Support NeoGAF

[BlueTsunami]

BTW. How do you "KNOW". Or are you guessing...

I KNOW because I connect my IBM laptop to my TV now and again when I want to stream stuff (or play stuff off my laptop).

The difference from two HD-WMV (one being 720p and the other being 1080i) was dramatic. I've also seen different content on LCDs. 1080i has been consistently better when it comes to picture quality. Just much more eye popping.

It also has IQ benefits to games, benefits from downsampling or playing the game at Native 1080p. I could really care less about the "science" of it. I've seen true 1080p material on a native 1080p HDTV and I can honestly say I see a great IQ difference.

Have YOU seen true 1080p material on a native 1080p HDTV? or are you just trying to portray that you know 1080p because your assesment on the "numbers"?.

Somewhere within this thread, we've come to the conclusion why your downplaying 1080p. I also find it remarkabley funny that alot of CES was about 1080p HDTVs. I guess the whole industry is out of touch with how "worthless" 1080p is. Keep on with the good fight though, wish ya luck.

 

[cyberheater]

I can understand why some forum members would think i'm putting down 1080P because of PS3 but that simply is not the case. I believe most PS3 games will be 720P (even if they are scaled to 1080P).

I'm just trying to understand why the push to 1080P. If your eyes cannot tell the difference then is the push to 1080p devices just a commercial one?

 

[JackFrost2012]

gaf: it's fanboys all the way down.

 

[Last Hope]

1920x1080 gives much more detail than 1280x720. It is simple as that.

Less jaggies, the super small text that the FF11 demo uses will be a lot sharper, etc.

 

[Raistlin]

I'm puzzling why 1080p is seen at the next big thing. From a normal gaming/movie watching distance, is the average human eyeballs even able to resolve detail at that resolution and at that distance.

I'm pretty sure at the recommended viewing distance of twice the screen width viewing distance you can't physically be able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p.

(Please don't make this a PS3 vs 360 vs NREV thread. This is just a discussion on visual acuity and resolution and the future of hdtv's)

720p has only 66% the resolution of 1080p in each direction. That amounts to over twice the amount of pixels for 1080p - 2,073,600 versus 921,600. That difference should be quite noticeable, and also allows you the luxury of sitting closer to your TV without seeing the pixel structure.

The main reason you can't see much of a diffence in stores is due to content, not the TV's themselves. Once BluRay and HD-DVD are out and have some quality transfers, from footage that sufficient for 1080p mastering ... the difference will be obvious.

 

[momolicious]

denial does save you money

 

[blackadde]

man, what a crock of shit. can't tell the difference? do you get dazzled and try to walk into your tv when you flip to the nature channel too?

 

[Wollan]

If the X360 was capable, would this thread exist? I seriously doubt it.

 

[mrklaw]

720p has only 66% the resolution of 1080p in each direction. That amounts to over twice the amount of pixels for 1080p - 2,073,600 versus 921,600. That difference should be quite noticeable, and also allows you the luxury of sitting closer to your TV without seeing the pixel structure.

.

you've twisted the argument by saying 'sit closer'. Sure, if you do that its fine. But at 'normal recommended viewing distances' - 2-3 time screen width, tests have been done that say there is little or no discernable difference between 720p and 1080p


Front project that shit and sit at THX recommended FOV and I'll jump on the 1080p bandwagon (I'm still waiting for a 1080p budget set), but for direct view TV I think 720p native is fine

 

[Raistlin]

If the X360 was capable, would this thread exist? I seriously doubt it.

Possibly not, but why does that matter?

you've twisted the argument by saying 'sit closer'. Sure, if you do that its fine. But at 'normal recommended viewing distances' - 2-3 time screen width, tests have been done that say there is little or no discernable difference between 720p and 1080p

1) I have not twisted anything. Sitting closer can be viewed as a seperate advantage I mention for the people that can't afford a really large TV.

2) 'Normal recommended viewing distance' is based on a calculation of the width, true. However the constant you use as a multiplier is based on the resolution. In otherwords, the recommended minimum viewing distance gets closer and closer the higher resolution you are. It is picked so you cannot discern the pixel-structure. Regardless, it is sufficiently close for you to see the increase in resolution.

3) Obviously if you sit really far a way, you won't see a difference. That isn't the point. The whole idea is you can get closer (and therefore have an apparently larger screen) without it looking like shit. Besides that however, in a realistic-sized room that will dictate your distance from the TV - if it is a decent sized TV, you will see the increase in detail.

 

[mrklaw]

actually the multiplier is based on field of view I believe. Different for TV watching than Movie watching.

Thats where the basis of this argument has come from. Given the same viewing distance for the same size TV, just the resolution changing, is 1080p worth it? My opinion is the answer is no. For TV.

