BT Rep: +4
From my understanding, 720p is a better resolution than 1080i due to the fact of 1080i being interlaced. It splits the picture and only displays half at a time so its 540 not 1080. It switches so fast our eyes can not see it unless there is a lot of fast movement. 720p is progressive and it displays the whole picture the whole time. So technically it goes 480i, 480p. 1080i, 720p, 1080p
Poster
Technically speaking, this is not really true. Comparing interlaced (for this example 1080i) to progressive (for this example 720p) is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. While you could make the argument that 720p is more of a "complete" picture, it is unfounded to compare it to 1080i.Originally Posted by XxRaVeNxX
Reason being, you have to consider what you are watching to decide which format is "better" for your given programming. For example, I wouldn't want to watch sports in 720p, because it would look and feel weird (not to mention impractical, given that 1080i represents fast motion better than progressive formats)...sports have always been shot interlaced and displaying them as progressive would be just odd. For the same reason, movies are shot in progressive because they're supposed to feel different.
Always consider the content! There is no definitive answer here.
And as a side note, "resolution" is defined as pixel depth, so your argument about 720p having a better resolution that 1080i is false. 720p is 1280x720, whereas 1080i is 1920x1080. But again, read my last post...I make note of the breakdowns there.
Last edited by alucarddl; 10-17-2008 at 06:24 AM.
One n Only
BT Rep: +2
a perfect example of a thread going down the dump lol
Last edited by kooltilldend; 10-17-2008 at 09:05 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
MY INSPIRATION
BT Rep: +45
--------------------Technically speaking, this is not really true. Comparing interlaced (for this example 1080i) to progressive (for this example 720p) is kind of like comparing apples and oranges. While you could make the argument that 720p is more of a "complete" picture, it is unfounded to compare it to 1080i.
Reason being, you have to consider what you are watching to decide which format is "better" for your given programming. For example, I wouldn't want to watch sports in 720p, because it would look and feel weird (not to mention impractical, given that 1080i represents fast motion better than progressive formats)...sports have always been shot interlaced and displaying them as progressive would be just odd. For the same reason, movies are shot in progressive because they're supposed to feel different.
Always consider the content! There is no definitive answer here.
And as a side note, "resolution" is defined as pixel depth, so your argument about 720p having a better resolution that 1080i is false. 720p is 1280x720, whereas 1080i is 1920x1080. But again, read my last post...I make note of the breakdowns there.
Whatever it is at least we learn something reading all these posts thank u guys to spare your precious time
Last edited by Groovy; 10-17-2008 at 09:16 AM.
" edarT ot gnihtoN evaH I "
I Hate to trade my Personal Information for a Tracker
Poster
You're quite welcome. I really like talking about this stuff (cause it's part of my industry) and I'm glad some folks can learn a thing or two. It'll definitely help your decision when it comes time to pull the trigger on a new HDTV.Whatever it is at least we learn something reading all these posts thank u guys to spare your precious time
Last edited by alucarddl; 10-23-2008 at 10:47 PM.
home skillet
BT Rep: +4
For sure. I'm really happy this thread was created. Lol. I learned quite a bit from it, and I think alucarddl for that.
Personally, I am fine with 720p. I'm buying my HDTV in a couple weeks, and I've been waiting until i've really read up on all this. And I've been watching tons of 720p movies on my computer, and they are absolutely beautiful. So I honestly think I'll be fine with just a 720p tv, plus it would save me money. But then again, if I think 720p is that pretty, than 1080p has to be even prettier(right? or is it not that much of a difference, as I've seen others say)...but is going to cost more money. So I've been shopping around.
Yeah, but anyways, thanks again to alucarddi for all the info.
BT Rep: +4
While I agree with your overall point, your claim that sports are better shown in interlaced format is a little off. Any high-motion event is going to have fewer motion artifacts if it is both videoed ("filmed") with a progressive camera, and broadcast in a progressive format. An interlaced camera will result in combing during high motion scenes when viewed at 30 fps on a standard HDTV.
Movies are inherently progressive not because they're supposed to "feel different" but because celluloid film is by it's nature a progressive source. Movie film cameras record to celluloid film at 24fps, and each image is captured "all at once" not scanned (as is the case with video). So really even the term "progressive" is misleading when referring to film, because "progressive" implies some sort of scanning, and film frames are exposed in their entirety all at once.
It's debatable whether sports are better in 720p or 1080i. 1080i will result in more motion artifacts when viewed at the standard ~30 frames per second on a home HDTV than 720p at 30fps. But when viewed field-by-field at 60Hz (say by an instant replay judge?) each field will have higher resolution in 1080i than 720p, thus 1080i might make instant replay calls more accurate.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks