# do you keep your HD receiver set at 720p or 1080i??



## 0pusX (Jan 11, 2008)

Im just using a 42" Insignia LCD, but I dont really notice any difference with my 622.

I usually keep it at 1080i, would i benefit more by switching to 720p?


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

720p has more pixels better picture.


----------



## 0pusX (Jan 11, 2008)

well i will switch it then to see if its better. thanks!!


----------



## allargon (May 3, 2007)

space86 said:


> 720p has more pixels better picture.


1280x720=921600 pixels
1920x1080=2073600 pixels

1080i has as many pixels as 1080p. This is not the Best Buy showroom floor. I'm not picking on you. I just want this misinformation nipped in the bud.

I've found my 768p display looks slightly better with my 211 set to display at 1080i despite the fact that my 768p display has de-interlacing issues. I don't have any test patterns, but I wonder if the Dish receiver has them as well. I've noticed some nasty shimmering and aliasing artifacts when I set output to 720p with 1080i native sources (e.g., "Ultra Space" on UltraHD).


----------



## Taco Lover (Jan 8, 2007)

allargon said:


> 1280x720=921600 pixels
> 1920x1080=2073600 pixels
> 
> 1080i has as many pixels as 1080p. This is not the Best Buy showroom floor. I'm not picking on you. I just want this misinformation nipped in the bud.
> ...


Yeah, but since 1080i is interlaced, only half the vertical pixels are visible at once. Of course, your eye can't really tell.

I have mine set at 1080i. I can't tell the difference between it and 720p on my 55" 1080p Sony SXRD.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

space86 said:


> 720p has more pixels better picture.


Er, no
720P is 720 horizontal scan lines with 1280 pixels per line.
1080i is 1080 horizontal scan lines with 1920 pixels per line.

The primary difference is that 1080i is transmitted one half-frame at a time, whereas 720p transmits the entire frame each time. Typically, 720P is better for sports or other fast-action video, since you don't get interlacing artifacts. 1080i is better for slow-moving video.

Minor nuance - even though you would think 1080i would have significantly better vertical resolution, it doesn't always. 1080i is sometimes vertically blurred to reduce some interlacing artifacts.

However, since the satellite and cable providers usually over-compress the video feeds (HD-lite), you typically can't tell much difference between the two. If you really want to see the difference, compare two OTA stations that are transmitting full-bandwidth video. (PBS is usually good for 1080i, as long at it's a program that was shot with 1080 equipment; a lot of HD used to be shot with 720 cameras. It's noticeable on my 60" Pio.


----------



## Slipshod (Oct 30, 2006)

I actually found 720p noticably better for SD content, and couldn't tell a significant difference between the HD resolutions, so I left it at 720p all the time.

I don't have to choose an output anymore though. I've got native passthrough now thanks to the R5000 and SageTV with their HD Extender.  

Cheers,
Slipshod


----------



## rbyers (Jan 15, 2004)

I use 720p to drive my 720p set. The picture usually looks pretty much the same when viewing active content. I used the HDNet test pattern, which is on about 2AM Tuesday or Wednesday. When viewing the test pattern, I could see minor artifacts on 1080 that disappeared after switching to 720.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

All of this is far from simple. It depends upon many factors, starting with the studio end. The part we have control over is deciding which device does the best scaling when resolutions don't match, the dvr, or the receiver. As always, try it out and pick what you like. Some people have high-end receivers that have fantastic scalers. Some people don't. Unfortunately, the 622/722 doesn't have native passthrough, so you only get your choice half the time.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

I use 1080i on my 768p set. It is claimed that my model of Panny downconverts 1080i better then it would upconvert 720p. I personally haven't noticed any difference.


----------



## Presence (Mar 14, 2004)

This might be getting outside the realm of this discussion, but is there such a thing as interlaced video on an LCD flat panel? I thought LCDs were progressive by nature. (Not sure about plasmas.)


----------



## DJ Lon (Nov 3, 2005)

rbyers said:


> I used the HDNet test pattern, which is on about 2AM Tuesday or Wednesday


Is this listed in the program guide on its own or is it attached to the end of another program?


----------



## DJ Lon (Nov 3, 2005)

Presence said:


> I thought LCDs were progressive by nature.


