel, good job in answering athenaesword's questions. :)
I'd like to add that if you have a HDTV below 50", 720p would be good enough.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-...-1.html?tag=msQuote:
The extra sharpness afforded by the 1080p televisions he's seen is noticeable only when watching 1080i or 1080p sources on a larger screens, say 55 inches and bigger, or with projectors that display a wall-size picture.
nice read GoldStoNe ;) and yeah daniel definitely deserves some form of honorary mention here lol. perhaps open a HD section for him to mod ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldStoNe
i'm going to check out what my TV really is lol. all i really know about it now is that it's 50" and it supports HDMI. i'm not even sure if it's full HD like daniel mentioned.
I concur with GoldStoNe and I even said something similar in an earlier post to the extent that full HD screens are only worth it from a certain size on or the additional money spent is definitely wasted. Where this limit is depends on a couple of details like the distance between the screen and yourself. If you're farther away than three times the height of your screen (I don't know if this is a golden rule or not but this has done well in my own experience) then it doesn't really matter much which size or resolution your screen is, you're unlikely to see much of a difference between 720p and 1080p anyway.
Also, like the article correctly stated, the full HD resolution invites people to sit closer to the screen - what had been a sin with previous crt technology now lets you experience a felt bigger picture without loss of quality. If this is one more of the advantages you don't or can't use, then it's another point against the use of 1080p.
Oh and ... I'd like a HD section here at FST because for many users it would be a start to make hdtv more than a mere denomination they read in the titles of their xvid-tv-rips. Moderating it on the other hand, don't even start with that please ;) Not only am I too lazy for that but it would be too much of an effort because most people here lack the experience to be remotely objective or helpful and it even shows in this thread (for example: some recommended SEPTiC while everyone who's a regular on hd trackers knows they're far from the best .. but it's easy to get that impression if you've only got your standard 480p xvid dvdrip to compare them with).
I am usually very happy that I can just drop in, ask a question or answer one for that matter and then go my merry way again like I do it on highdefforum.com which is an okay source for this kind of topic as well (though I don't know how well you'll be received if you ask for technical help on the movies from the internet stuff).
CTU and hv for me
hV , ESiR , SEPTiC
SEPTiC again haha.
looks like i might wanna concentrate on 720p over 1080p now since the difference doesn't seem to be worth the file size increase. would the increase in resolution from a 1080p be able to make up for a poor 720p encode? from what you've said, it probably wouldn't but i thought i'd ask just to be sure.
also, this's probably a little OT, but since it's my thread.. ;) issit safe to watch these plasma/LCD TVs at such close range nowadays? i sorta lost interest in TVs years ago so i'm a little rusty with the crt - lcd/plasma conversion era.
i think i've come across highdefforum before, but i didn't stay for long cus i realised alot of the threads were begs for hdbits.org invites. yeah it'll be nice to have a HD subforum, probably under the movies section. it's not like those discussion sections are heavily modded anyway; i mean, there's no point in enforcing strict rules about general discussion. there's an anime section, which is quite underutilised, so why not a HD section? there're clearly alot of people who need to be educated in HD, people like myself.
Mmh, there's another thing I have to clear up a bit. What makes a bad encode - or why do scene groups have this bad reputation among hd enthusiasts? Lets start from the other end: what makes a good encode? Little or no visible blocking, keeping the original hue/coloring, keeping the original details including any sharpness/blurring, keeping the original aspect ratio. What scene groups don't always get right are these details that do not necessarily make the movie look bad - but in comparison with the original or a proper encode those differences can be very obvious. The main goal an encoder aspires is to create a copy of a movie that looks just like the original ... and some groups fail in that task more often than others ;) It doesn't always mean the end result looks bad but it's not authentic enough for those enthusiasts.Quote:
Originally Posted by athenaesword
It is one of the distinct advantages of the digital display technology to be closer to the screen and still have a sharp enough picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by athenaesword
yeah but is this healthy for your eyes? We all used to blame CRT TVs for ruining our eyesight since youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
spectic imo
:ermm:Quote:
Originally Posted by zaa730