# 1080p vs 720p?



## robertoh (Mar 19, 2005)

Say you could afford:lol: two HD TV's, and one was 1080p and the other was 720p,and you first watched a program on the 720p set first,shut it off then watched the same program on the 1080p set,would you see a real difference?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Maybe.

Seriously, not enough information to answer.

Is the program in 720p or 1080? Is it from satellite/cable, OTA, or an HD DVD? What is the screen size and type of HDTV? Is it in fact an HDTV rather than just an EDTV?


----------



## robertoh (Mar 19, 2005)

Ok.It's on Satellite,both 42", the same program lets say on NFL HD.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

Side by Side, possibly. Turning the TV off between viewings, no. I'd say you'd probably need to be around 70" to start really noticing the difference.


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

Just remember that resolution is only one of a half dozen or so factors that contribute to how we perceive a picture.

John


----------



## Gilitar (Aug 1, 2004)

If the source is 720p or 1080i you wouldnt see a difference between the two sets. Second, if the source is 1080p and comparing the image you wouldn't be able to see the difference on a 42" once you get beyond about ten feet due to the limitations of the human eye.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

robertoh said:


> Ok.It's on Satellite,both 42", the same program lets say on NFL HD.


At 42" its going to be REAL hard to see any difference.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I was wondering about this myself. I have a 720p projection system with a 106" screen. Everything calibrated perfectly using a light meter. 

While watching a few HD-DVD's and Blu-Rays over the holidays, I sometimes wonder if 1080p would make that much of a difference or if the difference is worth the extra cost.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

106"?!?!? Yeah, a 1080p source will make a difference.
Anywhere after the upper 50" to lower 60" and up you should be able to see a difference.


----------



## Brandon428 (Mar 21, 2007)

You won't notice a big difference if its 55" or smaller,but once you go above that you will. Especially something that is in 1080p. I suggest if it comes down to a 1080p,1080i,or 720p just go with the 1080p unless your getting a small TV. 40-50" and lower.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

Chris Blount said:


> I was wondering about this myself. I have a 720p projection system with a 106" screen. Everything calibrated perfectly using a light meter.
> 
> While watching a few HD-DVD's and Blu-Rays over the holidays, I sometimes wonder if 1080p would make that much of a difference or if the difference is worth the extra cost.


On my 65" 1080P plasma there is a very noticeable difference in watching the
Prison Break Blu Ray First Season Disc at 1080P vs Prison Break recorded OTA
at 720P. I have some Prison Break episodes saved on my Dish 622 and my
Sony DHG HDD 500 recorded OTA at 720P. After comparing the two Prison Break sources and then watching ABC OTA live at 720P, you can really tell the difference between 1080P and 720P.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I think somewhere around 50" is probably where 1080 vs 720 starts to really kick in, as others have said. I have a 65" screen and I can tell the difference in detail between 1080 and 720.

The "i" vs "p" argument is something I will stay away from (I promised myself) because too many folks don't really understand what is going on there. Suffice it to say that 1080p would be noticably better than 720p on a 50"+ TV set but I doubt you'd see noticable differences in 1080i vs 1080p because there are no 1080p 60fps source available via broadcast or on media at this point.

That said... if the price differential is small, you might as well get 1080p if you can rather than 720p because most of the HD available today is either 1080i or 1080p. Only a handful of channels are broadcasting 720p, so if you only get a 720p set you would be downgrading most of the content you would be watching.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

"The "i" vs "p" argument is something I will stay away from (I promised myself) because too many folks don't really understand what is going on there. Suffice it to say that 1080p would be noticably better than 720p on a 50"+ TV set but I doubt you'd see noticable differences in 1080i vs 1080p because there are no 1080p 60fps source available via broadcast or on media at this point."

One way to see the 1080P vs 1080i difference is the Sopranos 6th Season
Blu Ray Disc. I have the Sopranos final episode saved on my Verizon DVR
which is in 1080i. I also have the Sopranos 6th season Blu Ray. If you watch the
same episode on my 65" TV, you can tell the difference between 1080i and
1080P. 1080P is noticeably sharper but not as dramatic as 720P vs 1080P.