That's what I found out when I researched my set. If I keep my TV @ 720p it's supposed to be the most natural display resolution and if I choose 1080i the TV chip has to do extra duty to deinterlace the picture.


----------



## lukin4u (Apr 13, 2007)

DJ Lon said:


> Is this listed in the program guide on its own or is it attached to the end of another program?





rbyers said:


> I use 720p to drive my 720p set. The picture usually looks pretty much the same when viewing active content. I used the HDNet test pattern, which is on about 2AM Tuesday or Wednesday. When viewing the test pattern, I could see minor artifacts on 1080 that disappeared after switching to 720.


of heard of this test pattern before but have never found it,
and no it is not in the guide when i looked a month ago

anybody got any exact info for the test?


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

HobbyTalk said:


> I use 1080i on my 768p set. It is claimed that my model of Panny downconverts 1080i better then it would upconvert 720p. I personally haven't noticed any difference.


Claimed by whom? I am in the same situation as you (Panny set, 768p) and find myself switching between 720p and 1080i on my Dish 722 depending on the source (e.g., ESPN- 720, CBS- 1080). If I would be better served leaving the receiver in the 1080i output mode 100% of the time with this set, I would like to know.

Thanks,


----------



## hdaddikt (Jul 2, 2005)

mhowie said:


> Claimed by whom? I am in the same situation as you (Panny set, 768p) and find myself switching between 720p and 1080i on my Dish 722 depending on the source (e.g., ESPN- 720, CBS- 1080). If I would be better served leaving the receiver in the 1080i output mode 100% of the time with this set, I would like to know.
> 
> Thanks,


This discussion has come up numerous times and each time it gets over-analyzed IMO. Set it for what looks best for you. For me the 1080i setting on my 622 looks better on my 768p display. I have tried switching it to 720p on occasion depending on the programming, and never saw an improvement. Of course there is always the first time, but unless I see a noticeable degradation in the picture, I'm not likely to waste time switching back and forth. YMMV


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

mhowie said:


> Claimed by whom? I am in the same situation as you (Panny set, 768p) and find myself switching between 720p and 1080i on my Dish 722 depending on the source (e.g., ESPN- 720, CBS- 1080). If I would be better served leaving the receiver in the 1080i output mode 100% of the time with this set, I would like to know.
> 
> Thanks,


It was over on the AVS Forum under the model of my set. A Panny engineer posted a note that the way Panny works it upconverts the 720 signal to 1080 before it downcoverts it to 768. By setting the source to 1080 you bypass this step.

Of course the Panny could have a better scaler then the 622/722 but I haven't notice this in practice.


----------



## kbuente (Mar 25, 2007)

It's not a choice but wouldn't the *BEST* choice be 1080P?


----------



## CoolGui (Feb 9, 2006)

kbuente said:


> It's not a choice but wouldn't the *BEST* choice be 1080P?


Sure it would be... You'd get the higher resolution and also non-interlaced (but a lower framerate by current supported standards -- not sure if you'd notice). However, none of the networks or providers broadcast at 1080p, nor do many displays.....


----------



## FastNOC (Sep 11, 2007)

Yeah I originally had 1080i on my Mitsu 65 inch but IMO 720p is better because it doesn't have the blurring issues on high action scenes.

But since nobody transmits 1080p the only thing you can use with it is blu-ray


----------



## allargon (May 3, 2007)

FastnoNOC said:


> Yeah I originally had 1080i on my Mitsu 65 inch but IMO 720p is better because it doesn't have the blurring issues on high action scenes.
> 
> But since nobody transmits 1080p the only thing you can use with it is blu-ray


You must have one of the older Mits. I have a 57" 1080p Mits (57732), and I have zero blurring issues.

Regarding the HDNet test patterns, information on that can be found in the link below.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=74738



Taco Lover said:


> Yeah, but since 1080i is interlaced, only half the vertical pixels are visible at once. Of course, your eye can't really tell.
> 
> I have mine set at 1080i. I can't tell the difference between it and 720p on my 55" 1080p Sony SXRD.


Your set is displaying everything at 1080p through upconversion or (sometimes after upconversion from the Dish receiver) de-interlacing. I bet if you had a 70" display, you would notice the difference in details between 720p and 1080i/p more easily. Below 65", it's not that easy to tell.

1080i may be broadcast de-interlaced, but it is rarely displayed that way unless you have a CRT or one of those weird Hitachi plasmas.