For movies probably, if you adjust your field of view and therefore sit closer.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

1) Basic resolution difference: 1920x1080 vs 1280x720

2) The interlaced/progressive thing should make no difference in practical use. 1080i should resolve in your playback software to a smooth progressive-scan 1920x1080 image at 24fps, because it is simple to put back together the fields to make the original progressive-scan frames again. Unfortunately some releases are harder to 'deinterlace' in this way, for example due to being badly flagged or having strange cadences, and this can result in either combing or a stuttery image. Deinterlacing these releases properly also depends on the quality of your playback software and playback hardware, and so user experiences vary greatly from player to player (for example, for PC software playback, enabling hardware decoding/DXVA can make the position worse as described in this thread).

3) 1080i used for 24fps source material has 20% redundancy, in other words one field in five is discarded: 720p used for 24fps source material has 60% redundancy, in other words 3 frames out of every 5 must be discarded, so a lot of bitrate is wasted (these percentages are approximate: in practice the redundancy is lower because the 'extra' fields or frames compress more easily, because of being repeated)

4) 1080i requires approximately 12% more bandwidth than 720p, or to put it another way, 1080i must be 12% more compressed than 720p at the same transmission bitrate. Therefore normally 1080i is transmitted at higher bitrates than 720p. If the bitrate of 720p is less than 88% of the bitrate of the equivalent 1080i then the 720p is likely to be more heavily compressed and therefore even worse than the lower resolution would imply

5) If your display is 1280x720 resolution, 1080i can still be better than 720p for you because downscaling that from 1920x1080 to 1280x720 makes the picture sharper and reduces the visibility of many kinds of compression artifact

 

[choplifter]

point #1 1080p gaming will not be mainstream or feasible with complex games until the Xbox3 - PS4 generation

point #2 who needs 1080p resolution anyway, when awesome prerendered CGI look great at 480i - what we need is higher complexity and quality in realtime gameplay graphics & animation, above and beyond what 360-PS3 will be able to do. that will be better than 1080p resolution anyday.

 

[trmas]

It will depend on the size of the display and the type of display as well. Anything under 42" you probably won't be able to see much of a difference. It's a different story as displays get larger and larger.

 

[Orin GA]

I'm puzzling why 1080p is seen at the next big thing. From a normal gaming/movie watching distance.

Quick question. What are you basing this on? Have you compared 720P and 1080P Games side by side? I wasnt even aware that 1080P console games have been released.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

1080P console games haven't been released yet, but PC's can be connected to HDTV's, I have no idea if he's seen it, but it is amazing when it's set up to output correctly.

 

[Raistlin]

actually the multiplier is based on field of view I believe. Different for TV watching than Movie watching.

What do you mean by field of view?

As far as I know, the minimum viewing distance is based on the size of the image, and the res of your viewing material. It is simply to be used as a guideline for getting the largest apparent image, while avoiding 'defects' in the image (scanlines, pixel structure, etc.)

Thats where the basis of this argument has come from. Given the same viewing distance for the same size TV, just the resolution changing, is 1080p worth it? My opinion is the answer is no. For TV.

What do you mean by 'for TV'? If you're watching something broadcast in 1080i, why does it matter if it's a TV show or a movie? I don't understand your differentiation.

For movies probably, if you adjust your field of view and therefore sit closer.

eh?

 

[Raistlin]

point #1 1080p gaming will not be mainstream or feasible with complex games until the Xbox3 - PS4 generation

point #2 who needs 1080p resolution anyway, when awesome prerendered CGI look great at 480i - what we need is higher complexity and quality in realtime gameplay graphics & animation, above and beyond what 360-PS3 will be able to do. that will be better than 1080p resolution anyday.

It's possible people are considering movies and broadcasts as well.

 

[mrklaw]

Viewing distance is size based, not res based - at least all the research done has used viewing distance based on diagonal screen size, not resolution.

1080i screws stuff up too. Stuff mastered as 1080i is usually filtered to reduce flicker on 1080i interlaced sets. So the actual resolution is only around the same as 800p. So 1080i on a 1080p set won't look that much better than 720p


1080p *mastered* stuff - i.e. some mumblings for bluray/HDDVD suggest they'll master 1080p and let the players interlace if necessary - now you have a straight fight.

And games @60fps obviously benefit from 'p'




TV Vs Movie viewing is separated by usage. If I'm watching a movie seriously, I'll put it on the projector - fills much more of my field of view, and it more immersive. But I wouldn't watch mythbusters like that.

 

[Shogmaster]

It's possible people are considering movies and broadcasts as well.

This thread is about gaming, but that's the crux of the problem and something folks will have to decide for themselves - Which is more important for them: Gaming or watching HDTV and movies?

Option A). Having 720p set will make X360 and PS3 games look optimal for the next 5 years but not let you have full res movie playback on BR and HD-DVD.

Option B). Having 1080p set will make X360 and PS3 games look less than optimal for the next 5 years but will let you have full res movie playback on BR and HD-DVD.