Also, any 1080i source on my 1080i 61" TV does not look quite as sharp as
a 1080i source on my 65" 1080P TV. The 1080P TV natively improves the picture.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

A chart is available at http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html


----------



## Spaz007 (Dec 11, 2007)

I have a 60" and 1080 is clearly better then 720. Its like night and day.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Hound said:


> One way to see the 1080P vs 1080i difference is the Sopranos 6th Season
> Blu Ray Disc. I have the Sopranos final episode saved on my Verizon DVR
> which is in 1080i. I also have the Sopranos 6th season Blu Ray. If you watch the
> same episode on my 65" TV, you can tell the difference between 1080i and
> 1080P.


Sorry to disagree with you here, but if you're seeing better from your Blu ray than from your DVR it is mostly going to be because the Blu ray disc has less compression on it and a much much higher bitrate than what is recorded on your DVR.

Unfortunately there is not a foolproof way to compare... but you could, for instance, output 1080i from your Blu ray player instead of 1080p and then see if you can tell a difference. I don't see how you could since I do not believe any of the encodes have greater than 30 fps even on Blu ray and HD discs.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

HDMe said:


> I think somewhere around 50" is probably where 1080 vs 720 starts to really kick in, as others have said. I have a 65" screen and I can tell the difference in detail between 1080 and 720.
> 
> The "i" vs "p" argument is something I will stay away from (I promised myself) because too many folks don't really understand what is going on there. Suffice it to say that 1080p would be noticably better than 720p on a 50"+ TV set but I doubt you'd see noticable differences in 1080i vs 1080p because there are no 1080p 60fps source available via broadcast or on media at this point.
> 
> That said... if the price differential is small, you might as well get 1080p if you can rather than 720p because most of the HD available today is either 1080i or 1080p. Only a handful of channels are broadcasting 720p, so if you only get a 720p set you would be downgrading most of the content you would be watching.


FPS is why most sports broadcasts are done 720P, I believe. The higher FPS, 60, for 720P leaves less artifacts/blurs for fast moving pictures.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Sorry to disagree with you here, but if you're seeing better from your Blu ray than from your DVR it is mostly going to be because the Blu ray disc has less compression on it and a much much higher bitrate than what is recorded on your DVR.
> 
> Unfortunately there is not a foolproof way to compare... but you could, for instance, output 1080i from your Blu ray player instead of 1080p and then see if you can tell a difference. I don't see how you could since I do not believe any of the encodes have greater than 30 fps even on Blu ray and HD discs.


Don't know about the Soprano's, but most Blu-ray are actually encoded at 1080P24. If your Tv can accept and display this at the correct rate (or multiple of) you will see a difference. The players also can do a decent 1080i/720P output.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Sorry to disagree with you here, but if you're seeing better from your Blu ray than from your DVR it is mostly going to be because the Blu ray disc has less compression on it and a much much higher bitrate than what is recorded on your DVR.
> 
> Unfortunately there is not a foolproof way to compare... but you could, for instance, output 1080i from your Blu ray player instead of 1080p and then see if you can tell a difference. I don't see how you could since I do not believe any of the encodes have greater than 30 fps even on Blu ray and HD discs.


I have done that and outputted 1080i from my Blu Ray player with the
Sopranos disc and then outputted 1080P and you can see the difference.
1080P is noticeably sharper with more detail.


----------



## John in Georgia (Sep 24, 2006)

Chris Blount said:


> I was wondering about this myself. I have a 720p projection system with a 106" screen. Everything calibrated perfectly using a light meter.
> 
> While watching a few HD-DVD's and Blu-Rays over the holidays, I sometimes wonder if 1080p would make that much of a difference or if the difference is worth the extra cost.


I believe it would, Chris. I moved from a 34" CRT (720p) to a 56" DLP (1080i). I'll watch the CRT in my study for a while and then go downstairs to the DLP and it still amazes me how much sharper the DLP image appears (especially on live sports events). And if you have access to Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, to me, it's a no-brainer.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

Chris Blount said:


> I was wondering about this myself. I have a 720p projection system with a 106" screen. Everything calibrated perfectly using a light meter.
> 
> While watching a few HD-DVD's and Blu-Rays over the holidays, I sometimes wonder if 1080p would make that much of a difference or if the difference is worth the extra cost.