=======

The best advice given in this thread is to set your output to what looks best to you on your display. :up:

One thing I have noticed that the Dish (211 and 622) receivers are poor upscalers. When I'm settling in for a day of college football from ESPN, Fox Sports Net, Big 10, etc., unless I'm hitting CBS, ABC (Austin affiliate is 1080i) or NBC, I set my receiver's output to 720p. It has nothing to do with de-interlacing artifacts. It's just that the upconversion is better with my displays. I do the same when viewing "American Idol" on Fox.


----------



## Bichon (Jun 5, 2003)

wje said:


> The primary difference is that 1080i is transmitted one half-frame at a time, whereas 720p transmits the entire frame each time. Typically, 720P is better for sports or other fast-action video, since you don't get interlacing artifacts. 1080i is better for slow-moving video.


Two points.

1. If the station is broadcasting in 1080i, then setting the satellite box to output 720p doesn't eliminate the de-interlacing step, rather it causes it to be done in the satellite receiver rather than the TV. Often the TV has superior processing.

2. If the original source is 24 frames per second, as it is for all movies and many shows shot of HD video, de-interlacing artifacts will not occur, assuming your TV implements 3:2 pull down correctly (most do).


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

I wasn't intending to say that setting the 622 for 720p when the content was being broadcast in 1080i was going to benefit you. Rather, I was (attempting) to say that sourcing sports video in 720p is better than sourcing it in 1080i.

And yes, many tvs have better scalers than the 622, but since we don't get native passthru, it's a moot point 50% of the time.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

Bichon said:


> 1. If the station is broadcasting in 1080i, then setting the satellite box to output 720p doesn't eliminate the de-interlacing step, rather it causes it to be done in the satellite receiver rather than the TV. Often the TV has superior processing.


So, assuming the TV has superior processing (and I suspect my Panasonic-768p- does), and following the logic above, should I set my satellite box to output at 1080i so 720p source material (read: sports) de-interlacing is handled by the TV, rather than the E*722 box?

Thanks,


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

Presence said:


> This might be getting outside the realm of this discussion, but is there such a thing as interlaced video on an LCD flat panel? I thought LCDs were progressive by nature. (Not sure about plasmas.)


Yes. Plasma and LCD displays are always progessive by definition. It's the INPUT of the display that may be p or i.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

mhowie said:


> So, assuming the TV has superior processing (and I suspect my Panasonic-768p- does), and following the logic above, should I set my satellite box to output at 1080i so 720p source material (read: sports) de-interlacing is handled by the TV, rather than the E*722 box?
> 
> Thanks,


Set it to whatever looks best when you view it. If you can''t tell the difference then it doesn't matter.


----------



## jackienopay (Dec 18, 2003)

I set it to 1080i and my integra 9.8 then converts it to 1080p.


----------



## toomuchtv (May 17, 2002)

DJ Lon said:


> Is this listed in the program guide on its own or is it attached to the end of another program?


I think it is attached to the end of a program. I just set a manual timer for the ten minute gap between the two programs.


----------



## MyDogHasFleas (Jan 4, 2007)

So, the Dish HD DVRs don't have a "passthru mode" or "native mode" where they will pass through the original program format to the TV? 

I know that the DirectTV HD DVRs have this capability. It would be what I would prefer. Then my 1080p set can upconvert from either format effectively.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

HobbyTalk said:


> Set it to whatever looks best when you view it. If you can''t tell the difference then it doesn't matter.


Profound.


----------



## PanamaMike (Mar 31, 2004)

1080i should technically be better, however there are a few things to take into consideration.

1: Display resolution: If you don't have a 1080p or 1080i the signal will have to be down rezed.

2: Native source resolution: If the native resolution is 1080i it's all good, but if it's 720p the it should be better to keep it matched at 720p since all you're doing is scaling a 720p lines to 1080. The fewer translations of the original signal the better.

3: Quality of your scaler and deinterlacer: If you TV has a poor quality deinterlacer or scaler it will affect PQ. For example Panasonic TV's are very poor in this department. This results in jaggies, moire patterns ect... PZ700 doesn't properly handle 1080i film material.

4: Receiver capability: This is another interesting issue. If you set the ViP 722 to 720p you're telling it to do the scaling for you. This might be a good or bad thing. Depending on whether your outbound electronics are better at this task or not. I haven't seen any reviews indicating the quality of the ViP 722 in this department.