I'm personally going with option A) because it will still let you have fantastic BR and HD-DVD playback @ 720p, but more importantly my gaming experience on my expensive HDTV will not give me that little pang of regret.

Also keep in mind that some of the 1080p BR/HD-DVD material will be not the best transfers and will look kinda crap at the full 1080p, but down resing that to 720p would improve the image quality.

And by the time X720 and PS3 comes out, High quality 1080p sets will be much much cheaper.

 

[Ryudo]

Not really sure what to think. 720p is a sweet spot i believe. I think 1080p will ultimately push the PS3 too hard ala 720p did for the xbox.

 

[Shogmaster]

Not really sure what to think. 720p is a sweet spot i believe. I think 1080p will ultimately push the PS3 too hard ala 720p did for the xbox.

I can guarentee you that 1080p PS3 games will be far more rare than 480p PS2 games.

 

[Ryudo]

I can guarentee you that 1080p PS3 games will be far more rare than 480p PS2 games.

But saying that must make you a stupid xbot right ?

 

[Shogmaster]

But saying that must make you a stupid xbot right ?

DURRRR~~

 

[Raistlin]

Viewing distance is size based, not res based - at least all the research done has used viewing distance based on diagonal screen size, not resolution.

Could you please explain on what criteria you are basing this? I'm going to guess the reason for this, is the studies you refer to where only using one resolution. Obviously at that point, it's only based on size.

Go over to AVS or any of the similar forums. When people ask for the best viewing distance ... they will give the answer I have provided, and for the reasons I have provided.

What would be the point in basis a seat location other then for my reasoning? What rational exists?

1080i screws stuff up too. Stuff mastered as 1080i is usually filtered to reduce flicker on 1080i interlaced sets. So the actual resolution is only around the same as 800p. So 1080i on a 1080p set won't look that much better than 720p

I'm not sure what this has to do with the discussion. I do not know much about this reduction in resolution, but I do not believe it is always handled in that way (based on actual footage comparisons). HD broadcasting isn't exactly mature yet, so even if this was the case at times it will likely will likely see improvements.

1080p *mastered* stuff - i.e. some mumblings for bluray/HDDVD suggest they'll master 1080p and let the players interlace if necessary - now you have a straight fight.

I'm under the impression that even players that are only doing 1080i will not be using any sort of flicker filtering that will reduce resolution. If that is the case, that would certainly be news to me.

TV Vs Movie viewing is separated by usage. If I'm watching a movie seriously, I'll put it on the projector - fills much more of my field of view, and it more immersive. But I wouldn't watch mythbusters like that.

That is fine for you, but you do not necessarily represent all people in this case. For one, people actually watch moves on TV at times - there are even channels dedicated to movies.

Also, some people watch shows that are a little more dramatic and atmoshperic than something like MythBusters - say 24, Lost, etc.

 

[Raistlin]

Shog,

We have had this debate many times before ... and people can easily do a search if they want to see the details.

Let us end it here ...




To anyone concerned about 720p content upconverted to 1080p versus 1080p content downconverted to 720p ...

... simply go test it in a few months. See how they compare ... and if you are okay with the image quality.

HD-DVD will be available in a couple of months, with BluRay soon following. Between that, and 720p broadcasts used for demos - one should be able to get a feel for how the sets handle the conversion in either direction at their favorite (mid - higher end) electronics store.

Note: I would advise testing multiple sets of each resolution in order to negate the specific implementations of their scalers.

Also, one should try to remain focused only on artifacts that would result from scaling. Try not to think about stuff like black-level.

 

[Brofist]

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/ContentShowcase.aspx

some of the videos there are in both 720p and 1080p

 

[cyberheater]

I think some of have missed the point. Shogmaster and mrklaw both understand the issue.

Sure 1080P content on a 1080P native resolution 50 inch tv will look great if your sittting 4 feet away. but my point and studies have shown that if you are sitting 8-10 feet away from the same screen which is typical in a normal living room. Your eye is physically unable to resolve all the detail. If you had the same game running at 720P on a 50 inch tv right with native resolution of 720p, and it was right next to the 1080P set up, they would look the same.

 

[mrklaw]

cyberheater understands my point. Studies by the BBC and European union have been based on standard viewing distances - thats fixed based on screen size alone, not resolution.

Based on that, there is no noticeable increase in resolution between 720p and 1080p.

*noticeable* difference, same distance.



My comment about 1080i reinforces the case. Most if not all 1080i material is filtered to remove high frequency detail before broadcast. This is to stop it flickering like mad on an interlaced display (imagine broadcasting alternate black and white horizontal lines). This means that even if you deinterlace, you aren't getting the original 1080p image back, you're getting an approximation of it - about the same as an 800p original.

A HD movie mastered only for 1080p could take advantage of the full resolution of the format, but it would need the player to handle the filtering for those people that have interlaced displays.

I personally hope they do this, as interlaced displays will become fewer and fewer, in favour of fixed pixel displays