Its not, I have had both 720p and 1080P projectors, and no you will not see the difference, I couldn't tell, and they were both on a 115" screen


----------



## booger (Nov 1, 2005)

I have a Panny 42" 720P so I assume that it's 720P native. I have yet to find a way to switch to 1080i. With this being the case, I have by 622 set to 720P. 

My question is this, for those OTA that broadcast in 1080i by default, does that make the picture worse?

I've noticed while watching sports, artifacts and blocks of color when there is a lot of movement. Would that be the cause of the format p/i? I've noticed more artifacts on OTA than Dish yet the clips with very little movement, OTA looks much better than Dish.

Any ideas?


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

projectorguru said:


> Its not, I have had both 720p and 1080P projectors, and no you will not see the difference, I couldn't tell, and they were both on a 115" screen


Really? I replaced my 720P projector with 1080P and could tell the difference. I'm not just speaking on brightness levels either. Only device I could tell the difference with was either an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray movie. Regular HDTV and upconvert DVD's were a wash. Hi-def movies looked better. Not a huge difference like SD to HD, but enough to notice. Both used/are using the same 119" screen.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

projectorguru said:


> Its not, I have had both 720p and 1080P projectors, and no you will not see the difference, I couldn't tell, and they were both on a 115" screen


I do not own a projector, but I was at Harvey Electronics in New York this month
and compared a 1080P projector with a blu ray disc to the Sharp aquos 65"
LCD with a blu ray disc and the difference to me was that the projector PQ looked
washed out compared to the LCD PQ.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

Hound said:


> I do not own a projector, but I was at Harvey Electronics in New York this month
> and compared a 1080P projector with a blu ray disc to the Sharp aquos 65"
> LCD with a blu ray disc and the difference to me was that the projector PQ looked
> washed out compared to the LCD PQ.


I don't know what projector they were using, but I'm guessing it had more to do with lighting. Projectors usually require low lighting levels to look optimal. LCD's do not have that restriction. In the right lighting, a projector will look as good as a LCD.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

phat78boy said:


> I don't know what projector they were using, but I'm guessing it had more to do with lighting. Projectors usually require low lighting levels to look optimal. LCD's do not have that restriction. In the right lighting, a projector will look as good as a LCD.


I forget the projector model, but it was in a closed room off the main showroom. I realize that projectors need low lighting.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

booger said:


> I have a Panny 42" 720P so I assume that it's 720P native. I have yet to find a way to switch to 1080i. With this being the case, I have by 622 set to 720P.


I also have a 720p Panny - TH42PX77U. The native resolution is 736p. The word from Panasonic is that the Panny does a better conversion from 1080i then from 720p. I have my 622 set to 1080i but truthfully I can't tell the difference when set to 720p


----------



## robertoh (Mar 19, 2005)

I guess I won't have to wonder about this subject anymore.This Morning I was checking stores for HD TV deals after Christmas on the internet and Sears had a 32" Sharp Aquos,1080p for sale $500 off.We have a medium size TV room and it should fit very good. Will uping to HD next week most likely with Dish's 6 month deal.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

my first projector was a Sanyo Z5 LCD 720P, in most cases and it depends on the projector, if you look it up on the internet, they put this projector up against ANY 1080P projector out there(and its only a 720P) Projector central reviews this one and gives it all 5 stars, and even the 6K dollar projectors that are 1080P don't get rated this high, anyway I upped to the 1080P Version of Sanyo, and could not tell the difference not at all, if they were both side by side I couldn't say.

AND yes old projectors need good light, but the new ones actually are too bright IMHO, if you put it on the highest setting


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

robertoh said:


> I guess I won't have to wonder about this subject anymore.This Morning I was checking stores for HD TV deals after Christmas on the internet and Sears had a 32" Sharp Aquos,1080p for sale $500 off.We have a medium size TV room and it should fit very good. Will uping to HD next week most likely with Dish's 6 month deal.


Yeah, 1080P will be the norm very soon. I would bet the majority of new TV's in 2008 will be 1080P.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

phat78boy said:


> Yeah, 1080P will be the norm very soon. I would bet the majority of new TV's in 2008 will be 1080P.