In the end, set the ViP to whatever produces the best picture to your eye 

Mike


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

PanamaMike said:


> .........In the end, set the ViP to whatever produces the best picture to your eye
> 
> Mike


My right eye prefers 720p while my left eye prefers 1080i. I simply close one eye depending upon the format at the time. In my house, this eliminates all issues regarding 720 vs 1080. :lol:


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

MyDogHasFleas said:


> So, the Dish HD DVRs don't have a "passthru mode" or "native mode" where they will pass through the original program format to the TV?
> 
> I know that the DirectTV HD DVRs have this capability. It would be what I would prefer. Then my 1080p set can upconvert from either format effectively.


bump, same question. Based on this thread I assume no but can someone confirm, assume 722


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

I want to know about this as well.

Do Dish Network receivers force the viewer to select either 720p or 1080i and re-sample the programming to either mode? If so, I think that is just downright stupid.

I have a pretty nice 52" 1080p 120Hz LCD-TV. I would prefer it if the HD receiver was able to detect I have a 1080p TV with HDMI 1.3a connections and leave the 720p and 1080i programming in the original formats. Changing a HD program originally broadcast in 720p or 1080i to a different format will degrade video quality.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

There is no native passthrough capability on the 622, 722, or 612. This has been a long-requested feature. Yes, it annoys those of us with good equipment.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

bummer, thanks


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

just thinking about this thread, not having native passthrough sucks for us 1080p tv owners.

how difficult is it to change the output resolution of the 722? is the setting buried deep down in the setup menus? 

Guess I plan to leave it in 1080i mode and switch to 720p for ABC/FOX/ESPN sports. seems like a pain


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

That's the other annoying thing... there isn't a quick way to change the output resolution. You have to do it from a couple of levels down in the menus.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

Taco Lover said:


> Yeah, but since 1080i is interlaced, only half the vertical pixels are visible at once. Of course, your eye can't really tell.
> 
> I have mine set at 1080i. I can't tell the difference between it and 720p on my 55" 1080p Sony SXRD.


That's not corect. On 1080p televisions, 1080i video is deinterlaced and all 1080 lines are lit up for every video frame that is displayed, yielding as others have pointed out, about twice as many pixels of resolution for a 1080i signal compared to a 720p signal.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

CoolGui said:


> kbuente said:
> 
> 
> > It's not a choice but wouldn't the BEST choice be 1080P?
> ...


1080p is *not* higher resolution than 1080i. They both display 1920x1080 pixels. The difference is in the rate of update only, not the number of horizontal or vertical lines of resolution that either format is capable of displaying.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

cartrivision said:


> 1080p is *not* higher resolution than 1080i. They both display 1920x1080 pixels. The difference is in the rate of update only, not the number of horizontal or vertical lines of resolution that either format is capable of displaying.


Thank you!

I made a vow not to get into the misinformation debates with HD but it was killing me not to see corrections.


----------



## CoolGui (Feb 9, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> 1080p is *not* higher resolution than 1080i. They both display 1920x1080 pixels. The difference is in the rate of update only, not the number of horizontal or vertical lines of resolution that either format is capable of displaying.


Didn't mean to dig up an old thread, but I was just checking replies... when I said a higher resolution I meant in comparison to 720p... and I went on to say non-interlaced which I meant in comparison to 1080i... so yes 1080p is the best features and better than both, but I'm not sure it would be at all noticeable given the source we are getting from dish.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

guess I will reply now, got my VIP 722 and have a 1080p sharp LCD. 

I decided to leave it in 1080i because I figure there is more 1080i stuff out there and the 720p is probably not "real" 60fps anyhow. Also I am thinking interlacing progressive is easier then deinterlacing interlaced for the 722. Still might go through the pain and swithch to 720p output for football on fox/abc/espn this fall. 

