Support NeoGAF

[Deg]

I am looking at CRT's and i cant really find any. How is it in the US?

 

[Crazymoogle]

If there are any available right now, I imagine they cost over 10k USD. Samsung apparently has some limited-run sets that will only put you back the price of a ferrari.

 

[OmniGamer]

Sony Qualia 006(formerly XBR100)...last I heard it was going to go for $10,000, but heard it might go up to $13,000 due to "exchange rates". At any rate, here's a link to a pic i've uploaded of it.HERE

 

[TAJ]

There are plenty of CRT front projectors that can do 1080p.

 

[Deg]

Ah ok. I expected more lol.

thanks.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

There are plenty of CRT front projectors that can do 1080p.

Really? How much $$?

 

[Pimpwerx]

Good question. I won't upgrade to an HDTV until 1080p sets are cheap, even if the broadcast standard is 720p. I want to have a future-proof item. TVs tend to be 10-yearish products for me, and 1080p sets will be standard within that time.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

Nothing's future proof.

 

[mrklaw]

If 720p is the broadcast standard, and likely game consoles will be 720p items next gen, then the only reason to go 1080p is for HD-DVD (in whatever format)

In which case, and IMO, thats a projection item right there. I don't need 1080p on a 32" screen, you just won't notice the difference. You want 1080p on a 100"+ screen.

So I'm happy with my 720p 32" set, and will upgrade my front projector when they hit 1080p. Don't forget that budget projectors can do 720p already for $2k

 

[seanoff]

Not quite Mr K

This is from a Digital Tv forum.

http://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?showtopic=11327&st=20

75% of HD in US is 1080i. Only Fox, Abc and ESPN use 720p60. Rest of the channels broadcast in 1080i60.

 

[Deg]

Did you know the UK doesnt even have one 1080i channel?

 

[Kleegamefan]

Thank god for that.....interlaced needs to die....

 

[Pimpwerx]

If 720p is the broadcast standard, and likely game consoles will be 720p items next gen, then the only reason to go 1080p is for HD-DVD (in whatever format)

In which case, and IMO, thats a projection item right there. I don't need 1080p on a 32" screen, you just won't notice the difference. You want 1080p on a 100"+ screen.

So I'm happy with my 720p 32" set, and will upgrade my front projector when they hit 1080p. Don't forget that budget projectors can do 720p already for $2k

You can see resolution changes on a small monitor, you can see it on a big tv with a larger dot pitch size. I know I can see the difference up to 1600x1200, which is still more vert lines than 1080p. I'm sure I'm gonna be able to tell the difference when I double or triple the size of the screen. It may not be future-proof, but once 1080p becomes cheap, I know I'll be comfortable spending $1500-2000 on a good screen that will be sure to last me a good 10 years. And I don't expect either HDTV or HD-DVD formats to exceed 1080p for the next 20 years. I hope I'm not just being optimistic. PEACE.

 

[Pimpwerx]

Thank god for that.....interlaced needs to die....

IAWTP. Interlacing should never have been included in the HDTV standard except for back. compat with 480i. And I was really hoping they would have bumped the refresh rate to 85Hz. IIRC Gates wanted some of these changes and tried for more convergence with PCs, but wasn't given much thought. Prog. scan 4 life....says the guy with a 20" Samsung POS in the living room. :lol

 

[Cooper]

You can see resolution changes on a small monitor, you can see it on a big tv with a larger dot pitch size.

You're also probably sitting less than a foot from your small monitor.

 

[TAJ]

>>>And I was really hoping they would have bumped the refresh rate to 85Hz. <<<

85Hz makes absolutely no sense. It wouldn't work well with either film or video sources, only new 85Hz video material. 72Hz and 96Hz would be great for film and new video, but problematic for legacy video. 120Hz would be outstanding for all sources except PAL video, but who gives a shit about that?

 

[EclipseGST]

>>>And I was really hoping they would have bumped the refresh rate to 85Hz. <<<

85Hz makes absolutely no sense. It wouldn't work well with either film or video sources, only new 85Hz video material. 72Hz and 96Hz would be great for film and new video, but problematic for legacy video. 120Hz would be outstanding for all sources except PAL video, but who gives a shit about that?

not me....

 

[Crazymoogle]

I think it's kind of funny when people call it 1080i60.

Anyhow, the really disturbing bit from that thread is Sony asking the ATSC to revert 1080i to 1440x1080. There just seems to be absolutely no patience for a full 1080i/p standard now.

 

[Pimpwerx]

>>>And I was really hoping they would have bumped the refresh rate to 85Hz. <<<

85Hz makes absolutely no sense. It wouldn't work well with either film or video sources, only new 85Hz video material. 72Hz and 96Hz would be great for film and new video, but problematic for legacy video. 120Hz would be outstanding for all sources except PAL video, but who gives a shit about that?

Well, the point being to increase the refresh rate. I used 85Hz since it's basically what passes for flicker-free these days. 72Hz isn't a significant step up to make a diff. 96Hz would be cool. 85Hz is a 25% increase. I think it'd be great too as tennis broadcasts and some autoracing camera pans show the shortcomings in current broadcast standards. You still get strobe effect. With greater detail of a better screen, this become more prominent. But it's really inconsequential for 90% of people out there, so an admitted nitpick on my part.

You're also probably sitting less than a foot from your small monitor.

No, I've just got good eye sight. Been using computers my whole life and still 20/20. A 19" monitor is what a regular tv set was back when I was a kid. Even at full viewing distance I can makeout the difference between Q3A running in max resoluton and running at VGA. If you can't see it, you might not have very good vision. On a full-size tv, the dot pitch isn't nearly as fine as even an average monitor, so you're gonna see it then. If the source material is shot at the target resolution, the difference should be noticeable. Going from 720p to 1080p would be a 50% in the vertical scanlines. This is ignoring the equally important increase in horizontal resolution. PEACE.