Too bad theres no 1080P broadcasts:lol:


----------



## wreck (Oct 27, 2007)

projectorguru said:


> Too bad theres no 1080P broadcasts:lol:


HD is still so widely mis-understood!
The ONLY media available in 1080p is blu-ray. I don't think there are even any PLANS for broadcasts in 1080p. 
There really is no manufacturer or retail outlet that is making HD easily understood for the general consumer.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

wreck said:


> HD is still so widely mis-understood!
> The ONLY media available in 1080p is blu-ray. I don't think there are even any PLANS for broadcasts in 1080p.
> There really is no manufacturer or retail outlet that is making HD easily understood for the general consumer.


Yes, it really is. Its funny how many people see it at my house and say they have to have it. I check back with them in a week or two and they say no way they will dish out that much money for the same TV they already get. I'm not sure who has their priorities mixed up, but I do know I have a problem when it comes to new toys.


----------



## Volitar Prime (Apr 1, 2007)

wreck said:


> The ONLY media available in 1080p is blu-ray.


Not quite. Blu-ray, HD-DVD, gaming on the Xbox 360 and PS3, and many people hook their PCs up to their HDTVs. This is 5 sources for 1080p content.


----------



## wreck (Oct 27, 2007)

Volitar Prime said:


> Not quite. Blu-ray, HD-DVD, gaming on the Xbox 360 and PS3, and many people hook their PCs up to their HDTVs. This is 5 sources for 1080p content.


I was under the impression that HD-DVD and Xbox360 WERE forms of blu-ray.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

robertoh said:


> Say you could afford:lol: two HD TV's, and one was 1080p and the other was 720p,and you first watched a program on the 720p set first,shut it off then watched the same program on the 1080p set,would you see a real difference?


No broadcasters are using 1080p, nor will they for 10 to 15 years according to a D forum some months back.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

wreck said:


> I was under the impression that HD-DVD and Xbox360 WERE forms of blu-ray.


Umm, no. I hope that was meant in jest. If not, would you like to buy my bridge?


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

I've heard but haven't seen for myself that 1080p is wonderful on large front projection rigs. I'm limping along with 720p, waiting to the 1080p projectors to hit my throw distance/brightness/price point requirements. About 18 months the way things are going. 

I did see a 1080p movie on a big Sony LCD and it was stunning, but there was nothing to A/B it with.

In a year or two, entry level will be 1080p and we'll be discussing the 2160p 240 Hz sets in the same manner.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

FogCutter said:


> In a year or two, entry level will be 1080p and we'll be discussing the 2160p 240 Hz sets in the same manner.


Only for people who need to brag about their system (terminal resolution envy), since such resolutions will be useless unless you are over 96 inches diagonally, maybe bigger.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Plus there is no 2160p content so everything will be downrezzed to 1080p/720p.


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

It wasn't long ago people were poo-pooing HD saying that only on impossibly large screens was there a visible difference with NTSC. They were talking about 30" diagonal screens. Monsterous at the time. 

When was the first BluRay disk rolled out? Before that there was no 1080p content, wasn't even part of the HD standard, and for broadcast it still isn't. That last part might be changing. It is being worked into the HD-DVD standard. 

I agree completely that people get 'spec' happy about these things, pushing for numbers that push the cost benefit envelope to ridiculous extremes, mostly for bragging rights.

$1000 (or less) buys a nice front projector that will throw very righteous 96"+ images. Clearly not everyone has enough room on the wall or the light conditions to support front projectors, but price needn't be a barrier. Don't even need a screen, just a white wall does nicely and saves a bundle. 

Look at how quickly 1080p TVs went from unthinkable overkill with no viewable content to standard fare. There surely is a point of diminishing returns, and from what I've read much above 1080p is overkill for any home application, however grand. So the OEMs will have to fight for sales with higher contrast, better viewing angles, color saturation -- all of the other components of PQ. 

It's all good, and prices just keep falling.


----------



## Volitar Prime (Apr 1, 2007)

FogCutter said:


> When was the first BluRay disk rolled out? Before that there was no 1080p content, wasn't even part of the HD standard, and for broadcast it still isn't. That last part might be changing. It is being worked into the HD-DVD standard.