I actually kind of like the one resolution option( but it should be a option) and 1080p output would be optimal. Nice not having to see/wait for the tv to resync the video signal everytime it the resolution changes. Which for OTA is almost every up/down channel here in san diego.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

Please note that 1080P24 has been broadcast. And it is part of the ATSC standard (also 1080P30 is in the standard). For various reasons, no one appears to have done more than a few "test" broadcasts. Since movies are 24fps, you would think this would be done more often.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

tnsprin said:


> Please note that 1080P24 has been broadcast. And it is part of the ATSC standard (also 1080P30 is in the standard). For various reasons, no one appears to have done more than a few "test" broadcasts. Since movies are 24fps, you would think this would be done more often.


yep

At work as was able to output 1080/24p via clear QAM to a sharp LCD and it handled it ok. Refresh rate is on 60hz so not helpful for this tv but at least it should easier to do 3/2 pulldown

edit: attached is from the spec

edit2: throw up the cable on for grins, notice cable lite options


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

I usually leave my receiver set at 1080i. However, I'll switch it to 720p if I turn it to one of the ESPN channels -one of few networks who broadcast in 720p.



> 1080p is not higher resolution than 1080i. They both display 1920x1080 pixels. The difference is in the rate of update only, not the number of horizontal or vertical lines of resolution that either format is capable of displaying.


The issue of updating difference is what makes 1080p appear sharper.

Anything shot in an interlaced format will have half the video frame lagging 1/30th of a second behind the other. Spatial detail is softened because of the 1/30 time difference. Edge detail is prone to sawtooth artifacts. Basically, no HD content should be taped in 1080i. 720p would be preferable even with half the pixel count. I like 720p/60 for sports -especially if the cameras are actually shooting at 60 progressive frames per second.

Film-based content in 1080i can yield fewer flaws, but that's only if the HDTV monitor can correctly deinterlace the video. Most do not. Sony's Playstation 3 is supposed to get a firmware update sometime this summer to add 1080i>1080p deinterlacing.



> Please note that 1080P24 has been broadcast. And it is part of the ATSC standard (also 1080P30 is in the standard). For various reasons, no one appears to have done more than a few "test" broadcasts. Since movies are 24fps, you would think this would be done more often.


The reason why 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 have not been widely used in broadcasting is because the formats are currently incompatible with a lot of TV transmission hardware. 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 isn't compatible with most HDTV sets either.

Television broadcast infrastructure is still very dependent on a 60Hz transmission rate. Whether it's 480i, 525i, 720p or 1080i the signal is still being broadcast at 60Hz.

A lot of hardware will need to be replaced over the next few years before we start seeing 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 broadcasts. On top of that, TV sets that are compatible with 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 will need to correctly see any embedded flags to know the image content, otherwise it still could come in as 1080i or just get scrambled.

I think 1080p/60 over the air, via satellite or over cable is not going to be feasible for at least the next several years. On top of that, next to nothing in terms of movies and TV shows is produced in that format up to this point. The 1080p/60 format seems more suitable for video games.


----------



## rey_1178 (Dec 12, 2007)

I have it at 1080i. best setting for me


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

Would it matter what your native resolution on your TV is? Should you match your receiver to your TV?


----------



## CoolGui (Feb 9, 2006)

TulsaOK said:


> Would it matter what your native resolution on your TV is? Should you match your receiver to your TV?


I know my TV doesn't display full 1080 lines, but more than 720. 1080 seems to look better, but it's hard to tell the difference. I think generally scaling down is always better than scaling up. But if your TV resolution was near or under 720 lines I guess you might as well go with that.... maybe someone can correct me on that guess.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Dpends on the TV. My Panny upscales 720 to 1080 before it downscales it to 768 (native rez.). While I can't really tell the diff, I set the output to 1080 to eliminate one set of conversions.


----------



## Lee Bailey (May 18, 2008)

1080i to my 1080i TV.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

Bobby H said:


> ...
> The reason why 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 have not been widely used in broadcasting is because the formats are currently incompatible with a lot of TV transmission hardware. 1080p/30 and 1080p/24 isn't compatible with most HDTV sets either.
> 
> Television broadcast infrastructure is still very dependent on a 60Hz transmission rate. Whether it's 480i, 525i, 720p or 1080i the signal is still being broadcast at 60Hz.
> ...


While I agree with most of what you say, all TV ATSC receivers tuners are required to be able to handle 1080P/24 and 1080P/30 broadcasts. They are part of the mandatory standard. Dish receivers can handle them as well. Most will convert it to either 1080I60 or 720P60. Its probably true that some did not do this as well as others.


----------



## grog (Jul 3, 2007)

I always set mine to 1080i but then again I have a 47" set that supports 1080i and 1080p just fine.

With the new HD "World Fishing Network" maybe 480i would be better? :lol:


----------



## gwar28 (Mar 10, 2007)

Does any one know if the HD Test is supposed to be on any time soon?


----------



## PRIME1 (Nov 29, 2007)

720p although I really can't tell any difference between it and the 1080i setting. Haven't really spent a lot of time comparing the two.


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

> While I agree with most of what you say, all TV ATSC receivers tuners are required to be able to handle 1080P/24 and 1080P/30 broadcasts.


The majority of existing HDTVs in use must convert those kind of signals and display them as other formats like 720p or 1080i. HDTVs monitors with native 1080p (true 1920 X 1080 resolution) display are still a relatively new thing. HDTV monitors that properly support 1080p/24 display are very new.



> 720p although I really can't tell any difference between it and the 1080i setting. Haven't really spent a lot of time comparing the two.


The high levels of lossy video compression do a lot to downgrade and soften detail in HD video. That makes it tougher to tell the difference between 720p and 1080i. When I have my TV set for 1080i I can see some sawtooth artifacts from the interlacing. It's easier to see the differences between 720p, 1080i and 1080p when those video formats are given a generous video bit rate.


----------



## Cap'n Preshoot (Jul 16, 2006)

After we had accumulated about 100 hours on our 65" Mits DLP (WD65732) I scheduled an appointment with Accucal http://www.accucalhd.com to have them come out and perform an ISF calibration on the display. As part of this they went through our ancillary equipment equipment too (STB, DVD, etc). In summary everything was left set in 720p because using their test equipment you could actually see the deinterlacing distortion when trying to upscale 720p source material (ie, ESPN HD) to watch it in 1080.

The gentleman also told us that in order to be able to actually "see the difference" in display resolution between 720 and 1080 with the naked eye we would need to have a minimum 100-inch display.

That having been said, when it came time to buy a "2nd set" to hang on the wall of the master bedroom we saved almost $800 on the price by purchasing a 720p display.

By the way, anyone with any of the mid and high-end TVs/monitors that allow separate adjustment of the color/tint primaries and secondaries would probably benefit from having your display professionally calibrated by an ISF-certified engineer. Best $$ spent so far. I could not believe the stunning difference from out-of-box conditions.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Cap'n Preshoot;1614112 said:


> The gentleman also told us that in order to be able to actually "see the difference" in display resolution between 720 and 1080 with the naked eye we would need to have a minimum 100-inch display.


That is simply not true. While it might possibly be true that a larger display helps to magnify the difference... I can tell the difference between 1920x1080 and 1280x720 on my 22" computer monitor!


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

HDme,

I have to agree with you 100%

I own a 52" Sony Bravia KDL52XBR4 HDTV set. I have no trouble whatsoever telling the difference between 720p broadcast content and content in native 1080p resolution.

The difference between 720p/60 and 1080i/30 is a little more difficult to distinguish. But if the TV station is given a reasonably ample bit rate for the broadcast then the resolution is going to make itself clear.

The best looking 720p I see is what I get from my OTA outdoor antennae of our local ABC affiliate based in Lawton, OK. The video looks good. Yet, I can clearly see the blocking and other limitations of 1280 X 720 pixel material meeting the native 1920 X 1080 capability of my HDTV monitor.

Out of all HD content I view, the movies I buy and rent on Blu-ray disc are at the highest quality level by a very clearly defined margin. The difference really isn't even close. And that's even including the good looking HD video I get from HBO. The only thing that would be any better is if I had some sort of access to the 2K digital cinema JPEG2000 movie files a close friend of mine is able to play at his all-digital cinema movie theater.


----------



## Bichon (Jun 5, 2003)

Cap'n Preshoot;1614112 said:


> The gentleman also told us that in order to be able to actually "see the difference" in display resolution between 720 and 1080 with the naked eye we would need to have a minimum 100-inch display.


You sure he didn't preface his comment by saying "at your viewing distance, ..".

Your ability to differentiate 1080p vs 720p on a given screen size depends on your viewing distance. This Engadget article has a handy chart: http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2007)

Lee Bailey said:


> 1080i to my 1080i TV.


Ditto.