The first Blu-ray Discs were released on June 20, 2006. But before that there was 1080p content in the form of the first HD-DVDs which were released on April 18, 2006 (dates according to wikipedia). Why do so many people think that only Blu-ray and not HD-DVD is 1080p? Both are and always have been.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The broadcast standard does include specs for 1080p at 24 fps, which actually takes less bandwidth than 1080i... but we haven't seen anyone broadcast that yet.

I have never heard 100% for sure, but I believe both Blu ray and HD DVD 1080p are at 24 fps, which is the native frame rate for film... and although there are a handful of releases on both formats from the early days that were 720p or 1080i for some reason... the overwhelming majority of Blu ray and HD DVD have been 1080p from day one.


----------



## TechnoCat (Sep 4, 2005)

Fascinating opinions here! 

The problem with the basic question is, you can't hold the other factors equal. I got to see a set of calibrated (which most HD fans here probably don't have) sets, one 720P and two 1080P, side-by-side a few years ago. The 1080P sets lost in the comparison - but not due to resolution. The color saturation was just much better on the Panasonic 720p plasma than on the 1080p LCD (Sharp?) or 1080p plasma (early Panasonic I think.)

Presumably the colors are better now, but that was only two years ago or so. 

Theoretically, 1080p and 1080i should be indistinguishable to your eyes. Then again, I'm sure many of our members pay $150 for Monster HDMI cables rather than $15 for MonoPrice cables, and then for good measure color them with green felt tips, and swear they see a difference. Also theoretically, at "normal viewing distances", 720p and 1080p shouldn't be distinctly different to people with normal vision. But this is a fan-board; there are probably a lot of people here with really big TVs who get close during the action. So I'd say that one depends on the size of the TV, whether you really are several meters from it, and how well adjusted it is.

But seriously, more important than 720 vs 1080 is calibration. Buy yourself Avia or Digital Video Essentials or a SpyderTV Colorimeter, and use it.


----------



## Ressurrector (Jan 1, 2008)

well......... neither DIRECT nor DISH HD services offer 1080 (P) so...........

no further questions your honor.............................................


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

Volitar Prime said:


> The first Blu-ray Discs were released on June 20, 2006. But before that there was 1080p content in the form of the first HD-DVDs which were released on April 18, 2006 (dates according to wikipedia). Why do so many people think that only Blu-ray and not HD-DVD is 1080p? Both are and always have been.


I believe it is because only the very newest HD-DVD players will play 1080p, while the first BluRay players out of the box supported the feature. I thought it was interesting that HD-DVD all of a sudden has 1080p while they never mentioned it before. I guessed that they were doing the old line doubling trick to keep up with Sony. Whatever the new Toshiba player is now supports 1080p.

Probably Toshiba didn't lead with it because at the time there were no 1080p sets until Sony started rolling them out, likely to take advantage of the 1080p BluRay.

It seems to me that the very first 1080p sets would display but not there were no inputs that would pass 1080p signals. A feature without a point for sure.


----------



## msmith198025 (Jun 28, 2007)

wreck said:


> I was under the impression that HD-DVD and Xbox360 WERE forms of blu-ray.


Nope, two different formats.


----------



## EAGLES20 (Sep 8, 2005)

I have a 60 in" SONY that is 720 P and a 56" Samsung 1080 P and I can tell you that yes you do see a difference. And it's not a small one either and both TV's are Calibrated by Eliab from Avical.Com anyway just wanted to post to your question. That's in HD I'm talking about.


----------



## Ressurrector (Jan 1, 2008)

Whats get me is.........

When was color tv originally broadcast over the air??? 1960- 1965

And then what year is it now?? lol so it took THAT long too get digital and HDTV and the FCC is just NOW making all TV stations change up and they are dragging their feet too...

Now we have to assume both direct and dish know SOMETHING we don't about 1080 (P) vs (I) since they did not include 1080 (P) on their systems and maybe I am wrong but have heard NO plans for them to ever offer 1080 (P)...

Sure the Xbox can do it......PC can do it............ PS3 BUT Who makes xbox?? MICROSOFT Who makes PS3??? SONY!! so its the war of Blu-ray VS HD-DVD
IN THE END 

So whats strange is OTHER then xbox,ps3,or pc what outputs a 1080 (P) signal? Blu-ray....... So its as if SONY made that format to sell Blu-ray, and xbox is just keepin up with the Jones's........ sure PC can do it it can go even higher but TRUST ME unless your doin a game or movie you don't want close to 1080 resolution clicking icons on your desktop..its VERY little icons and hard to see..........

So I see 2 things happening here........... either the (P) dies as a "FAD" and suffers the same fate as "minidisc" which I thought pwned CD's IMHO OR the industry REALLY embraces and adopts 1080 (P) to further spread it....... At this point in the game with both dish and direct not offering it on their receivers and the majority of toshiba HD-DVD players are 1080 (I) max I REALLY doubt the P is gonna take off now........... BUT then again I didn't think anyone would pay 600 dollars for a PS3 either but they are selling decent in the states... everyone quit buyin that **** it will be 99.95 at wal-mart..LMAO 

Also Did anyone here take advantage of the deal walmart had november for like 1 day?? toshiba HD_DVD players for 99.95 ONE day

So I thought well they just marked the 360 HD player down to 129 and yall do know it plays hd movies on PC fine through usb???

I go to buy this SOB and they marked it back up to 179...LOL YAH I get king kong inside lets raise the price 40 dollars YAH!!!

The industry has been pushin hella hard to get everyone to go HD when the majority of the public is like cavemen understanding fire when challenged with all this

My prediction is Walmart will have that toshiba HD player ALL day for 99 sometime in 08.......... OH it will happen .......... and when it does ..........watch what blu-ray and PS3 do..............................


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

Until recently, HD transmissions weren't an option because of bandwith and the high cost of the electrical components. For those who purchsed HD sets when they first became available to general public, the price was very evident. HD compatible sets were one price, HD sets with built in OTA tuners were another. At the time the price was usually between 400-800$. Thats the cost of a good flat panel now days. 

HD didn't just sneak up on people. Jay Leno has been broadcasting since 99 in HD. Since HD broadcasts have been around, the time frame for transition has been known. I don't like the excuse that its too quick or no one saw this coming.

1080P transmissions are not bandwith feasible because of how much space they take up. One 1080P transimission is the same as 2-3 1080i transmissions. The benefit of a 1080P transmission would also only be realized for those with very large televsions, 60+. 

Blu-ray and HD-DVD players should not be compared with HD television. Even at 1080i, either of those formats will look much better then an HD broadcast. 1080P is just icing on the cake for those with larger TV's. This all has to do with different types of delivery and compression between HD television and the new HD players.

Yes, a lot of us here got in on the HD-DVD players at walmart. There is a large thread about it somewhere in the OT.


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

I have a WalMart $99 HD-DVD player. I was busy until late the night of the special, so I had no expectation of getting one, but dang, they had 3 left. I bought them out.

Should have gotten one sooner -- with Netflix and HD-DVD I don't have to wait for Dish to widen their HD content. The PQ with the HD-DVD and my 622 are very close, but the HD-DVD has it on sound quality. Much better spacial resolution on surround sound.

phat78boy,

Great post on 1080p broadcast. I knew there would be more overhead, but didn't realize there would be that much more. When the standards were being established back in the 1990s, I read that 720p was the practical limit because 1080i just ate too much bandwith. And the made the screen size argument, too. 

Does anyone remember the first OTA HD standard failing? Had no correction for mulitipath, so the early tuners were junk. Sounds like no one attempted a field trial before adopting the standard. Good enough of government work.


----------



## PTown (Aug 18, 2007)

booger said:


> I have a Panny 42" 720P so I assume that it's 720P native. I have yet to find a way to switch to 1080i. With this being the case, I have by 622 set to 720P.
> 
> My question is this, for those OTA that broadcast in 1080i by default, does that make the picture worse?
> 
> ...


I have a Panasonic also. Res. is dictated by the broadcaster providing your signal/channel.
No it doesn't make it worse necessarily.
Your artifacts are most likely caused by a weak signal.


----------