----------



## mhowie (Sep 30, 2006)

Bichon said:


> You sure he didn't preface his comment by saying "at your viewing distance, ..".
> 
> Your ability to differentiate 1080p vs 720p on a given screen size depends on your viewing distance. This Engadget article has a handy chart: http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/


Is that chart relevant for a 720p to 1080i comparison? The question on the table is whether one can truly discern between those two. If so, then it might make sense to switch the Dish HD receiver output to that of the channel broadcast resolution since it doesn't pass it through natively.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

I noticed some interlacing problems watching LOST running my 722 in 1080i mode. Note sure if it is a 722 problem or my tv issue deinterlacing it. Switched the 722 to 720p and it was fine.


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

ABC broadcasts in 720p. Episodes of _Lost_ are going to be shown in 720p when broadcast. However, season 3 of _Lost_ is available on Blu-ray in native 1080p/24 format.


----------



## CoolGui (Feb 9, 2006)

I think the "can't tell a difference" comes from the fact that most television monitors internally resize both 720p, 1080i AND 1080p to their native resolution. I think it would actually be a lot easier to see it on a computer monitor because it will show the resolution as it is. For those of you who think your HD TV doesn't scale the image, look at the specs before you argue.  My 50" Panasonic plasma does 1368x768 no matter what the input source, so it scales pretty much anything I display.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Feb 12, 2008)

Bobby H said:


> ABC broadcasts in 720p. Episodes of _Lost_ are going to be shown in 720p when broadcast. However, season 3 of _Lost_ is available on Blu-ray in native 1080p/24 format.


yeah I know, that is why I posted my comments. 722 interlacing the 720p source to 1080i or my tv deinterlacing the 1080i 722 signal had issues.


----------



## falcon241073 (Jun 3, 2007)

allargon said:


> Your set is displaying everything at 1080p through upconversion or (sometimes after upconversion from the Dish receiver) de-interlacing. I bet if you had a 70" display, you would notice the difference in details between 720p and 1080i/p more easily. Below 65", it's not that easy to tell.
> 
> 1080i may be broadcast de-interlaced, but it is rarely displayed that way unless you have a CRT or one of those weird Hitachi plasmas.


I have one of those wierd Hitachi TVs. I keep everything on 1080i as that is the native resolution for the TV. I would say, after reading everything I could get my hands on, that keep the source as close as you can to the TVs native resolution. TV will take care of the rest. If you have a native of 768p then set it at 1080i as it will down convert better than up convert.

I have seen zero ghosting or blurring watching sports. This is the benchmark for that. Sports, especially football or Hockey are the fastest because the ball or puck is being followed by the camera. Watch the crowd in the background and see how bad the pixelate out of the picture on both settings and see which is best.


----------



## Cap'n Preshoot (Jul 16, 2006)

Bichon said:


> You sure he didn't preface his comment by saying "at your viewing distance, ..".
> 
> Your ability to differentiate 1080p vs 720p on a given screen size depends on your viewing distance. This Engadget article has a handy chart: http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/


Well yes, correct. Viewing distance is important. For us with the 65" Mits, we sit 11 ft from the screen. In the bedroom the 40" Sony is on the wall, 10' from the pillows.

In either case for us, we "cannot see the difference" ergo why waste the money on a 1080p display when we can have a 720p for almost 1000 less? Put another way, whatever difference was, if there really was any that neither of us could see, that difference certainly wasn't worth the difference in price.
.


----------



## Lee Bailey (May 18, 2008)

gwar28 said:


> Does any one know if the HD Test is supposed to be on any time soon?


It is now back on every Saturday morning at 10am ET, on HDNET. Set up a manual timer, or perform a search for test patterns to find it and record it.


----------



## jpeckinp (Nov 6, 2006)

480i FTW!

Seriously I keep it at 480i.
Not really 1080i for my 1080p Sharp.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Since the TV is only 720...


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

Has any time table been given on when/if the ViP 722 and ViP 622 receivers will have their firmware upgraded to allow on the fly 720p and 1080i "pass through?"

Most HD channels are broadcast in 1080i so it's usually not a problem to leave the receiver set at 1080i. Still, I'd prefer the receiver to properly pass through a 720p signal from a channel like ESPN HD instead of messing with the signal. Video broadcast in native 720p/60 should stay that way if possible.

I read somewhere the new Fox News HD channel broadcasts in 720p. Makes sense since the main Fox network also broadcasts in 720p.


----------

